Mobile Learning in K-12 Education: Personal Meets Systemic

Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)

Abstract

This paper investigates one school’s journey towards integrating mobile learning within its institutional structures. This includes a comparison of the school’s objectives against mobile learning affordances. The approach takes into account the cultural contexts, dynamic nature of digital change, and school structural challenges that impact on providing worthwhile education outcomes. Several in-school case reviews on mobile learning use within the school look at mobile learning integration. As well as providing insights for other schools to consider, possible ways forward are presented for better understanding the dynamic relationship between mobile learning and school intentions, as well as challenges that go with ever-evolving digital technologies.

References

  1. Bain, A., & Weston, M. (2012). The learning edge: What technology can do to educate all children. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baran, E. (2014). A review of research on mobile learning in teacher education. Educational Technology and Society, 17(4), 17–32.Google Scholar
  3. Blackley, S., & Walker, R. (2015). One-to-one laptop programs: Is transformation occurring in mathematics teaching? Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 99–117. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier25/blackley.pdf.
  4. Bjerede, M., & Bondi, T. (2012). Learning is personal: Stories of android tablet use in the 5th grade. Learning Untethered. In B. Clarke & S. Svanaes (Eds.). An updated literature review on the use of tablets in education. Tablets for Schools. Retrieved from http://www.tabletsforschools.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/T4S-Literature-Review-9-4-14.pdf.
  5. Churchill, D., & Churchill, N. (2008). Educational affordances of PDAs: a study of a teacher’s exploration of this technology. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1439–1450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Churchill, D., Fox, B., & King, M. (2012). Study of affordances of iPads and teachers’ private theories. International Journal of Information and Education Technology., 2(3), 4.Google Scholar
  7. Clarke, B., & Svanaes, S. (2014). Tablets for schools: An updated literature review on the use of tablets in education. Retrieved from http://www.tabletsforschools.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/T4S-Literature-Review-9-4-14.pdf.
  8. Cochrane, T., Narayan, V., & Oldfield, J. (2013). iPadagogy: Appropriating the iPad within pedagogical contexts. International Journal of Mobile Learning & Organisation, 17(1), 18.Google Scholar
  9. Columbus, L. (2014, November). Mobile is eating the world. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2014/11/09/mobile-is-eating-the-world/.
  10. Craig, T., & Van Lom, M. (2009) Impact Constructivist Learning Theory and Mobile Technology Integration, Theories of Educational Technology. EDTech, Boise State University, Boise. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories/craig_and_vanlom.
  11. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cuban, L. (2014). Larry Cuban on school reform and classroom practice. Retrieved from https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/.
  14. Duncan, D., Hoekstra, A., & Wilcox, B. (2012). Digital devices, distraction, and student performance: does in-class cell phone use reduce learning? Astronomy Education Review, 11, 010108–1, 10.3847/AER2012011.
  15. Florida Centre for Instructional Technology. (2011). Technology integration matrix (TIM). Retrieved from http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix.
  16. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Greenfield, S. (2015). Mind change: How digital technologies are leaving their mark on our brains. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  18. Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective. Research in Learning Technology, 20. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v20i0.14406.
  19. Laouris Y., & Eteokleous, N. (2005). We need an educationally relevant definition of mobile learning. In Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Mobile Learning, mLearn 2005, October 25–28, Cape Town, South Africa.Google Scholar
  20. Liu, M., Scordino, R., Geurtz, R., Navarrete, C., Ko, Y., & Lim, M. (2014a). A look at research on mobile learning in K-12 education From 2007 to the present. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(4), 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu, M., Navarrete, C., & Wivagg, J. (2014b). Potentials of mobile technology for K-12 education: An investigation of iPod touch use for english language learners in the united states. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 17(2), 115–126.Google Scholar
  22. McCoy, B. (2013). Digital distractions in the classroom: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. Journal of Media Education, 4(4), 10.Google Scholar
  23. McFarlane, A. (2015). Authentic learning for the digital generation – Realising the potential of technology in the classroom. Abingdon, UK: Rutledge.Google Scholar
  24. Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2003) Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practicing within the disciplines. Retrieved from http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/docs/ETLreport4.pdf.
  25. New Media Consortium. (2013). Horizon report, K-12 edition 2013. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/publications/2013-horizon-report-k12.
  26. New Media Consortium. (2014). Horizon report, K-12 edition 2014. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-k12.
  27. OECD. (2013). Governing complex education systems: Framework for case studies. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/governingcomplexeducationsystemsgces.htm OECD.
  28. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. Brighton: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
  29. Sharples, M. (2009). Methods for Evaluating Mobile Learning. In G. N. Vavoula, N. Pachler, & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Researching mobile learning: Frameworks, tools and research designs (pp. 17–39). Oxford: Peter Lang Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  30. Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: Research, practice and challenges (In Chinese, J. Xiao, Trans.). Distance Education in China, 3:5–11, 44. Also reprinted as Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile Learning: Research, Practice and Challenges (In Chinese, Trans. J. Xiao). Adult Education, 9, 28–35. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/37510/2/sharples.pdf.
  31. Shuler, C., Winters, N., & West, N. (2013). The future of mobile learning: Implications for policy makers and planners. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  32. Seipold, J., & Pachler, N. (2011). Evaluating mobile learning practice - towards a framework for analysis of user-generated contexts with reference to the socio-cultural ecology of mobile learning Medienpaedagogik (Vol. 19, pp. 1–13).Google Scholar
  33. Traxler, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2005). Evaluating mobile learning: Reflections on current practice. In Proceedings of mLearn2005: 4th World Conference on mLearning, Cape Town, South Africa. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/12819/1/.
  34. Turner, J. (1999). Use of the Logo programming language as software to support constructivist learning within a post-primary school mathematics environment. Unpublished PHD thesis. Monash University, Victoria.Google Scholar
  35. UNESCO. (2012). Turning on mobile learning: global themes. UNESCO Working Paper Series on Mobile Learning. (pp. 1–14).Google Scholar
  36. Watters, A. (2014). The monsters of educational technology. Retrieved from http://hackeducation.com/2014/12/01/the-monsters-of-education-technology/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Canadian International School of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations