Improving the Way of Learning by Mobile Technology - Research Paper Example

Improving the Way of Learning by Mobile Technology Name Tutor Name Course Date Executive Summary The implementation of mobile technologies, like ICT, has to integrate various educational aspects. This include factors such; institutional readiness, pedagogy and curriculum, financial support and teacher competencies to ensure efficiency in learning. The purposed of this study is to explore the ways in which learning can be improved by mobile technology. The objective is aimed at answering the main research question: what are the ways in which learning can be improved through mobile technology. The findings of the study provide best practices and insights into these research questions. The study found that mobile technology is pivotal in higher education. It is also playing a critical role in improving the way of learning in higher education by linking informal and formal learning practices. This is however conditioned by the learning paradigms employed in learning. The study established that learner-centered approach is more effective for mobile learning than teacher-centered approach. Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Table of Contents 3 1. Introduction 4 1.1 Background of the study 4 1.2 Motivation and significance of the study 5 1.3 Aims and Objectives 6 1.4 Research Questions 6 2. Literature Review 7 2.1 Categories of Mobile Technologies 8 2.2 Activity-based approach to m-learning 10 2.2.1 Behaviourist learning 11 2.2.2 Constructivist learning 11 2.2.3 Collaborative Learning 12 2.3 Benefits of mobile devices in supporting Learning and teaching 12 3. Methodologies 14 4 Analysis, Findings and Discussion 15 4.1 Significance of mobile technologies in higher education 17 4.2 Ways in which mobile technologies can be used to enhance education 19 4.3 Potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education 21 5. Conclusion 22 6. References 24 1. Introduction Mobile technology has enabled extension of learning beyond the walls of the classroom. Currently, it is an emerging paradigm in educational technology. The concept of mobile learning, or m-learning, depicts a learning process using wireless technologies that can receive unbroken transmission signals. Studies indicate that educators have started to place interest on mobile learning with the prospect of expanding the sphere of computer-mediated education to learning situations beyond the traditional class room learning experiences. This paradigm provides the potential for interactive and collaborative learning particularly for geographically dispersed learners (Lan & Huang 2010). 1.1 Background of the study The increased use of mobile device has in itself motivated the need to exploit them for the purposes of promoting learning. For instance, according to ITU (2013), mobile-cellular penetration approaches 100 percent penetration globally, with indications that there will be as many mobile devices as the number of people around the world at the end of 2013. ITU (2013) statistics showed that 6.8 billion people own mobile phones, with the penetration at 96 percent, as of 2013. Mobile technologies are currently prevalently used by students in higher education. This article argues that rather than see them as disruptive technologies, there is a need for educators to exploit the potential of these technologies in improve learning in higher education. Therefore, this study is based on the premise that mobile technologies offer an opportunity for a fundamental change in higher education, away from the traditional class setting or use of computer labs (Lan and Huang 2011). 1.2 Motivation and significance of the study Mobile technologies have displayed a potential for supporting learner-centered learning. Integrating mobile devices in the learning environment can enable teachers and students to share vital information and to coordinate their works. Across the globe, the integration of mobile and wireless technologies has risen rapidly although empirical studies on their effectiveness are still rare. With the increased penetration of mobile devices globally, educational institutions are now in search of new paradigms essential for restructuring educational curricula and classroom facilities to bridge a technology gap in education (Economist Intelligence Unit 2008). However, this calls for effective adoption of technologies into the existing environment to promote meaningful learning. The use of mobile devices has indeed changed the education landscape. However, the impact of mobile learning to student achievement remains unclear (Economist Intelligence Unit 2008). Other potential areas for research that need to be investigated include the critical role that mobile technologies plays in higher education and the different ways in which mobile technologies can be applied in improving education (Lan and Huang 2011). Indeed, there is a paucity of research on the critical roles of mobile devices on education. The goal of this research is therefore to explore the ways in which learning can be improved by mobile technology. 1.3 Aims and Objectives The aim of the study is to explore the ways in which learning can be improved by mobile technology. The study objectives entailed: i. To identify the significance of mobile technologies in higher education ii. To examine difference ways in which mobile technologies can be used in enhancing education. iii. To establish the potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education. 1.4 Research Questions This study will address the following research question. i) What is the significance of mobile technologies in higher education? : The researcher is interested in examining the perceived and observable benefits of integrating mobile technology in higher education. ii) What are the different ways in which mobile technologies can be used in enhancing education? The researcher is interested in exploring different strategies for effective integration of mobile learning in higher education iii) What is the potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education? The researcher is interested in examining how and whether mobile technology can be integrated in different sphere of learning. 2. Literature Review The adoption of mobile technology in the context and circumstances of learning has extensively been discussed by various literatures (Lave and Wenger 1991 and Brown et al 1989). Lave and Wenger (1991) and Brown et al (1989) noted that knowledge involves information in context. The researchers opined that since mobile devices enable context-specific information they have the potential to facilitate construction of knowledge and learning. According to Naismith et al (2006), mobile technologies present learning experiences that can effectively educate and engage contemporary learners in a way that is distinctly different and much advanced as compared to those provided by conventional desk top computers. Mobile devices are applied dynamically in a range of almost limitless settings hence giving access to a wide variety of applications and situated-learning activities. In Naismith et al’s (2006) view, the personal nature of mobile technologies implies that they are well-suited to engage learners in individualized learning experiences. Recent reviews of mobile technologies for learning have categorized examples of mobile use based on the curriculum area. Several studies have conceived that the role and impact of mobile technologies for learning covers more than what an individual can do using a device (Liu 2007). This means that to determine their efficiencies and effectiveness, there is a need for more extensive reviews of the emerging practices and how they related to paradigms and theories that were previously suggested for use in computer education. 2.1 Categories of Mobile Technologies Different kinds of technology exist that can be grouped as “mobile”. Most researchers have derived the meaning of “mobile” to depict “moveable” and “portable” (Naismith et al 2006; Mueller, Wood and Pasquale 2012; Ishmael et al 2012; Armatas, Holt and Rice 2005). To some information analysts, the term also implicates “personal” rather than “shared” nature of use. Naismith et al’s (2006) combined the term personal and mobile since a device might be mobile without necessarily being mobile. The researchers proposed that to determine the effectives of the use of mobile technologies in learning, two orthogonal dimensions of shared vs. personal and static vs. portable could be used (Fig 1). Figure 1: Classifying Mobile technologies (Naismith et al 2006) In quadrant 1, the devices are classified as either being personal and portable. The class of devices consists of those that people mostly think of in relation to mobile technologies. They involve mobile phones, laptops, tablet PCs, PDAs and even handheld-video game consoles. Lee et al (2004) and Rosas et al (2003) evaluated the effectiveness of their use of the use of this category for educational purposes. Since this category supports single-users, they are opined to be very personal. Their networked nature offers opportunities for information sharing. This implies that they are useful in promoting learning in educational scenarios that generally involve personalized information sharing. Naismith et al (2006) noted that these devices are portable since they can be transferred from one place to the other, which means that they can be available in many places. Lan and Huang (2011) however explained that some other technologies that are less portable compared to PDAs and mobile phones also offer personal interaction with learning experience. Quadrant 2 shows classroom response systems. This class consists of individual student devices useful for responding to multiple choice questions that a central server or a teacher administers. This category is essentially static since it can only be used per location. However, it remains personal since it is typically small in size and is allocated to a single user. Naismith at al (2006) called these technologies personal static technologies. Quadrant 3 (Fig 1) presents mobile technologies that can offer learning experiences to users who are on the move. However, the devices are by nature not physically moveable. Such devices include interactive museum displays, street kiosks in addition to a number of other kinds of installations that present potentials to pervasive information access and learning experiences. In any case, it is the learner who is moveable. These mobile devices are typically perceived to be less personal. They are also likely to be shared between multiple users. Since they are large in size, it means they are appropriately suited for multiple user-interactions. Naismith (2006) termed such devices “shared mobile technologies.” Quadrant 4 presents mobile technologies that provide more shared interactions (Fig 1). For more shared interactions, it means the devices must themselves have larger size and hence be less portable. Such include video conferencing facilities and interactive classroom whiteboards. Naismith et al (2006) explained that although these devices would generally not be categorized as mobile technologies, they are included in the classification since they show the complete space of potentials engendered by the classification. 2.2 Activity-based approach to m-learning Much of the researches on the role of mobile technologies in higher learning are driven by the technical capabilities of the devices. To date, application of theory into the use of these technologies for educational purposes is lacking. Being mobile adds to the dimensions of the learning activities because of the mobile and personal nature of the devices and given the kinds of interactions they can offer learners at different environments. Klopfer et al (2002) developed five properties of mobile devices that promote effective learning experience. These include portability, social interactivity, context sensitivity, connectivity and individuality. Klopfer et al (2002) noted that to fully realize the potential of mobile technologies in learning, it is critical to investigate beyond the use of individual device and to consider their application in classroom practice as part of learning experience. Figure 2: Activity-based classification of using mobile technologies in learning In structuring the classification of activities around the major theories and areas if learning that are pertinent to learning, Naismith et al (2006) identified six main themes to provide theoretical background for reviewing case studies presented in section 3. These include behaviorist, constructivist, situated learning, teaching support, informal learning and lifelong and collaborative learning. 2.2.1 Behaviourist learning This paradigm involves the application of mobile devices to present learning materials, offering appropriate feedback, and acquire responses from learners. Using this paradigm, learning is perceived to be best facilitated through an association of particular stimulus and response. With respect to mobile technology, computer-aided learning is regarded as the presentation of a problem (stimulus) and the contribution of the learner as the response. In this type of learning paradigm, learning takes place through transmission (Naismith et al 2006). 2.2.2 Constructivist learning This theory of learning postulates that learning is an active process whereby learners construct new concepts or ideas based on their past and current knowledge (Bruner 1966). The use of cognitive structure in this paradigm constructs hypothesis largely based on Piaget’s description of patterns of physicals and mental actions underlying specific acts of intelligence (Piaget 1929). Mobile technologies offer tremendous applications that promote learning in terms of display capabilities, namely graphics, texts and video, with regard to constructivist theory. To promote effective learning through this paradigm, instructors encourage students to be constructive constructors of knowledge by discovering principles for themselves. Mobile technologies offer an opportunity to enable learners to be embedded in realistic context while at the same time presenting them with supporting tools. 2.2.3 Collaborative Learning The capacities of mobile devices and their wide context of use greatly contribute to their potential to promote collaboration. Mobile technologies can easily communicate with other computer devices enabling learners to share data, messages and files (Colella 2000). In addition, they can be linked to a shared data network thus improving learning experience by enhancing the effectiveness of communication. Previous researches on collaborative learning are previously informed by recent researches on computer-supported collaborative learning, where specific focus was placed on the application of mobile technologies to facilitate interactions between students (Naismith et al 2006). 2.3 Benefits of mobile devices in supporting Learning and teaching The use of mobile technologies in higher education is not limited to leveraging them for improving learning experiences. As a process, education relies significantly on the coordination of learners and resources. Here, mobile technologies can support teaching and learning without openly being part of the learning activity. In the recent past, universities have made significant progress in corporate technology systems towards initiatives that support various aspects of studies and learning (Armatas, Holt, & Rice 2005). Such efforts include encouraging students to engage in online activities. A study conducted by Armatas, Holt and Rice (2005) established that more and more students are coming to universities and colleges equipped with mobile devices such as mobile phones that enable them to communicate easily and share information. The key advantages to these devices unlike the traditional equipments such as computers are their ease of accessibility, portability and their functionality (Economist Intelligence Unit 2008). Mobile devices can be used to access the internet in the same manner as a computer; in fact mobile phones have integrated computer features such as Office functionality (with enabled editing of Ms Word, Excel, Power point and Ms Access among others). Mail functionality applications have also been integrated in order to allow quick communication process. With all these capabilities of portable devices, mobile services are proving imperative in aiding institutions break the monotony and reach out to students as well as developers in creating better applications that can assist in a classroom setting (Junglas 2005). Mobile devices have the potential of overcoming geographical limitation and socioeconomic boundaries and create a level playing field for all students irrespective of their socioeconomic status. Tables and other mobile devices create a better learning experience as compared to the traditional platforms. Benford (2005) noted that most young children find it more interesting to use mobile devices in accessing educational applications and playing games. These mobile devices make the learning process fun. The researcher further expressed that next generation mobile devices are clearly gaining popularity in the educational sector (Benford 2005). As an example, the latest device such as Google’s Glass is threatening the existing classroom structure. Google Glass allows students to access a number of educational live streams and hence eliminating the need to be physically present a class setting. Mobile education also allows students and teachers alike to share knowledge at any time irrespective of their locations. With mobile devices, the need for regular classes may become unnecessary especially in higher education. Mobile devices can have unimaginable impact for students if lectures can be live-streamed for a group of students, anyone in the world can attend the lecture and hence making it more interesting to actually forecast the impact of mobile technologies to the future of the education system. Anderson (2006) discussed that that mobile technologies have paved ways for crowd-sourced learning. These projects impart education of diverse subjects making them more appreciated and hence paving way for educational giants to enhance crowd-sourcing. With the online platforms providing wealth of information, millions of people have acquired knowledge on several fields without attending the relevant course physically (Kessler 2011). 3. Methodologies The study used document analysis to collect data. Focus was on secondary sources of data. The criteria for reviewing the article entailed searching for journal articles that focused on improving the way of learning by mobile technology. The researcher independently extracted data from such studies that met the criteria. Online library research was conducted with the reviewer focusing on analysis of documents and summarizing them in a table (See Table 1). Only journal articles documented in English language were selected. Yin (2003) suggested three principles that can be used in data collection document analysis: case study database, chain of evidence and multiple sources of evidence. By integrating these three principles, data was collected and the research questions for all the data collected were used. All the eight articles investigated the ways of improving learning by mobile technology. All the articles were directly related to the research questions. Scrutiny of the secondary sources provided ground for determining the real impact of mobile devices on our educational system. Possibilities of future usage were also revealed as the potentials of the internet integrated mobile devices are analyzed through the eyes of scholars and educators. The documents were selected based on the extent to which they have been able to explain and describe the role of mobile technology in higher education. After selection of the articles relevant to the study, they were analyzed through tabulating their various purposes, methods and themes in relations to mobile technology (See Table 1). The findings were later evaluated in order to answer the research question. All documents analyzed were peer reviewed articles published between 2005 and 2013. 4 Analysis, Findings and Discussion Most of the articles in the conferences and academic journals captured research evidences on the expediency in mobile learning. The evidences collected from seven peer reviewed journals are presented below. Author & date Purpose Method Sample Result Limitations Chou, Block and Jesness (2012). Examine the effectiveness of one-to-one Learning using mobile technology in K-12 education. Qualitative case study (Observation) 120 students observed One-to-one learning using mobile technology enables students to develop passions and interests through their own personalized, media-enhanced environments that can transport students to different environments times - Small sample size – Sample restricted to K-12 education. -Limited geographical scope -Failure to examine learning theoretical perspectives Mueller, Wood and Pasquale (2012) Examine the role of mobile technology in higher education. Explore the role of handheld devices in and out of the classroom. Direct Approach & Structured Surveys (questionnaire) 108 respondents Mobile technology as a learning tool is still a relatively novel learning and instructional tool and that it is used more frequently as a communication device amongst peers than as an instructional tool directed by faculty. --lacks generalizability -Small sample size. Ishmael et al (2012) Identify the role of technology acceptance among instructors from the from the components of awareness and motivation, training and courses, training design, and supports and facilities Structured Survey (Questionnaires) 38 The level of technology acceptance among instructors from all components (training and courses, training design, awareness and motivation, and supports and facilities) was high. - Small sample size. -Lacks generalizability -Failure to examine learning theoretical perspectives Liu (2007) Examine factors that may affect the application of mobile technology in learning in classroom situations. Qualitative case study (Observation) 28 - Teacher's instructional practices are greatly restricted by the teacher-centred approach. The stress and strong doubts about changes in instructional methods prevented teachers from changing instructional routines. -- Small sample size. -Lacks generalizability -Limited review of learning paradigms . Armatas, Holt and Rice (2005) Examine how a balance can be achieved in the context of work being undertaken at the University with major commitments to e-learning. Unstructured survey (Document analysis) 23 documents reviewed Caution and planning are needed in adopting mobile technologies to avoid some of the pitfalls experienced when in using e-learning. -No follow up research was carried out Chen and Denoyelles (2013) Examine students' mobile learning practices in higher education Structured Survey (Questionnaires) 1,082 There is a gap between students who own mobile technologies and those who actually use them for academic purposed. Instructors should integrate mobile technology in learning. -Limited review of learning paradigms Osman and Cronje (2010) Reflect on and understand the position of mobile learning in higher education Unstructured survey (Document analysis) 25 articles - Mobile technology is likely to become one of the most efficient ways of delivering higher education instruction in the future, it has become necessary to examine its implication for the design of teaching and learning. - No review of learning theories and paradigms Rapetti, Picco and Vannini (2011) To examine the importance of mobile technology for students in their learning experience. Structured Survey (Online questionnaires) 4449 students - Mobile technologies are crucial in the everyday life of students and bridge the role between informal and formal practices of learning - No review of learning theories and paradigms Figure 3: Summary of document analysis 4.1 Significance of mobile technologies in higher education Most of the articles analyzed integrated the learning paradigms. The studies concluded that pedagogical approaches that can be used with mobile technology include self-regulated learning and constructivist pedagogical approaches (Armatas, Holt and Rice 2005; Liu 2007; Ishmael et al 2012; Mueller, Wood and Pasquale 2012; Chou, Block and Jesness 2012). According to Armatas, Holt and Rice (2004), the potentials of mobile technology in encouraging constructivist pedagogy and in supporting self-regulated learning can be effectively realized if the technology is applied in a manner that is consistent with the two theoretical frameworks -- self-regulated learning and constructivist pedagogical. Liu (2007) used different learning paradigms. The researcher found that learner-centered approach was more effective for mobile learning than teacher-centered approach. The study is consistent with findings by Armatas, Holt and Rice (2004) that indicated that educators’ instructional practices do not often comply with their beliefs. Both studies however clarified that mobile technologies cannot effectively change a teacher’s instructional practices, and hence having a planning for their implementation is essential. Similar findings were reported by Osman and Cronje (2010), who established that integrating learning paradigms with mobile technology like mobile learning is one of the most efficient ways of delivering higher education instruction in the future. Findings by Rapetti, Picco and Vannini (2011) were consistent with the two studies, as the researchers found that mobile technologies are crucial in the everyday life of students and bridge the role between informal and formal practices of learning. A study by Armatas, Holt & Rice (2005) established that mobile devices are proving to be indispensable tools in online teaching and learning process as they present opportunities for technology solutions where students can be supported in a number of ways in their education process. Chen and Denoyelles’ (2013) findings supported this view although they approximated that there is still a gap between students who own mobile technologies and those who actually use them for academic purposed. Ishmael et al (2012) and Armatas, Holt & Rice (2005) established that although mobile technologies are indispensible in pushing students towards college information in a bid to add value to the learning process, there is a high level of technology acceptance among instructors from all components (training and courses, training design, awareness and motivation, and supports and facilities) was high. Liu (2007) found that introducing mobile technology into the classroom learning environment placed the teacher at dilemma since a teacher needed change instruction, which however caused stresses. These requires the teacher to make significant changes from earlier instructions such as types of social relationships between students, classroom interaction and the nature of the teaching materials or assignment if the mobile devices have to be effective. 4.2 Ways in which mobile technologies can be used to enhance education A study by Chou, Block and Jesness (2012) found that learning using mobile technology should focus on the improvement of content and performance. Content refers to the technical and pedagogical contents that enable instructors to improve student learning. On the other hand, performance improvement involves improving the capability of educators. With regard to the content, the learning should be transformed with technology. Chou, Block and Jesness (2012) suggested that at the basic level, technology can be used to substitute and to augment traditional and print text, while at higher levels; technology should be used to transform the learning experience by modifying and redefining. Armatas, Holy and Rice (2005) used a different approach although they arrived at the same conclusion. The researchers identified six principles for effective higher education learning and teaching. These include: interest and explanation; learning from students; independent, engagement and control; intellectual challenge and clear goals respect and concern for learners and learning. Armatas, Holy and Rice (2005) further established that these principles improved the way of learning using technologies. In sum, the survey suggested that students needed support and direction in using mobile technology for learning purposes. The findings are consistent with a study by Chen and Denoyelle’s (2013), which found that students need support in how to use the mobile devices for learning. Chou, Block and Jesness’ (2012) study however found that aside from the teachers, learners can work with their peers to engage in learning. Chen and Denoyelle’s (2013) discussed that instructors should consider the pertinent relevant technical limitation and evaluate their students to determine what mobile device they owned or preferred. Chen and Denoyelle’s (2013) survey results showed that the type of mobile device determines the effectiveness of integrating mobile technology in learning. The study found that tablets emerged as the most powerful mobile learning devices since it is small and portable while the size of the screen lets students to retrieve and create information more easily compared to other devices. In another finding, the researchers found that access to the mobile device constitutes the first step in support and increase of student’s mobile learning practices. A study by Mueller at al (2012) established that for effective use of mobile technology as instructional tool in higher education, teachers are likely to apply their past experiences, attitudes and beliefs about teaching and learning. In a bid to determine the ways in which mobile technologies can be used to enhance education, Mueller, Wood and Pasquale (2012) found that mobile technology as a learning tool is still a relatively a novel learning and instructional tool. The researchers clarified that it is used more frequently as a communication device amongst peers than as an instructional tool directed by faculty. Findings by Mueller at al (2012) suggested that to use digital technology as a cognitive tool in higher education learning, teachers must appreciate the technology as a learning tool as well as have the capacity to integrate it into the classroom. Figure 4: substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition in effective mobile learning. 4.3 Potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education A study by Chou, Block and Jesness’ (2012) found that one-to-one student learning with mobile technology can enable learners to develop interests and passions through their own media-enhanced and personalized environment. This enables learners to learn at different times and places (Chou, Block and Jesness 2012). Mueller, Wood and Pasquale's (2012) finding suggested otherwise since mobile technology as a learning tool is still a relatively novel learning and instructional tool. Chou, Block and Jesness’ (2012) observed that learning using mobile technologies could be improved at the basic two levels of substitution and augmentation as suggested by SAMR model (Fig 2) through time and more collaboration among teachers from various disciplines. This can maximize the potential of mobile technologies to be used in various fields. In establishing the potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education, Chen and Denoyelle’s (2013) found that facilitating professional development in helping instructors to learn and incorporate mobile technologies into curriculum. The researchers concluded that integrating of different apps away from information apps would facilitate the potential of integrating mobile technologies in all spheres of education. Armatas, Holt, & Rice (2005) observed that the main challenge to mobile learning is achieving balanced as well as sustainable use of the system in order to direct students learning process. In this case, achieving the balance can promote comprehensive integration of mobile technology in all spheres of education. 5. Conclusion This study found that mobile technologies play a crucial role in improving the way of learning in higher education. This is however conditioned by the learning paradigms employed in learning. The study established that learner-centered approach is more effective for mobile learning than the teacher-centered approach. Although mobile technology is proving to be an indispensable tool in online teaching and learning processes, there is a gap between students who own mobile technologies and those who actually use them for academic purposes. With regard to ways in which mobile technologies can be used to enhance education, the study established that learning using mobile technology should focus on the improvement of content and performance. With regard to the potential role of mobile technologies in all spheres of education, the study found that learning using mobile technologies could be improved through planning, time management and more collaboration among teachers from various disciplines. However, evidence from the research also shows that change from traditional classroom-based learning to mobile learning due to lack of paradigms is essential for restructuring educational curricula and classroom facilities to bridge a technology gap in education. A major limitation of this study is that a follow up study on the research questions was not done. Due to this, there is a need for studies using quantitative research methods to explore the practicalities of using mobile technologies to improve learning. Further, this study has raised some issues concerning the impact of teachers’ use of mobile technologies. Clarifying such as issue improves the understanding of how teachers can effectively integrate wireless technology. There is also a need for further researches to conduct in-depth studies on the transfer of skills from informal learning contexts due to mobile devices. 6. References Anderson, P 2006, Mobile technologies and their use in education - new privacy implications. JISC Technology and Standards Watch, viewed 10 Nov 2013, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.109.2898&rep=rep1&type=pdf Armatos, C, Holt, D & Rice M 2005, Balancing the possibilities for mobile technologies in higher education, Telstra Research Laboratories, 770 Blackburn Road, Clayton Benford, S 2005, Future Location-Based Experiences. JISC: Technology & Standards Watch, viewed 10 Nov 2013, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/jisctsw_05_01.pdf Brown, JS, Collins, A and Duguid, S 1989, "Situated cognition and the culture of learning," Educational Researcher, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp.32-42 Bruner, J 1966, Toward a Theory of Instruction, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA Chen, B & Denoyelles, A 2013, "Exploring Students' Mobile Learning Practices in Higher Education," Educause Review Online, viewed 10 Nov 2013, http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/exploring-students-mobile-learning-practices-higher-education Chou, C.C., Block, L., & Jesness, R 2012, “A case study of mobile learning pilot project in K-12 schools,” Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, Vol. 5 No.2, pp.11-26. Colella, V 2000, "Participatory simulations: building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling," Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4): 471-500 Mueller, J, Wood, E & De Pasquale 2012, "Examining Mobile Technology in Higher Education: Handheld Devices In and Out of the Classroom," International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.43-54 Economist Intelligence Unit 2008, The future of higher education: How technology will shape learning, 10 Nov 2013, http://www.nmc.org/pdf/Future-of-Higher-Ed-(NMC).pdf Ismail, S, Azizan, S & Azman, N 2012, Teaching via Mobile Phone: a Case Study on Malaysian Teachers’ Technology Acceptance and Readiness, viewed 10 Nov 201, http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume10Number1/Ismail.pdf Junglas, S 2005, A research model for studying privacy concerns pertaining to location-based services, HICSS '05: Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 7 (7). Washington: IEEE, p. 180.2. Kessler, S 2011, 4 Ways Mobile Tech Is Improving Education. Mashable, viewed 10 Nov 2013, http://mashable.com/2011/05/04/mobile-education-initiatives/ Klopfer, E and Squire, K 20202, Environmental Detectives: the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations, Education Research Technology & Development Lan, Y.-F., & Huang, S.-M. (2012). Using Mobile Learning to Improve the Reflection: A Case Study of Traffic Violation. Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 15 No.2, pp.179–193 Lave, J and Wenger, E 1991, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, England Liu, T 2007, “Teaching in a wireless learning environment: A case study,” Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp.107-123. Naismith, L, Lonsdale, P, vavoula, G & Sharples, M 2006, Literature Review in Mobile Technologies and Learning, Future Lab, viewed 10 Nov 2013, http://www2.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Mobile_Review.pdf Osman, M & Cronje, J 2010, "Defining Mobile Learning in the Higher Education Landscape," Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp.12–21. Piaget, J 1929, The Child’s Conception of the World, Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, New York: Rappeti, E Picco, A & Vannini, S 2011, "Is mobile learning a resource in higher education? Data evidence from an empirical research in Ticino (Switzerland)," Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp47-57. Yin, R 2003, Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd ed, Thousand Oaks, Sage Read More