Students’ Perspectives on Utility of Mobile Applications in Higher Education

  • Naghmeh Aghaee
  • Ken Larsson
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 183)


Use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in pedagogy and learning in higher education supports the concept of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). Mobile devices and applications with educational purposes are part of using online ICT and facilitate autonomous learning in education. Using mobile applications for education has significantly improved in the last few years. However, there is still a gap, in which this concept is still not widely known and frequently experienced by learners. As a part of supporting TEL in higher education and filling this gap, the department of Computer and System Sciences at Stockholm University in Sweden is planning to develop a mobile application for the SciPro system. SciPro is the computer-mediated communication platform to support enhancement of thesis quality and facilitate autonomous learning in higher education, at both Bachelor and Master levels. This study aims to investigate and evaluate learners’ perspectives about utility of mobile applications in higher education and specifically to support SciPro functionalities. Almost 95% of the respondents use mobile applications for higher education and believe in the utility of mobile applications for supporting learning in higher education. This is while there are a few respondents (less than 5%), who do not fully share this opinion. More than 70% of the respondents think that a SciPro mobile application will add value to their thesis process. Even though it may not directly affect the speed and quality of the thesis, it will increase mobility, availability, and flexibility of accessing information and resources in SciPro.


Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Mobile Application Applications Learning Higher Education Thesis Process 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Richards, C.: Towards an integrated framework for designing effective ICT supported learning environments: The challenge to better link technology and pedagogy. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 15(2), 239–255 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hallberg, D., et al.: SciPro from a mobile perspective: Technology enhanced supervision of thesis work in emerging regions. In: Aitec East Africa ICT summit at Oshwal Centre, Nairobi, Kenya (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aghaee, N., Hansson, H.: Peer Portal: Quality enhancement in thesis writing using self-managed peer review on a mass scale. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 14(1), 186–203 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aghaee, N.M., Larsson, U., Hansson, H.: Improving the Thesis Process. In: The 35th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, IRIS 2012 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hansson, H.: 4-excellence: IT system for theses. Going Global: Internationalising higher education. In: British Council Conference, London (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hansson, H., Moberg, J.: Quality processes in technology enhanced thesis work. In: 24th ICDE World Conference on Open and Distance Learning, Bali, Indonesia (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hansson, H., et al.: SCI-PRO: Improving Universities Core Activity with ICT Supporting the Scientific Thesis Writing Process. In: Sixth EDEN Research Workshop, Budapest (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hansson, H., Larsson, K., Wettergren, G.: Open and flexible ICT - support for student thesis production - design concept for the future. In: Gaskell, A., Mills, R., Tait, A. (eds.) The Cambridge International Conference on Open and Distance Learning, pp. 197–204. The Open University, Cambridge (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moore, M.G.: Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 3(2) (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Creswell, J.W.: Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications, Inc. (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohen, L., et al.: Research methods in education. Psychology Press (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Muilenburg, L.Y., Berge, Z.L.: Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education 26(1), 29–48 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cho, S.K., Berge, Z.L.: Overcoming barriers to distance training and education. USDLA Journal 16(1), 16–34 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kukulska-Hulme, A.: Current uses of wireless and mobile learning. JISC-funded Landscape Study Report 15, 2006 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kukulska-Hulme, A.: Mobile usability in educational contexts: what have we learnt? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 8(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., Archer, W.: Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2(2), 87–105 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Anderson, T.: Distance learning–Social software’s killer ap? In: The Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia Conference, Breaking Down Boundaries, Adelaide (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rekkedal, T., Dye, A.: Mobile Distance Learning with PDAs: Development and testing of pedagogical and system solutions supporting mobile distance learners. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 8(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kuo, Y.-C., et al.: A Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education Programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 14(1), 16–39 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reinhart, J., Schneider, P.: Student satisfaction, self-efficacy, and the perception of the two-way audio/video distance learning environment. A preliminary examination. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 4(4), 357–365 (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Findahl, O.: Swedes and the Internet 2012. The Internet Infrastructure Foundation, Stockholm (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naghmeh Aghaee
    • 1
  • Ken Larsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and System SciencesStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations