Where do mobile devices and mLearning stand in relation to each other?

The influence of smartphones on our life was felt so profoundly when they first came about that a new learning model was created just to account for these devices in the learning and teaching. In less than 10 years smartphones and devices they inspired, namely tables, hybrid laptop and recently phablets (something cringes in me every time I see, type or pronounce this word, but it seems like it is here to stay), changed the patterns of information consumption, knowledge production and sharing and collaboration. Life seems to be moving even faster now than it was at the turn of millennia: a traffic jam or a long commute is no longer an excuse to neglect work responsibilities. In education theory and practice changes were already underway because of the reevaluation of the place, advantages and disadvantages of eLearning. What, it would seem, mobile technology did was it gave a push to adapt teaching even further to meet the market demands of the 21 century. To give just one example, on top of the list of new sought after skills now is networking, which was able to develop to its current level only thanks to mobile devices ubiquity. 

So, it appears necessary to have a closer look at what makes mobile devices was so important for enhancing learning and teaching experience. When going through research on the topic, a few main features can be identified that the researchers typically agree on:

• Learning continues beyond the classroom (Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience, 2009; Dublin Descriptors, 2005). 
• Quick content delivery, 
• enhanced support time in project-based group work, 
• a higher level of student engagement in learning-related activities within a multitude of diverse physical locations
• and enhanced availability and accessibility of information (Clough, Jones, McAndrew & Scanlon, 2007; Cowie et al., 2009; Falaki et al., 2010). 
• New ways of accessing and sharing knowledge (Saylor, 2012; Wong & Looi, 2011). 

Furthermore, Quinn (2011) provides a comprehensive review of mobile device features and named it 5C (emphases added):

• Content

"One of the common uses of mobile devices is access to media. Regardless of whether the content is dynamic, such as audio or video, or static, such as graphics, photos, and text, having information available on demand can be valuable."

• Capture

"In addition to presenting information, a second possibility is capturing information. Information can be captured in a mobile device by sensors, such as a microphone or camera, and also by text entry. Other sensors can be used for data capture as well, such as via a GPS. For instance, a performance can be videotaped, notes about a situation can be taken, or contextual data can be measured."

• Compute 

"Many times, individuals are not good at a variety of types of computation, but digital processors can be programmed to be. As a consequence, the combination of individual plus processor is more effective. Individuals can capture data and enter it, and the device can provide processing to transform that information into more relevant data."

• Communicate 

"One of the undervalued opportunities with mobile devices is the opportunity to connect with others, to communicate. Layers on top of these channels are also emerging as social networking. Applications currently exist on most smartphones for the most popular social networks: Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. "            Networking"While synching with a desktop was a critical step for mobile devices to really succeed, creating a unified information environment, the original mechanism was through a physical cable and so updates were only possible when the device was next to the computer. "

• Combinations 

"You could think of this as the fifth C, combinations of the first four elements. Augmented reality ... mixes capture of local context by sensors with compute to add information onto the existing information. Similarly, using capture to share the current context with peers or experts to collaborate mixes capture with communicate."

Unlike the authors cited above, Quinn does not make a difference between learning that happens in and outside of classroom. Rather, he perceives the role of mobile devices as simply being ubiquitously present and adaptable to all learning situations. 

With regards to software aspects of 'networking', it is worth noting that with the spread of cloud services, wireless synchronisation became a reality for many mobile devices. Synchronisation and updates can now occur on the level of a single app or a whole system. 

What new abilities of mobile devices brought home was the realisation that, in the world where such technology is available, one has to start think, working and communicating differently in order to take full advantage of it. According to Granič et al. (2009), in learning, incorporation of mobile devices results in these positive changes in learner behaviour:

• mLearning encourages student’s independent thinking through making observations and connections in interaction with environment. It renders traditional passive reception of information ineffective and outdated. 
• It allows to actively engage in the learning process by taking real life data or study materials and making them one's own 
• It encourages collaboration with fellow students.
• It creates individual experiences and encourages close analysis of smaller pieces information at student own pace and wish.
• Lastly, gives students the feeling of independence and empowerment by allowing to concentrate on topics that they find interesting. 

The hope, of course, is that the learner can take these skill out the real world with them and continue operate with mobile devices in a natural and efficient manner. 

References:

Clough, G., Jones, A. C., McAndrew, P., & Scanlon, E. (2007). Informal learning with PDAs and smart phones. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 359-371. 

Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. (2009). Higher education in a Web 2.0 world. Bristol: JISC. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/ documents/publications/heweb20rptv1.pdf

Cowie, J., Cairns, D., Blunn, M., Wilson, C., Pollard, E., & Davidson, D. (2009). A mobile knowledge management and decision support tool for soil analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 29(5), 397-406. 

Dublin Descriptors. (2005). Shared “Dublin” descriptors for the bachelor ́s, master ́s and doctoral awards. Draft 1.31 working document on JQI meeting in Dublin, 2004PC. 

Falaki, H., Mahajan, R., Kandula, S., Lymberopoulos, D., Govindan, R., & Estrin, D. (2010). Diversity in Smartphone usage. MobiSys 2010: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services, 179-194. 

Granič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing MLearning : Tapping Into the Mobile Revolution forranič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

Saylor, M. (2012). The mobile wave: How mobile intelligence will change everything. New York, NY: Vanguard Press. 

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.