Phases of mobile learning

Joint European Summer School on Technology Enhanced Learning, Slovakia, June 2009

http://mature-ip.eu/en/startEmail: john.cook@londonmet.ac.uk

Home page: http://staffweb.londonmet.ac.uk/~cookj1/Blog: http://blogs.londonmet.ac.uk/tel

Twitter: http://twitter.com/johnnigelcookSlideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook

Blip.fm: http://blip.fm/johnnigelcook

Dr John CookProfessor of Technology Enhanced Learning

MATURE & Learning Technology Research Institute, London Metropolitan University

My role in MATURE

• MATURE (FP7 IP)– http://mature-ip.eu/en/start– focus is on Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks

• I am Workpackage leader for evaluation and requirements spec (Workpackage 6)– LTRI’s refined role one of performing Evaluation within a Design

Based Research approach

• Working across the project applying expertise in– informal learning, – mobile learning and – adoption of e-learning tools and approaches designing and

implementing systems that support learning

Structure (50+10)

1. Introduction

2. Devices

3. Learning outside the classroom

4. Mobility of the learner

5. Conclusions

6. Future work

7. Questions

This talk is based around one of my chapters in:

• Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., Cook, J. and Kress, G. (in preparation, 2009). Mobile Learning: Structures, Agency, Practices . Springer. Due Autumn 2009.

1. Introduction

Three phase diachronic overview – extended Mike Sharples, Becta seminar

‘Future Gazing for Policy Makers’ held in 2006

• focus on devices

• focus on learning outside the classroom

• focus on the mobility of the learner

2. Focus on devices

• Widespread experimentation mid 1990s

• PDAs, tablets, laptops and mobile phones

• Affordances of mobile devices– e-books– classroom response systems– handheld computers in classrooms– data logging devices– reusable learning objects

• Perry (2003) – 2002-03 – 150 teachers– 30 schools in England– mainly PDAs, to evaluate

• advantages: – portability – size– instant on (no start-up time)– cost (relative to laptop computers)– battery life (relative to laptop computers)– outdoor use

• Disadvantages: – small screen– possibly not robust enough for schools– lack of technical support– data loss due to battery problems– problems with linking to networks

• Robustness and linking to networks have diminished in the intervening years.

• New challenges for learning with mobile devices have also emerged.

• McFarlane and colleagues (2007, 2008) conducted research on two ambitious initiatives– ‘Learning2Go’ in Wolverhampton– ‘Hand-e-learning’ in Bristol

• Considerable parental support• McFarlane et al. (2007) reported less positive

take-up than had been hoped for: – lack of infrastructure in the schools – wireless

capacity in particular– rushed initial training for teachers– the choice of science as the subject

• Project re-launch:

“the introduction of 1:1 mobile devices has been more problematic and complex in secondary schools than in primary” (McFarlane et al., 2008, p. 9).

• UK’s Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) in Reusable Learning Objects (http://www.rlo-cetl.ac.uk/)– Explored converged multimedia capabilities of

smartphones as platform for storing learning resources

– See Bradley et al. 2007; Smith et al, 2007.• This work uses smartphones as a desk-top,

placing rich multi-media mobile learning objects in the phone’s memory to scaffold (Wood, Bruner and Ross, 1976) different types of learning.

3. Focus on learning outside the classroom

• Affordances include – field trips– museum visits– professional updating– bite-sized learning– personal learning organisers

• ‘HandLeR’ addressed issues of user interface design for mobile learning and developed software for a field trip

• According to Sharples, Corlett and Westmancott (2001), the generic HandLeR system had four main components:– a set of tools to capture and annotate events,– a web browser, – a database manager to organise and relate the events as a knowledge

structure, and – a communications manager to support synchronous voice and data

communication and asynchronous sharing of knowledge• and the capture tools included:

– a notepad with handwriting or voice recognition,– an integral still and video camera, and – a drawing package

• ‘MOBIlearn’. – research and development project ran for 33 months

from January 2002 to March 2005 – 24 partners from academia and industry in ten

countries (http://www.mobilearn.org). – access to knowledge through appropriate learning

objects, mobile services and interfaces. – One aspect of the non-formal learning that the project

tested extensively was with users at the Uffizi Gallery in Florence (http://www.mobilearn.org/results/trial.htm; Lonsdale et al, 2004).

• SMS alerts are starting to find a use in schools for communicating with students and parents– co-ordination and management– scope for development– Kenya there is a widespread availability of mobile phones as well as no

reliable fixed telecoms network and no prevalent computer availability (e.g. Traxler and Dearden, 2005)

– Griffiths University in Australia carried out a project learning Italian with SMS where 2-3 messages a day were sent about grammar, vocabulary news, literature and administration, homework etc (see http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/handle/10072/186).

– The BBC Bitesize’s (http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/) is a secondary school revision resource for students studying their GCSEs in the UK that is made freely available to the world. Figure illustrates some of the features offered by this resource, which includes written content, interactive content, audio, video and games. Sometimes Bitesize allows revision questions to be sent to mobile phones.

• Indeed, learning outside the classroom is now making use of the multimedia affordances of mobile phones in increasing sophisticated ways.

• An approach that goes well beyond the RLO approach described in phase one above is the ‘Skattjäkt project’ (Treasure Hunt; http://www.celekt.info/projects/show/15)

• Developed at Vaxjo University, Sweden. Treasure Hunt is a mobile game that is designed to encourage young people to solve a mystery surrounding a castle

4. Focus on the mobility of the learner

• Characterised by a focus on – the mobility of the learner – the design or the appropriation of learning spaces – informal learning and lifelong learning

• Three important affordances can be distinguished4.1 mixed reality learning

4.2 context-sensitive learning

4.3 ambient learning

4.1 Mixed reality

• Mixed reality learning (mixed modes of representation) – augment a learner’s meaning-making – participate in a media-rich environment rather than view the

learner as consumer – new environments and visualisations are created where the

physical and digital interact and inform one another in real time– construct content and ‘place’ it in context using mobile devices

where other learners can access, and add to it – meaning built around the specifics of a place and learning trails

can be developed to foster meaning-making across and between multiple contexts

• The ‘MyArtSpace’ project provides an example of a sophisticated mixed reality project (e.g. see Sharples et al, 2007; and http://www.cultureonline.gov.uk/projects/in_production/my_art_space/).

• Another approach to mixed-reality is provided by the ‘CONTSENS’ project (http://www.ericsson.com/ericsson/corpinfo/programs/using_wireless_technologies_for_context_sensitive_education_and_training/)

• The project focuses on the development of appropriate training/learning materials for mobile learning enhanced by context sensitive and location based delivery

• London Metropolitan University, consortium members are working on new environments and visualisations that are created where the physical and digital interact and inform one another in real time. This Cultural Heritage Learning work package extends work done on an earlier mobile learning Cistercian Chapels project for archaeology students hosted by Sheffield University, UK, (http://www.shef.ac.uk/hri/projects/projectpages).

Cistercian Chapels project for archaeology (Carl Smith, John Cook &

Claire Bradley, work in progress)• Construction of the Abbey began in 1132. A

defining feature of the Cistercian Order was its incorporation of two communities, and the abbey church was designed to accommodate both groups separately.

• Whereas the monks’ choir was in the eastern part of the church, the lay-brothers’ was in the west; the two were divided by a large partition known as the rood screen.

• The gap between physical world (what is left of Cistercian), virtual world on mobile is inhabited by the shared cognition of the students in the video clip (PLAY)

Preliminary results

• All the users made extremely positive comments about what they thought of the mobile learning course, describing it as– “more fun” than expected, “I enjoyed it”, “interesting”,

2 said it was “very interesting, it was a “good idea”, “good!”, a “fantastic experience”, and “very stimulating lots of good ideas”.

– 80% rated it as being useful for learning the subject– 60% thought the mobile device enhanced the learning

experience

Preliminary results

• On the negative side, three found that having to look at the mobile devices were a distraction from engaging with the archaeology/site itself, and one would like more archaeological and historical explanation.

• However, 80% agreed that the mobile learning experience was fun, and 9 out of the 10 users (90%) would take another mobile learning course if it was relevant to their learning needs and would recommend mobile learning as a method of study to others, which is a good indication that most of them had a positive experience (the other user answered ‘uncertain’ to both of these questions).

4.2 Context-sensitive

• Location-aware services– offer to transfer background information– services such as finding places and giving directions– help identify potential interactors in physical proximity of the

learner

• Context-sensitive learning– aware of the activities of learners and can thus offer to give

assistance– E.g. if a student’s course work is due in soon, the context-

sensitive system can send a tip giving the location of resources that may help with an assignment

– continually derive what intervention is appropriate and can provide relevant services to aid learning

• Context-aware learning could include (Sharples, 2006)– location-based guides and customised help systems– systems that enable activities in context, e.g. data

logging– game learning offering services and options such as

communication and awareness of other game players– customise content– adaptive interface and interaction, where the level of

detail and order of presentation can vary and be made appropriate for context and for display on different devices.

• The ‘CONTSENS’ project developed a series of mobile learning applications that are being used to support student teachers in exploring their knowledge and understanding of urban education in a meaningful context (Smith, Cook and Pratt-Adams, 2008).

Going for a Local Walkabout: Putting Urban Planning Education in Context with Mobile Phones (Cook, 2009a;

also Smith, C., Cook, J. and Pratt-Adams, S., 2009)• An urban area close to London Metropolitan University, from 1850

to the present day, is being used to explore how schools are signifiers of both urban change and continuity of educational policy and practice.

• The aim of this project is to provide a contextualised, social and historical account of urban education, focusing on systems and beliefs that contribute to the construction of the surrounding discourses.

• Another aim of this project is to scaffold the trainee teachers’ understanding of what is possible with mobile learning in terms of filed trips.

• Part of EC funded CONTSENS project: http://bit.ly/oU9bj

Enhancement of the learning experience

• 91% thought the mobile device enhanced the learning experience

• The information was easy to assimilate allowing more time to concentrate on tasks.

• Allowed instant reflection in situ.• The mobile tour promoted “active learning”

– they were less passive than they would have been on a tutor-led tour

– they were not “merely taking in information” – the mobile tour triggered their own thoughts and

encouraged them to think more about the area

4.3 Ambient learning

– makes use of the digital artefacts to augment the environment and enable learning (see e.g. Price, 2007).

– technological tools are used to augment user activity in context.

– this view of context invests effort in designing a rich environment that in turn mediates innovative forms of learning and teaching.

A prototype Nokia camera phone, equipped with sensors and

MARA (Source: Nokia Research

Center)

5. Conclusions

• Emerging trends over the three phases– enhancement of the desktop – support for learning outside the classroom and the

notion of learner mobility with location and context sensitive systems that enable life-long learning transitions across multiple contexts

– ambient and mixed-reality systems and environments may soon be teaching us about themselves.

– wide area educational gaming may draw in learners who may be at distance to the school.

– we saw in the ’CONTSENS’ project that zone-based notifications provides a form of monitoring activity, tracking and survellance that has major ethical implications.

5. Conclusions

• There is still much work to do if mobile devices are to be widely adopted for learning in educational institutions. As Sharples (2006) pointed out, there are many issues that for schools to resolve, these include:– How will schools respond to children bringing in their

own mobile multimedia communications devices?– How can schools manage the tension between

informal networked learning and formal institutional learning?

– What types of mobile learning are appropriate and cost-effective for schools, colleges, universities and the workplace?

5. Conclusions

• There is much to commend mobile phone usage as a mediating tool for learning inside and outside of educational institutions and the workplace

• Indeed mobile phones are at the interface between informal and formal learning (Cook, Pachler and Bradley, 2008)

6. Future Work

• Mobile Learner Generated Contexts: Research on the Internalization of the World of Cultural Products (Cook, 2009b):

• Structural changes to mass communication affect the agency of the user and their relationship with traditional and new media.

• Users are now actively engaged in shaping or generating their own forms of individualised communication context by accessing and transforming the cultural products that are available within new media platforms and the Internet.

6. Future Work

• Future work in this area will revolve around these context questions.

1. Will learners follow a ‘learning pathway’ across multiple contexts for learning?

2. During their activity, what will the learning trail left behind by learners tell us as they move from one learning context to the next?

3. Will it be possible to produce intervention guidelines that can be used (perhaps in modified forms) across many contexts?

7. References• Bradley, C., Haynes, R., Cook, J., Boyle, T. and Smith, C. (2009) Design

and development of multimedia learning objects for mobile phones. In Mohamed, A. (ed) Mobile Learning in Education and Training. Athabasca University Press

• Bradley, C., Haynes, R., Smith, C., Cook, J. and Boyle, T. (2007). Multimedia Learning Objects for Mobiles. Mobile Learning, 5-7 July 2007, Lisbon, Portugal.

• Cook, J. (2009a). Going for a Local Walkabout: Putting Urban Planning Education in Context with Mobile Phones. Invited talk at LearnHigher CETL ‘M-Posium’ on Mobile Learning. April 22nd, Manchester Metropolitan University. Slides available: http://www.slideshare.net/johnnigelcook

• Cook, J. (2009b). Mobile Learner Generated Contexts: Research on the Internalization of the World of Cultural Products. In B. Bachmair (Ed.) Media Literacy in New Cultural Spaces (Medienbildung in Neuen Kulturräumen). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS-Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft, due end of 2009.

• Cook, J., Pachler, N. and Bradley, C. (2008). Bridging the Gap? Mobile Phones at the Interface between Informal and Formal Learning. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, Spring. Available from: http://www.rcetj.org/?type=ci&id

7. References• Lonsdale, P., Baber, C., Sharples, M. (2004) A Context Awareness Architecture for Facilitating

Mobile Learning. In J. Attewell & C. Savill-Smith (eds.) Learning with Mobile Devices: Research and Development. London. Learning and Skills Development Agency, pp. 79-85.

• McFarlane, A., Triggs, P. and Yee, W. (2008) Researching mobile learning - Interim report to Becta Period: April – December. Coventry. Available at: http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/mobile_learning.pdf, accessed 1st August 2008.

• McFarlane, A., Rouche, N. and Triggs, P. (2007) Mobile learning: research findings. Coventry. Available at: http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/mobile_learning_july07.pdf, accessed 1st August 2008.

• Perry, D. (2003) Handheld computers (PDAs) in schools. Becta, Coventry, March 2003. Available at: http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&rid=13623, accessed 13th September 2008.

• Price, S. (2007) ‘Ubiquitous computing: digital augmentation and learning.’ In: Pachler, N. (ed) Mobile learning: towards a research agenda. WLE Centre, Institute of Education, London, pp. 33-54. Available at: http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/files/occasionalpapers/mobilelearning_pachler_2007.pdf

• Sharples, M. (2006). Becta seminar ‘Future Gazing for Policy Makers’, 28 March, held at the BT Government Innovation Centre, London, UK.

• Sharples, M., Corlett, D., & Westmancott, O. (2001). A Systems Architecture for Handheld Learning Resources. Paper presented at CAL 2001. Available: http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/handler%20cal2001.pdf, accessed 13th September, 2008.

7. References• Sharples, M., Lonsdale P., Meek J., Rudman P.D., Vavoula G.N. (2007). 

An Evaluation of MyArtSpace: a Mobile Learning Service for School Museum Trips. Paper submitted to mLearn 2007 conference, Melbourne. Preprint available as from http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/write.htm, downloaded 5 March, 2008.

• Smith, C., Cook, J. and Pratt-Adams, S. (2009). Context Sensitive Mobile Learning: Designing a ‘Technoscape’ for Urban Planners. Mobile Learning, Barcelona, 26-28 February.

• Smith, C., Cook, J. Bradley, C., Gossett, R. and Haynes, R. (2007). Motivating Learners: Mobile Learning Objects and Reusable Learning Objects for the X-Box generation. ALT-C 2007, 14th International Conference of the Association for Learning Technology, University of Nottingham, September 2007.

• Traxler, J and Dearden, P. (2005a) The Potential for Using SMS to Support Learning and Organisation in Sub-Saharan Africa http://www.wlv.ac.uk/PDF/cidt-article20.pdf, accessed 17th September, 2008.

• Wood, D., Bruner, J. S. and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.

Thank you

Questions?