MobilePedagogy2
From CTLI Wiki
http://ctliwiki.unitec.ac.nz/index.php/MobilePedagogy2
Arriving in Barcelona - recorded on Nokia Xpressmusic 5800
First generation cellphones - e.g. Lethal Weapon.
Defining Mlearning
Definitions of mobile learning have focused initially upon the mobility of the devices and more recently the mobility of the learners. Sharples proposes a form of Laurillard’s conversational framework, excluding the teacher, to define mobile learning by its contextual and informal learning characteristics. “The processes of coming to know through conversations across multiple contexts amongst people and personal interactive technologies” (Sharples et al., 2006). However, a key element in the conversational framework is the dialogue between teacher & student. In contrast to Sharples et al (2006), Laurillard (2007) emphasizes the teacher’s input in mobile environments through good pedagogic design that facilities continuity between the face to face and remote peer learning contexts. Her definition of mobile learning incorporates the critical pedagogical design input of the teacher: “M-learning, being the digital support of adaptive, investigative, communicative, collaborative, and productive learning activities in remote locations, proposes a wide variety of environments in which the teacher can operate” (Laurillard, 2007).
Context Bridging
Recent research into mlearning has highlighted the context ‘awareness’ of mobile devices (Cook et al., 2007; M Sharples et al., 2007), and the ability to ‘span’ learning contexts (Wali et al., 2008). However, what is unique about WMDs for mlearning is their ability to BRIDGE contexts – i.e. to provide ubiquitous connectivity independent of the context of use, thus linking multiple contexts into the learning environment, continuing learning ‘conversations’ via social presence and communication technologies.
It is the potential for mobile learning to bridge pedagogically designed learning contexts, facilitate learner generated contexts, and content (both personal and collaborative), while providing personalisation and ubiquitous social connectedness, that sets it apart from more traditional learning environments. Mobile learning, as defined in this paper, involves the use of wireless enabled mobile digital devices (Wireless Mobile Devices or WMD’s) within and between pedagogically designed learning environments or contexts. From an activity theory perspective, WMD’s are the tools that mediate a wide range of learning activities and facilitate collaborative learning environments (Uden, 2007).
The WMD’s wireless connectivity and data gathering abilities (e.g. photoblogging, video recording, voice recording, and text input) allow for bridging the on and off campus learning contexts – facilitating “real world learning”.
The learning outcomes for students include:
- Developing critical reflective skills
- Experiencing and developing group communication skills
- Developing a life-long online eportfolio that showcases their potential
- Developing a potentially world-wide peer support and critique and support network
- Learning how to maximise technology to enhance the learning environment across multiple contexts
MLearning Case Studies
Interactive Concept Map
- Mobile Web2 Projects Overview
- My VOX Blog (Technology Steward)
- Rogers VOX Blog (BDesign Lecturer)
MlearningTrials
Bachelor of Product Design 2008
The Bachelor of Product Design is a level seven programme of 360 credits over three years of full time study. The programme is offered on a semester basis and aims to produce students who are equipped with theory and practice to contribute to the effective conception and delivery of robust, new ideas. In order to achieve this, students are required to be conceptually active and broadly informed but also sufficiently pragmatic to accept the importance of a thorough and systematic approach to realisation. The programme was launched in 2003 and was borne out of a Bachelor of Design which had its roots in a traditional approach to design studio teaching that favored the Atelier Method (2008) or ‘private method’ of instruction where an individual staff member works with a small group of students to progressively train them.
The standard studio environment of one communal space and one timetable is unlikely to offer the best support and learning opportunities for creative students. Design students probably more than other students are known to work at different paces and often redesign their projects just before the assignment is due to be handed in. Some students need to work with music playing whilst others require complete silence. Some students work in the afternoons whilst others prefer the mornings. The introduction of mobile web2.0 tools has facilitated significant flexibility for students to choose to work in virtually any context on and off campus.
Pedagogical Transformation 2006 to 2009
| Assignment Iteration | Focus | Deliverables |
| 2006 | Traditional Paper Assignments | * A report summarising all research undertaken and the key findings and insights.
|
| 2007 | Mix of Traditional and optional Blogs | * A report summarising all research undertaken and the key findings and insights.
|
| 2008 | Compulsory Blogging and Trial MoBlogging |
|
| 2009 | Full integration of Mobile Web2 | * SHAC09 On site moblogging of sustainable House design - similar deliverables to those of 2008, except all of class!
During the 'nomadic' studio session students are expected to:
|
Table 1. Changes in Bachelor of Product Design (Third Year) 2006-2009.
Mobile Web2 Costs
The "Myth" of the cost of Mobile Web2
Most mlearning research in NZ has focused on utilising SMS for either push or pull of basic information, or to create self-study 'flash cards'. This has been based on the comparatively cheap cost of SMS compared to 3G data, and the claim that SMS does 90% of what we can achieve via Mobile Web2!
Sadly this miss-information is rife! Lets bury that myth right now!
1. SMS is NOT a media rich, collaborative, user content creation tool! Mobile Web2 is!
2. Costing 20c($0.2NZ) per 160 character message, it is the equivalent of the minimum 3G data, which is charged per kilobyte or part thereof. Casual 3G data now costs $1NZ for a 10MB per day 'data cap' ($1 per MB thereafter) - soooo, for the same price of 5 x SMS messages (approx 5kb) you get 10MB of rich media using casual web2!!!
OR, to get the equivalent data in SMS messages, it would cost 10000 x $0.2 = $2000NZ.
HHhmmmm - who's being more cost effective now!
Student Feedback
- BDesign 2008 Year3
- BDesign 2008 Year2
- BDesign 2008 Year1
Lecturer Feedback
- BDesign 2008 Year3
- Project Introduction
- "It isn’t ‘easy’ working in this way but it is immensely valuable and exciting. I think that it would be very hard to go back to traditional teaching only methods now I have begun to use blogging and mobile blogging."
- BDesign 2008 Year1
What potential benefits do you see for mobile web 2.0 technologies to enhance teaching and learning?
The integration of mobile web 2.0 has facilitated a shift away from the default Atelier ‘private method’ of instruction to a new more fluid and dynamic pedagogical method. This project has deliberately disrupted the timetabled instructivist studio learning that is frequently used and placed the student group in a social constructivist framework.
The chief benefits we have noted are:
- Increased interaction, problem solving and sharing between students, increased interactivity in general – this has come in the forms of: encouragement, sharing of data and content, passing on of online material and the ‘hey you should know about this’ comments.
- Increased interaction from external commentators – especially when working on live projects. Clients have been able to track projects in the making and steer students if need be. At final presentations clients have followed the projects over the duration of the assignment and can closer comment on the projects outcomes and validity.
- The development of student reflective journals. The Blogs have effectively become online reflective rich media journals. Keeping an overview of a design project is difficult. Valuable time is taken up when standing back and assessing the state of the project. Reflecting on project work is difficult as the designer is often engulfed in the project. By introducing blogs to the students and requiring them to blog daily, we have created ‘natural’ times when a brief overview of the design project can be created in a readily accessible and exciting form. This overview can serve to keep the project on track and act as a ‘call’ for comments from peers and staff.
- Designers often find it difficult to document their processes and methodologies and as a result of this find it hard to remember how they got to the end result. This project has created a ‘bread crumb’ trail that students can go back to both during and after the project to check their working methods (staff can do this with their work too).
Have you seen increased engagement in the course from students when using this technology?
The initial stages of the project saw a drop off in normal project activity as students explored the mobile web 2.0 tools, including the setting up of the software and hardware and the fun students had exploring the new technology that was available to them. However as the tools became second nature and integrated into the students’ daily work-flows a significant uptake in engagement in the course was observed.
The increased engagement came from:
- A sense of connectivity that is characterised by the immediate access to the Internet, photo sharing, instant messaging (IM), emailing and the usual voice and txt messaging that the smartphones bring. Virtually any space is now transformed into a collaborative learning space. Students often group together looking at online material, send each other files and photos, URLs and other digital information. Mobile video blogging has become a favourite activity and is an effective way to get out of studio information across in a short space of time.
- The use of mobile web 2.0 provided a sense of current technology being embedded into the learning experience. In comparison, even though virtually all students in the third year course have access to their own laptop computers for use in the studio/class room, this is seen as standard these days. This project has facilitated a culture of mutual support, networking and collaboration among students, which also enhances students’ skills in communication with their peers, academics and industry representatives.
- Evenings see a sharp increase in student posts – often comments on each other’s blogs as well as end of day reflective posts.
- Students’ editorial skills have increased due to the constant need to monitor the content of their blogs. A look over almost all of the blogs from the start of the project to today will show significant progression in what the students have learned about editing content and getting ideas across.
What are the key issues to successfully integrating this technology into courses?
- Assessment and staff participation. We ran a 2007 project that did not carry an assessment weighting and the uptake was lower than for this 2008 project where assessment of the blog was embedded. It makes sense that students want to receive credit for doing something that takes time, focus and commitment.
- It is vital that staff participate in the blogging process and run their own blogs alongside the student ones. Students want to see that staff are visiting the blogs and commenting on posts as well as offering links to sites where students can pick up information that might assist them with their projects. This doesn’t mean staff are required to comment on all posts but reading the blogs is important as students will often ask ‘So what did you think of my last post then?’
- This project allowed students to have the smartphones (and Bluetooth folding keyboards) and use them as if they owned the device, and they were also supplied with a 1GB data plan for the duration of the course. This ensured that participants had the tools they needed to work effectively. Therefore programmes need to provide the hardware or make it a compulsory course purchase to enable access.
In what way has your teaching approach changed by using this technology and tools?
- Breaking down the walls! This encapsulates the thrust of this project.
- As a result of integrating and assessing mobile blogging technology tools into the programme I have become far more tolerant of students working from different locations, something the class room/studio model struggles to cope with.
- Putting time aside to read and comment on the content of each student blog is important and time during working hours needs to be allocated for this. By allocating time during the studio/teaching to work on the student blogs late night work at home can be kept to a minimum.
- It isn’t ‘easy’ working in this way but it is immensely valuable and exciting. I think that it would be very hard go back to traditional teaching only methods now I have begun to use blogging and mobile blogging.
Plans for mlearning integration in 2009
The feedback from both students and teaching staff on the 2008 mobile web 2.0 trial within the third year Product Design course has been unanimously positive. Analysis of student mobile web 2.0 use and feedback will be covered in depth in further papers. Tutors have noted that the integration of mobile web 2.0 within the course has significantly engaged students and provided the basis for a flexible, context independent learning environment. Thus academic staff, with the help of the researcher (“technology steward”), are planning on integrating the use of mobile web 2.0 tools across all three years of the course for all students and staff in 2009. While it is believed that a student-owned smartphone model is the best approach, it may take another year of seeding the integration of mobile web 2.0 into the programme before this is fully feasible. The cost of both the smartphones and mobile data have dropped significantly in the last year, and a variety of funding models will be explored for 2009.
Specific mobile affordances will be utilised as part of the third year Product Design, such as: Geotagging, Video streaming, micro-blogging, mobile codes etc...
Outline of Mobile Web2 integration plans for 2009
Conclusions
The paper has provided a real world overview of the integration of mobile web 2.0 technologies into a course and gives reflections from the teaching staff involved on the impact of this approach. The symbiotic relationship developed between the academic advisor (technology steward) the academic teaching staff and the students involved in each of the mobile learning trials has proven a rich environment for harnessing educational technology to design social constructivist learning environments relevant to the needs of these students. Significant changes in pedagogical approach and levels of student engagement have been realised. It is hoped the insights gained will be built upon to form a foundational model to fully embed mobile web 2.0 tools into the entire Bachelor of Product Design curriculum for the future.
"One Last Thing"
The future Smartphone? The Zunephone
References
Atelier Method. (2008, 6 October). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved 17 October, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atelier_Method&oldid=243469066
Bateman, R., & Cochrane, T. (2008). Design project outline. Retrieved 16 October, 2008, from http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dchr4rgg_71dgp6ntf6
Cochrane, T. (2006, 3-6 December). Learning with wireless mobile devices and social software. Paper presented at the 23rd ASCILITE Conference: Who's Learning? Whose technology? The University of Sydney, Sydney.
Cochrane, T. (2007a, 16-19 October). Mobile blogging: A guide for educators. Paper presented at the MLearn 2007 - Making the Connections 6th International Conference on Mobile Learning, Melbourne.
Cochrane, T. (2007b). Mobile web2 pedagogies, Conference on Mobile Learning technologies and Applications (MOLTA). Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Cochrane, T. (2007c, 16-19 October). Moving mobile mainstream: Using communities of practice to develop educational technology literacy in tertiary academics. Paper presented at the MLearn 2007 - Making the Connections 6th International Conference on Mobile Learning, Melbourne.
Cochrane, T. (2008, 25 September). Mobile learning case studies overview2. from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Eh5ktXMji8
Cochrane, T., & Bateman, R. (2008, 1-3 October). Engaging students with mobile web2.0. Paper presented at the EIT Teaching & Learning Conference, EIT, Napier, New Zealand.
Cochrane, T., & Kligyte, G. (2007, 11-14 June). Dummies2delight: Using communities of practice to develop educational technology literacy in tertiary academics. Paper presented at the JISC online conference: Innovating eLearning, JISC online conference.
Dorst,K. (2003) Understanding Design (pg 84) Bis Books, Amsterdam
Hercules, F. (2001 18-21 April) Dyslexia in Art and Design Higher Education: Hidden Strengths, Hidden Weaknesses. Paper presented at 5th BDA International Conference, University of York, York, UK. http://www.bdainternationalconference.org/2001/presentations/sat_s6_b_5.htm
Kukulsa-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2005). Mobile teaching and learning. In A. Kukulsa-Hulme & J. Traxler (Eds.), Mobile learning (pp. 25 - 44). Oxon: Routledge.
Laurillard, D. (2007). Pedagogcal forms of mobile learning: Framing research questions. In N. Pachler (Ed.), Mobile learning: Towards a research agenda (Vol. 1, pp. 33-54). London: WLE Centre, Institute of Education.
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2008). Future learning landscapes: Transforming pedagogy through social software. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(5).
Mealing, S. (2000). ud2k - Designing the Design Student. In Becoming Designers. (p15) Intellect Books, London.
O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved March, 2006, from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
Sharples, M., Milrad, M., Sanchez, I. A., & Vavoula, G. (2007). Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, S. Barnes & L. Montandon (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Principles and products (Vol. chapter 14, pp. 20).
Uden, L. (2007). Activity theory for designing mobile learning. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 1(1), 81-102.
Wali, E., Winters, N., & Oliver, M. (2008). Maintaining, changing and crossing contexts: An activity theoretic reinterpretation of mobile learning. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technologies, 16(1), 41-57.
Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J., & spa, K. R.-. (2005). Technology for communities. Retrieved 14 July, 2006, from http://technologyforcommunities.com/
