M-Learning: Liberating Learners 1
M-Learning: Liberating Learners
Alan Reid
Old Dominion University
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 2
An Introduction to M-Learning
The constant evolution of Instructional Design and Technology can be attributed
to two things in particular: the capabilities of emerging technologies, and a shift in
teaching and learning styles. The progression of e-learning and distance learning over the
past decade has altered the landscape of formal education, thus directly impacting
instructional design. E-learning has allowed formal education to escape the confines of
the traditional brick and mortar classroom, and has given the learner more independence
and responsibility over their academic lives. Yet, while demand for instruction is
increasing in higher education, the use of portable devices affords the learner even more
of an ‘anytime, anywhere learning’ mindset and cuts the tether between the learner and
his workstation. While we are not technologically prepared for M-Learning to replace e-
learning or traditional instruction, mobile learning should join the discourse as being a
viable, effective instructional method: if not as an entire course platform, at least as a
supplement to instruction.
The rapid introduction of new technologies is causing teaching and learning styles
to shift from a didactic approach to a more collaborative and constructivist learning
environment. While there is debate whether m-learning enhances or impedes student
progress, it can be acknowledged that emerging technologies are “a catalyst for new
educational paradigms, [and] it is the convergence of the valued idea of collaborative
constructivist approaches and new communications technology that has given life to
online and blended learning in higher education”(Garrison & Akyol, 2009). Web 2.0
tools such as wikis, internet communications, social media, and social networking sites
have proven to be useful tools in the classroom, and whether used in synchronous or
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 3
asynchronous formats, have contributed to a socratic sense of involvement and
togetherness. M-Learning extrapolates constructivism by promoting a collaborative
learning environment through the most accessible of forums.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the significance, possibilities, and future
impact of mobile phones in higher education. It will focus specifically on the educational
applications of Apple’s iPhone and iPod Touch.
The Definition of M-Learning
M-Learning can take place on a multitude of devices. The eLearning Guild
defines mobile learning as “any activity that allows individuals to be more productive
when consuming, interacting with or creating information mediated through a compact
digital portable device that the individual carries on a regular basis, has reliable
connectivity and fits in a pocket or purse”(Wexler et al. 2008, p.7). This general
definition includes, but is not limited to, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs),
Smartphones (mainly Blackberry and iPhone), and the iPod Touch. Because these
competing manufacturers are developing mobile devices at different rates with different
capabilities, this paper will concentrate on the Apple family of iPhone and iPod Touch
devices. There are two aspects that define a mobile learning device: portability and
technical attributes. As a rule of thumb, the minimum requirements for a mobile learning
device include:
1. Reliable online connectivity (Wi-Fi enabled)
2. High portability
3. Full-size keyboard
4. Multimedia support (Java, Java Script, Flash)
5. Long battery life
6. Large memory storage
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 4
7. Adobe Acrobat Reader
8. Learning Management System (WebCT, Blackboard, UniLearn, etc.)
Yet, preferably having:
9. Bluetooth
10. Built-in Video
11. Built-in Camera
12. Built-in audio recording capabilities
13. High screen resolution
(Upadhyay, 2006)
It is important to note that Laptops, Tablet PCs, or the newly released Notebook PCs do
not fall into the category of mobile devices because the user does not routinely carry
these devices. A phone is a routine accessory while a medium-sized laptop is not.
The Background of M-Learning
Instructional gaming has taught us that learning oftentimes is a result or runoff of
the original product. Just as gaming consoles that originated as a source for entertainment
led to instructional gaming, M-Learning harnesses the power of connectivity already
established through a device initially marketed as a means for entertainment and checking
e-mail. There are 1.2 billion new mobile phones sold each year (Johnson, Levine, Smith,
2009) and their application as a learning tool in addition to being a communication tool is
still being realized. According to the IBM Institute for Business Value, “nearly a billion
people [will] access the mobile Internet by 2011”(Wagner, 2008).
Mobile phones fuse the functionality and capability of a laptop with the
affordability and convenience of a pocket-sized phone. This affects the dynamics of
learning tremendously. Now, the learner may access course material anytime, anywhere.
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 5
This inclusion fosters the idea that learning takes place outside of a classroom, a test, or a
lecture. Admittedly, mobile learning deprives the learner of some social aspects of the
classroom, but text-based discussion threads, real-time communication tools, and video
lectures and podcasts provide the learner with a sense of community and direct
involvement with classmates, otherwise void in a large classroom environment. Mobile
learning also appeals to the psychomotor domain and kinesthetic learning styles of the
user through texting and scrolling.
Although mobile learning is a subset of e-learning, it can be said that the former
differs extensively from the latter. The main distinction between the two is portability; e-
learning promotes technology as a platform for learning, but tethers the learner to a
workstation and a specific Internet network. Mobile learning encourages anytime,
anywhere learning, with constant, fluid, course interactivity. Although mobile learning is
still evolving, it is evident that mobile learning is distinguishable from e-learning:
“‘mobile’ is not merely a new adjective qualifying the timeless concept of ‘learning’ –
‘mobile learning’ is emerging as an entirely new and distinct concept alongside the
‘mobile workforce’ and the ‘connected society’”(Traxler, 2007).
Since 2000, the online ecosystem has developed from content delivery and
retrieval, such as e-mail and knowledge databases, to user-specific interactive
applications, such as Facebook, Skype, and Google Docs (see Fig.1.1). Now, the
development of applications for the iPhone/iPod family is becoming increasingly more
accessible and user-friendly. As of June 2009, there are currently over 48,000 active apps
available for download (Elmer-Dewitt, 2009). Developing an educational app for the
iPhone/iPod family specific to a course in higher education is more possible than ever.
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 6
There are two distinct types of applications: Web-apps and iPhone apps. “Web-
apps for the iPhone and iPod touch are applications that run on the web and not on the
local machine/phone” whereas iPhone apps “run directly on the device, but these ones are
commercially distributed through the Apple store”(Fernandez-Morales & Mayorga-
Toledano, 2009).
Figure 1.1 The Evolution of the Online Ecosystem (Collier, 2008).
Current Usage of Mobile Learning
Despite mobile learning being a relatively new field, there have been multiple
studies and empirical assessments conducted on the use of the iPhone apps in higher
education. In fall of 2008, Abilene Christian University (ACU) implemented its “ACU
Connected” program in which it distributed an Apple iPhone 3GS to all of its incoming
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 7
freshmen students. ACU is recognized as the first university to completely immerse itself
in the mobile learning school of thought. In addition to course documents and course
calendars, “freshmen use their iPhones or iPod Touches to receive homework alerts,
answer in-class surveys and quizzes, get directions to their professors’ offices, and check
their meal and account balances”(“ACU Mobile Learning,”2009).
Another case study in mobile learning took place in a large Introduction to
Sociology course at a 4-year university in the Northeast United States in 2006. The
sample size consisted of 112 students, mainly made up of freshmen taking the course for
a general education requirement. Study materials for the course exam were made
available via two methods: traditional handouts and class reviews, and the mobile
learning software program Learning Mobile Author (LMA). Forty-two students were
assigned the material via the LMA and accessed the review materials via a web-enabled
cell phone, and seventy students reviewed the material via class handouts and by
attending class review sessions. The average scores on the exam revealed the students
who reviewed using the LMA outscored the traditional students (McConatha, Praul,
Lynch, 2008).
Lastly, the University of Malaga in Spain has been offering web-apps for the
iPhone and iPod Touch in the first course for the Degree in Actuarial Science program
since 2002. In this case, the apps are designed to be used as supplemental course tools.
Practice tests consisting of five questions each were distributed to the students (see
Fig.2.1).
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 8
Figure 2.1 University of Malaga (Fernandez-Morales & Mayorga Toledana, 2009).
The results of the student test scores were not analyzed as they were in the
aforementioned case study. Instead, students were asked to rate the satisfactory level of
the course delivery method. “The results obtained from the first evaluation survey are
very satisfactory and constitute a clear incentive to develop more resources in this
format”(Fernandez-Morales & Mayorga-Toledano, 2009).
Limitations of M-Learning
Mobile learning equips the learner with convenience, accessibility, affordability,
and portability in an ‘anytime, anywhere’ learning environment. However, there are clear
disadvantages to this type of learning.
First, any type of learning that has technology requirements poses a limitation.
Even though the affordability of an iPhone or iPod Touch is significantly more than a
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 9
laptop or desktop computer, mobile learning requires ownership of said device. Students
who do not already possess a mobile device will have upfront costs. In the case of the
University of Malaga, an html emulator was created to accommodate students who could
not access the course through a mobile device.
Additionally, technical support becomes an issue. Where does the learner receive
consultation or troubleshooting advice if something is not working properly? The costs
that an institution saves by launching m-learning courses could very well be regained in
technical support.
Most importantly, “the fledgling state of wifi technology could be a major
stumbling block for future advances”(McConatha, Praul, Lynch, 2008). Although there
are more cell phones in America than landline phones, wireless Internet is still
developing in some parts of the country. Until the United States is completely furnished
with wireless technology, there will be issues with a learning style that promotes having
no boundaries.
The Good News
Mobile learning is relatively young and still developing. Because of the
entertainment value and media capabilities of the iPod Touch and iPhone, many college
students already possess the necessary equipment for M-Learning. And, with the
introduction of iTunes University, podcasting has become more readily available to
higher education. Many professors are already recording or podcasting their lectures for
their students to review. Wireless Internet has become a routine expectation of each and
every university. “Third-party educational applications are readily available for the
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 10
newest mobiles, and educational content is easy to find for almost every
discipline”(Johnson, Levine, Smith, 2009). The popularity of mobile phones is growing
exponentially, and the implementation of them as learning tools is inevitable.
Conclusion
Mobile learning is still developing. Despite its obvious limitations in
infrastructure and support, M-Learning proves to be “an opportunity for higher education
to reach its constituents in new and compelling ways, in addition to the obvious anytime,
anywhere benefits of these ubiquitous devices”(Johnson, Levine, Smith, 2009). It shifts
the learning from a teacher-based setting to a more collaborative, constructivist
environment. The price of mobile devices has fallen considerably, and they are more
affordable than ever. The freedom and power to learn whenever, wherever is an attribute
that today’s learners are seeking. The portability and convenience of M-Learning
accommodates even the most mobile of students, and could be an influential factor in
deciding on which school to attend.
Overall, M-Learning liberates its learners from the physical confines of the
classroom, but also from the traditional didactic-based teaching style. The iPhone and
iPod Touch are on the frontlines of mobile learning, and we will continue to see
education incorporate devices such as these in the years to come, especially with the
increasing compatibility of these devices with existing desktops and PCs. According to
Fernandez-Morales and Mayorga-Toledano (2009), the “central purpose of [M-Learning]
is to promote the autonomous learning of students, taking advantage of the possibilities
that new technologies offer, increasing interactivity and motivation”(p.1049).
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 11
In the field of Instructional Design and Technology, we are constantly
experimenting with emerging technologies. Consequently, if the purpose of education is
to reach its learners and provide effective, efficient instruction, then M-Learning is the
next logical step for e-learning and distance education and should be viewed as a viable,
credible opportunity for higher education.
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 12
References
Abilene Christian University. (2009, September 14). ACU Mobile Learning. Retrieved
from [Link]
Collier, Jay. (2008). Evolution of the Online Ecosystem (image). Retrieved October 2,
2009 from [Link]
Elmer-Dewitt, Philip. (2009, June 10). Apple Fact Check: 50,000 Apps? – Update 2.
Retrieved from [Link]
Fernandez-Morales, A., & Mayorga-Toledano, M.C. (2009). Web-apps for the iPhone in
Higher Education. Applications for the Degree in Actuarial Science. Research,
Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education.
Garrison, D.R., & Aykol, Zehra. (2009). Role of Instructional Technology in the
Transformation of Higher Education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education.
21:19-30.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The
New Media Consortium.
McConatha, D., Praul, M., & Lynch, M. (2008). Mobile Learning in Higher Education:
An Empirical Assessment of a New Educational Tool. The Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology, 7(3) Article 2.
Traxler, John. (2007). Defining, Discussing and Evaluating Mobile Learning. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2).
Upadhyay, Nitin. (2006). M-Learning – A New Paradigm in Education. International
Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Education, 3(2), 33-
34.
M-Learning: Liberating Learners 13
Wagner, Ellen. (2008, June 30). Mainstreaming Mobile Learning, eLearning Guild
Learning Solutions eMagazine, 1-8.
Wagner, Ellen D. (2008). Realizing the Promises of Mobile Learning. Journal of
Computing in Higher Education. 20:4-14.
Wexler, S., Brown, J., Metcalf, D., Rogers, D., & Wagner, E. (2008). eLearning Guild
research 360° report: Mobile learning. Santa Rosa, CA: eLearning Guild.