Advertisement

Mobile Blended Learning

  • Christian GlahnEmail author
  • Marion R. Gruber
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Mobiles Lernen ist in Bildungsorganisationen in komplexe Lernprozesse eingebettet. Jedoch greifen einfache Funktionsanpassungen von Online-Lernumgebungen für mobile Endgeräte für die didaktische Unterrichtsgestaltung von Mobile Blended Learning zu kurz. In diesem Beitrag wird das Blended Learning-Konzept um die mobile Dimension erweitert und der Einfluss von Kontexten auf Lehr- und Lernprozesse untersucht. Dabei werden Lernkontexte als eigenständige und dynamische Faktoren berücksichtigt.

In Bezug auf „Kontext“ muss zwischen „Seamless Learning“ und „Mobile Blended Learning“ unterschieden werden. Seamless Learning stellt die aktive Gestaltung von Kontexten und deren Übergänge in das Zentrum der didaktischen Konzeption. Bei der didaktischen Gestaltung beeinflussen die Lernkontexte die Auswahl von Lehr- und Lernmitteln, Sozialformen und Aktivitätselementen. Im Gegensatz dazu werden beim Mobile Blended Learning die Lernkontexte durch die Auswahl von Lehr- und Lernmitteln bei der Gestaltung von Lernangeboten bestimmt. Dieses Kapitel stellt Seamless Learning und Mobile Blended Learning in einem integrativen Modell gegenüber. Auf der Basis dieser erweiterten Sicht auf Blended Learning wird anhand eines praktischen Beispiels der Einfluss von Kontexten auf mobile Lernerlebnisse in konventionellen Bildungsangeboten an der Hochschule erkundet.

Schlüsselwörter

Kontextualisierung Learning Design Mobile Blended Learning Seamless Learning Aktivitätstheorie 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York/NY.Google Scholar
  2. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook 1: the classification of educational goals: Cognitive Domain. New York/NY.Google Scholar
  3. Churchill, D., Fox, B., & King, M. (2016). Framework for Designing Mobile Learning Environments. In D. Churchill, J. Lu, T. K. F. Chiu & B. Fox (Eds.), Mobile Learning Design, Theories and Application. Singapore, 3-25.Google Scholar
  4. Dillenbourg, P. (2015). Orchestration Graphs: Modeling Scalable Education. Lausanne (CH).Google Scholar
  5. Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (Second Edition). New York/NY.Google Scholar
  6. Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. M. (2004). Principles of Instructional Design, 5th Edition.Google Scholar
  7. Orlando/FL. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco/CA.Google Scholar
  8. Glahn, C. (2009). Contextual Support of Social Engagement and Reflection on the Web [Doctoral thesis]. Heerlen: Open University in The Netherlands. http://hdl.handle.net/1820/2062. Zugegriffen: 06. Juni 2017.
  9. Glahn, C. (2013). Using the ADL Experience API for Mobile Learning, Sensing, Informing, Encouraging, Orchestrating. In K. Al-Begain, R. Bestak, N. Al-Beiruti & C. Turyagyenda (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Apps, Services and Technologies, NGMAST 2013, 25-27 September 2013, Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic. Prague, Czech Republic.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ngmast.2013.55
  10. Glahn, C. (2014). Mobile Learning Operating Systems. In M. Ally & A. Tsinakos (Eds.), Increasing Access through Mobile Learning. Vancouver (CAN), 141-157.Google Scholar
  11. Glahn, C., Gruber, M. R., & Tartakovski, O. (2015). Beyond Delivery Modes and Apps: A Case Study on Mobile Blended Learning in Higher Education. In G. Conole, T. Klobučar, C. Rensing, J. Konert & É. Lavoué (Eds.), Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9307. Heidelberg, 127-140.Google Scholar
  12. Glahn, C., Hug, T., & Gassler, G. (2005). Embedded Lifelong Learning: Demands on the Integration of Learning into the Daily Routine. New Educational Review 5 (1), 243-254.Google Scholar
  13. Koper, R. (2003). Combining re-usable learning resources and services to pedagogical purposeful units of learning. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.), Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach to eLearning. London, 46-59.Google Scholar
  14. Koper, R., Olivier, B., & Anderson, T. (Eds.) (2003). IMS Learning Design Information Model. IMS Global Learning Consortium. https://www.imsglobal.org/learningdesign/ldv1p0/imsld_infov1p0.html. Zugegriffen: 06. Juni 2017.
  15. Kuh, G. D., Douglas, K. B., Lund, J. P., & Ramin-Gyurnek, J. (1994). Student Learning Outside the Classroom. Transcending Artificial Boundaries. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 8. Washington/DC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED394444.pdf. Zugegriffen: 23.22.2017.
  16. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaikin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice, perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge (UK), 3-33.Google Scholar
  17. Lave, J. (2009). The Practie of Learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning, Learning Theorists in their own words. London, New York/NY, 200-208.Google Scholar
  18. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge (UK).Google Scholar
  19. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component Instructional Design. New York/NY.Google Scholar
  20. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On The Horizon.  https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
  21. Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional Design: What is it and Why is it? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: An Overview of their Current Status. New York/NY, 3-36.Google Scholar
  22. Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2009). Situational Principles of Instruction. In C. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: Building a Common Knowledge Base, Vol. III. New York/NY, 57-72.Google Scholar
  23. Reigeluth, C. M., & Keller, J. B. (2009). Understanding Instruction. In C. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: Building a Common Knowledge Base, Vol. III. New York/NY, 27-40.Google Scholar
  24. Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning.  https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.192
  25. Sharples, M., Arnedillo-Sánchez, I., Milrad, M., & Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile Learning. Small Devices, Big Issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Learning, Principles and Products. Dordrecht, 233-249.Google Scholar
  26. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2006). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Elearning Research. Los Angeles, 221-247.Google Scholar
  27. Specht, M. (2009). Learning in a Technology Enhanced World: Context in Ubiquitous Learning Support. http://hdl.handle.net/1820/2034. Zugegriffen: 06. Juni 2017.
  28. Specht, M. (2015). Connecting Learning Contexts with Ambient Information Channels. In L.-H. Wong, M. Milrad & M. Specht (Eds.), Seamless Learning in the Age of Mobile Connectivity (). Singapore, 121-140.Google Scholar
  29. Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, Discussing and Evaluating Mobile Learning: The moving finger writes and having writ… . The International Review Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning.  https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v8i2.346
  30. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge (UK).Google Scholar
  31. Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2014). Digital Habitats: Stewarding Technology for Communities. Portland.Google Scholar
  32. Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J. D., & Rowe, K. (2005). Technology for communities. In L. Langelier, CEFRIO (Eds.), Guide de mise en place et d’animation de communautés de pratique intentionelle. Québec (CAN). http://technologyforcommunities.com/CEFRIO_Book_Chapter_v_5.2.pdf. Zugegriffen: 06. Juni 2017.
  33. Wong, L.-H. (2015). A Brief History of Mobile Seamless Learning. In L.-H. Wong, M. Milrad & M. Specht (Eds.), Seamless Learning in the Age of Mobile Connectivity. Singapore, 3-40.Google Scholar
  34. Wong, L.-H., & Looi, C.-K. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Computers & Education 57(4), 2364-2381.Google Scholar
  35. Zimmermann, A., Lorenz, A., & Oppermann, R. (2007). An Operational Definition of Context. In B. Kokinov, D. C. Richardson, T. R. Roth-Berghofer & L. Vieu (Eds.), Modeling and Using Context: 6th International and Interdisciplinary Conference, CONTEXT 2007, Roskilde, Denmark, 20th-24th August 2007. Proceedings. Berlin, Heidelberg, 558-571.Google Scholar
  36. Zimmermann, A., Specht, M., & Lorenz, A. (2005). Personalization and Context Management. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 15 (3), 275-302.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ChurSchweiz
  2. 2.ZürichSchweiz

Personalised recommendations