It was nice to be invited to present a session for Sheffield Hallam University on mobile learning earlier today. The university has quite a strong research group in this area, and my talk, presented online via Adobe Connect had to be on point. Mobile learning is going to be very big indeed. One report suggests that as many as 8 out of every 10 people now having access to some form of mobile communication device. Whatever source you trust, mobile device use is high and rising, leading to the conclusion that mobile learning is clearly an area of development that will have a massive impact on society in the coming months and years.
Where to start with a subject such as mobile learning? I decided that rather than merely cover practical issues (the 'how to do mobile' approach), I would try to take a more challenging approach, and explore social, pedagogical and psychological theories that relate to mobile technology, and present some of the issues that mLearning practitioners are currently facing. I used several images I have recently captured to illustrate the presentation, including the one above of the free Xbox 360 Kinect areas at Prague Airport, Czech Republic. I predict we will see more of this in public places. It's interesting, because what we see here is a form of mobile learning without a mobile device. I suggested that mobile learning doesn't necessarily rely on carrying a device around with you, although it is the norm. Perhaps we need to reconceptualise our idea of what mobile learning is really all about.
There are many social implications of mLearning, some of which I covered in my presentation (slides below). I cited Puro (2002) who declared: 'The mobile phone ... is a new kind of stage where the mobile information society is acted out'. This echoes Goffman's (1967) drama theory where individuals manage their impressions in a kind of performance in social contexts. Puro's perspective is that the mobile phone evokes performances from users, but what is in question is the extent to which these performers manage their impression, and how much of this management is conscious effort. Fortunati (2002) speaks of the alienation and isolation that sometimes comes from mobile phone use, and comments that some isolation can be self-imposed, particularly when 'defending the space within which one would like to isolate one's voice'. Anyone who has sat next to someone loudly talking on their mobile phone in a confined space will see the truth, and Puro's expression that - 'the social distance on the mobile stage is small, but the emotional bond may be weak. [The] mobile phone ... may increase contact, but also increase loneliness' - will resonate with many.
There is no denying that at its heart much good learning has a social component. Earlier today in a meeting with one of our training staff, I argued that e-learning needs a social learning element. I suggested that he consider introducing some social media tools into the mix, so that the somewhat 'flat' two dimensional rote learning normally presented was bolstered by some deeper thinking supported by discussion, the creation of content and critical engagement with learning. I believe that mobile devices can help to achieve this mix of content and context based learning.
I explored the question of whether txting is 'dumbing down' language and causing problems. Does SMS text (the unorthodox spelling, or 'squeeze text' imposed by a limit of 160 characters) cause informal language to spill over into formal contexts? David Crystal (2008) says it doesn't. His argument is that in most cases, young people know the differences between communication modes, and that the ethos of language has changed with the introduction of new communication technologies, to the extent that there are now lots of acceptable versions of English. In effect, habitual use of a variety of tools (Facebook, Twitter, SMS, MS Messenger, YouTube, etc) is ensuring that this current generation is more versatile in literacy skills than any previous generation.
Finally, I discussed some of the practicalities of establishing mLearning strategies at an institutional level. There are many constraints, including small screens (a problem for those who require larger screens due to visual impairment or different expectations), bandwidth and connectivity problems, problems integrating mobile devices into institutional VLEs, and compatibility issues across multiple devices. A great article covering these and other issues by Edudemic is entitled How to develop your own mobile learning tools. Each institution has to decide on what basis (if any) it will implement mLearning strategies, which include the need to improve quality of delivery, widening access and participation, and tapping into the huge potential of mobile devices to maximise the study time that is available to each student.
References
Crystal, D. (2008) Txting: The gr8 db8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fortunati, L. (2002) Italy: Stereotypes, true and false. In J. E. Katz and M. Aakhus (Eds.) Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Provate Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1967) Interaction Ritual. New York: Doubleday.
Puro, J-P. (2002) Finland: A Mobile Culture. In J. E. Katz and M. Aakhus (Eds.) Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Provate Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Photo by Steve Wheeler
Learning on the move by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment