University Student Conceptions of M-learning in Bangladesh 

  • Md. Shahadat Hossain Khan
  • Benadjih Oiriddine Abdou
  • Che Kum Clement
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)

Abstract

This article presents emerging results from a phenomenographic study that examines Bangladeshi university students’ experience of using mobile devices in their learning. Three students from one renowned university participated in the semi-structured interviews to explore their experiences of m-learning. The findings revealed that university students viewed mobile learning (m-learning) in four qualitatively different ways that were: (i) storing learning materials; (ii) accessing information and knowledge; (iii) effective learning tool; and (iv) effective tool for collaboration. This study is constructed on previous studies of university students’ conceptions of learning. However, the focus taken in this research was on the experience of m-learning, as an emerging research area, which revealed new facets of university learning. The findings of this study play a significant role in the faculty development program and have an impact on the teaching and learning practices in university education.

References

  1. Åkerlind, G. S. (2005). Learning about phenomenography: interviewing, data analysis and the qualitative research paradigm. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. 63–74). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Al-Fahad, F. N. (2009). Students’ attitudes and perceptions towards the effectiveness of mobile learning in King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. Online Submission, 8(2).Google Scholar
  3. Barnard, A., McCosker, H., & Gerber, R. (1999). Phenomenography: A qualitative research approach for exploring understanding in health care. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 212–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  5. Bruce, C., Buckingham, L., Hynd, J., McMahon, C., Roggenkamp, M., & Stoodley, I. (2004). Ways of experiencing the act of learning to program: A phenomenographic study of introductory programming students at university. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 3(1), 145–160.Google Scholar
  6. Duarte, A. (2007). Conceptions of learning and approaches to learning in Portuguese students. Higher Education, 54(6), 781–794. doi:10.1007/s10734-006-9023-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eklund-Myrskog, G. (1998). Students’ conceptions of learning in different educational contexts. Higher Education, 35(3), 299–316. doi:10.1023/a:1003145613005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., Prosser, M., & O’Hara, A. (2006). How and what university students learn through online and face-to-face discussion: conceptions, intentions and approaches. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 22(4), 244–256. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00173.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., Calvo, R. A., & Prosser, M. (2008). Engineering students’ conceptions of and approaches to learning through discussions in face-to-face and online contexts. Learning and Instruction, 18(3), 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forster, M. (2013). A phenomenographic investigation into information literacy in nursing practice—Preliminary findings and methodological issues. Nurse Education Today, 33(10), 1237–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. González, C. (2009). Conceptions of, and approaches to, teaching online: a study of lecturers teaching postgraduate distance courses. Higher Education, 57(3), 299–314. doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9145-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hammond, M. (2014). Introducing ICT in schools in England: Rationale and consequences. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hammond, M., Reynolds, L., & Ingram, J. (2011). How and why do student teachers use ICT? Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 27(3), 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harris, L. R. (2011). Phenomenographic perspectives on the structure of conceptions: The origins, purposes, strengths, and limitations of the what/how and referential/structural frameworks. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 109–124. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2011.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hashim, K. F., Tan, F. B., & Rashid, A. (2014). Adult learners’ intention to adopt mobile learning: A motivational perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2). doi: 10.1111/bjet.12148.
  16. Kafyulilo, A. (2014). Access, use and perceptions of teachers and students towards mobile phones as a tool for teaching and learning in Tanzania. Education and Information Technologies, 19(1), 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Karim, M. A. (2010). Digital Bangladesh for Good governance. Paper presented at the Bangladesh Development Forum 2010, Bangabandhu International Conference Centre. Retrieved from http://www.lcgbangladesh.org/bdf-2010/BG_Paper/BDF2010_SessionVI.pdf.
  18. Khan, S. H. (2014). Phenomenography: a qualitative research methodology in Bangladesh. International Journal on new trends in education and their implication, 5(2), 34–43.Google Scholar
  19. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Limbu, L., & Markauskaite, L. (2015). How do learners experience joint writing: University students’ conceptions of online collaborative writing tasks and environments. Computers & Education, 82, 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lucas, U. (2001). Deep and surface approaches to learning within introductory accounting: A phenomenographic study. Accounting Education, 10(2), 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography-describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  24. Noor-Ul-Amin, S. (2013). An effective use of ICT for education and learning by drawing on worldwide knowledge, research, and experience: ICT as a change agent for education. Scholarly Journal of Education, 2(4), 38–45.Google Scholar
  25. Ozdamli, F., & Cavus, N. (2011). Basic elements and characteristics of mobile learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 937–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ozdamli, F., & Uzunboylu, H. (2014). M‐learning adequacy and perceptions of students and teachers in secondary schools. British Journal of Educational Technology. Google Scholar
  27. Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Potyrala, K. (2001). ICT tools in biology education.Google Scholar
  29. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rogers, Y., Connelly, K., Hazlewood, W., & Tedesco, L. (2010). Enhancing learning: a study of how mobile devices can facilitate sensemaking. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 14(2), 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Serin, O. (2012). Mobile learning perceptions of the prospective teachers (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus sampling). Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 11(3), 222–233.Google Scholar
  32. Sha, L., Looi, C.-K., Chen, W., Seow, P., & Wong, L.-H. (2012). Recognizing and measuring self-regulated learning in a mobile learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 718–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sin, S. (2010). Considerations of quality in phenomenographic research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(4), 305–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vermunt, J., & Vermetten, Y. (2004). Patterns in student learning: relationships between learning strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 359–384. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0005-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Virtanen, V., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2010). University students’ and teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning in the biosciences. Instructional Science, 38(4), 355–370. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9088-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Shahadat Hossain Khan
    • 1
  • Benadjih Oiriddine Abdou
    • 1
  • Che Kum Clement
    • 1
  1. 1.Islamic University of TechnologyDhakaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations