The M-Learning Paradigm: an Overview

Neil McLean
Director, IMS Australia
Macquarie University, Sydney

A Report for the Royal Academy of Engineering

and the Vodafone Group Foundation

November 2003

Preface
The original intention of this brief research study was to explore the possibilities of using
mobile devices to receive and store learning objects from distributed repositories. A
secondary intention was to make some predictions as to whether such applications of
technologies could kick-start a new learning revolution in developing countries who usually
lack the technical infrastructure of developed countries. Finally, the aim was to provide some
tangible basis for further collaboration between Oxford University and Macquarie University,
Sydney on research projects relating to the development of m-learning.
After some preliminary research, and after some conversations with experts in the field, it
became evident the original research objectives needed to be placed in a much wider
context, if they were to make any sense. The m-learning paradigm (as it is now known) is in
its embryonic stage of development and it seems much more appropriate and useful to
provide a brief but concerted overview of the current developments in m-learning, as a means
of clarifying potential strategic options for the application of such technologies.
Having looked at m-learning from a variety of perspectives, there are some firm proposals for
research projects involving Oxford University and Macquarie University, Sydney, which are in
accord with the goals of the Vodafone Group Foundation Scheme.
I wish to acknowledge the assistance received from my principal sponsor at Oxford
University, Dr Stuart Lee and to thank all his colleagues for being so generous with their time.
I also wish to thank various colleagues around the world for providing me with a rich array of
perspectives, which have helped greatly in developing this paper. Finally, I would like to
thank the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Vodafone Group Foundation for providing
me with this opportunity to investigate an emerging field of great interest to the international
education and training communities.
Neil McLean
November 2003

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 2

Introduction
The application of information and communications technology to education and training, both
in the corporate and public sectors is now big business on a global scale. It is however, an
industry which is young and relatively immature. The rapid emergence of new technologies
outpaces the ability of learning communities to apply the technological infrastructure in any
systemic or sustainable fashion. E-learning communities are still grappling with significant
pedagogical, cultural and business issues which are often under-estimated by the
technologists.
Over the past couple of years, there has been widespread recognition of the need to place elearning in the much broader context of the emerging knowledge economy. In particular, the
development of infrastructure embracing both e-learning and information environments is now
regarded as a key issue. There are serious technical challenges inherent in developing such
infrastructure and these technical complexities are equally relevant to the unfolding mlearning paradigm.
M-learning has now emerged as a new wave of development, based on the use of mobile
devices combined with wireless infrastructure, and much of the current literature on mlearning reveals all the strengths and weaknesses associated with the more mature elearning communities. There are, of course, close links between e-learning and m-learning
and it can be argued that they represent a continuum based on the deployment of ever-more
sophisticated technologies. It is the purpose of this paper to tease-out the strategic
assumptions behind the current thinking on the m-learning paradigm; to explore the
relationships with e-learning developments; to describe the strengths and weaknesses of
existing mobile device technologies; to make some assessment of the state-of-play in current
m-learning initiatives; and, finally to provide some practical proposals for developing
applications of m-learning.
There is no intention in this paper to provide detailed technical analysis of the latest mobile
technologies or carrier technologies. It is acknowledged however that the technical
capabilities of the mobile devices is a critical factor in developing and sustaining viable mlearning communities.
In preparing this report, I have relied heavily on the opinions of two experts - Robbie Robson
and Harvey Singh - and their work is quoted at some length in the body of the paper.

M-Learning: What is it?

M-learning is a term coined to cover a complex array of possibilities opened up by the
convergence of new mobile technologies, wireless infrastructure and e-learning
developments. As with any emerging paradigm, there are many attempts to define its
essence. It is worth quoting some of these definitions in order to capture the common
threads inherent in the term m-learning. Consider the following:

1. M-Learning is the intersection of mobile computing and e-learning:

accessible
resources wherever you are, strong search capabilities, rich interaction, powerful
support for effective learning, and performance-based assessment. E-Learning
independent of location, time or space (Quinn, 2000).

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 3

2. A new m-learning architecture will support creation, brokerage, delivery and tracking
of learning and information contents, using ambient intelligence, location-dependence,
personalisation, multi-media, instant messaging (text, video) and distributed
databases (Mobilearn, 2003).

3. Three ways learning can be considered mobile learning is mobile in terms of space;
it is mobile in different areas of life; it is mobile with respect of time (Vavoula and
Sharples, 2002).
In essence these examples represent visions rather than definitions and it may be useful
to comment on the dynamics underpinning these statements.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 4

1. Behind the Vision

There is a complex array of assumptions and factors inherent in these statements
about m-learning and they are captured here in no particular order of importance:

The crucial common element is the intersection between the use of mobile
devices and wireless access. As Singh (2003) says: Mobile computing
relates to the ability to interact with the device from anywhere, whereas
wireless access defines the communication between computers and devices.

The concept of delivery and access anywhere, any time is central to the
vision.

The distinction between e-learning and m-learning becomes blurred in much

of the analysis.

Most of the key proponents highlight the promise of rich interactivity, total
connectivity and powerful processing.

Transformation of learning is the ultimate assumption behind the m-learning

paradigm.

The capacity for customisation, personalisation and flexible adaptation are

constant themes in the current discourse.

The lifelong learning vision underpins much of the m-learning debate.

Pedagogical debate has gained momentum - as it has in the e-learning space,

but remains problematic.

Ubiquitous access through the use of mobile devices is perhaps the most
persistent driver in the m-learning paradigm.

The potential return on investment is often cited, although unproved in current

practice.

There is very often confusion between the issues involved in providing mobile
device/wireless access in fixed locations such as the classroom and the
challenge of providing distributed asynchronous access within dispersed
learning communities.

There is a tendency to reinvent the wheel in terms of many of the issues

already addressed in e-learning communities.

The difficulties of preparing and delivering and evaluating relevant learning

content in the form of learning objects is invariably underestimated.

The need to link m-learning technologies to institutional infrastructure is

recognised but, as yet, little explored.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 5

Convergence of technologies, standards and services is very often assumed

but the understanding of how, and when, such convergence will happen
remains elusive.

There is a considerable amount of semantic confusion in the attempts to

conceptualise the m-learning paradigm.

This brief analysis shows some of the strengths and weaknesses of an emerging
paradigm in a fast-moving technical environment.

2.

Current State of Mobile Technologies, Connectivity and Applications

The literature and trade press is awash with stories of the latest developments in mobile
technologies and wireless potential. It is not the intention in this paper to provide
detailed technical assessment of any particular technology or technological pathway.
Nevertheless, it is important to make some assessment of the state of readiness in
terms of developing and implementing m-learning applications.
There is relatively common agreement that multi-purpose hand-held devices such as
personal digital assistants (PDAs) and cell phones will outsell PCs and laptops in the
very near future within the global community. Tablet PCs are becoming fully powered
personal computers with strong potential for m-learning and there is now a lot of
speculation on the development and potential application of wearable devices. There is
a general consensus amongst the consultant community, however, that many obstacles
exist in terms of implementing any significant m-learning applications, based on current
mobile technology capacity. These obstacles can be summarised in the following form:

Limited memory and storage are major inhibitors.

Screens are generally too small for the use of any sophisticated applications.

Intermittent connectivity is a major barrier.

Cross-platform solutions are not yet possible.

Links to learning management systems or enterprise systems are in an embryonic

stage of development.

The industry is plagued by proprietary solutions.

Transmitting across different browsers and platforms is almost impossible.

Existing applications are not easily integrated to the mobile technology environment.

Start-up costs are invariably high.

Tracking outcomes is difficult.

Security is a major issue.

Cost of accessing major third-party networks is punitive.

Multiple permissions are necessary in terms of negotiated access.

Continuous technology development militates against stability and sustainability in

terms of mounting viable m-learning applications.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 6

Many of these issues also exist in the e-learning industry but they are exacerbated in the
m-learning space because of the current limited technological capacity.
Distribution Channels and Control of Content
At a broader level there is a constant battle over the control of distribution channels and
control of content. In a private communication, Robby Robson (2003) made the
following observations:
A major lesson of the last few years of technology is that connectivity matters.
Not only does connectivity change the way in which people relate to information
(and to each other), but it also affects who controls technology.
When new technologies (such as personal computers, graphing calculators and
mobile phones) are introduced, it is generally the hardware manufacturers who
determine the end user applications. Even if manufacturers make third-party
development possible, they generally do so via proprietary means that they
control.
Eventually, however, standards emerge, either because a single
manufacturer dominates the market and creates a de facto standard or because
an industry adopts an open standard.
This creates enough platform
independence (or platform uniformity in the case of de facto standard) that it
becomes commercially viable for independent software vendors to develop enduser applications. This is the point at which true innovation can occur.
For innovation to have an effect, however, there must be distribution channels that
provide access to end-users. This is where connectivity comes in and why the
Internet is different. In other media, such as print, radio, cinema, music and
television, the companies who own the distribution channels (publishers, radio and
television networks, film studios, and the recording industry) control the content.
On the Internet, this is not the case. Control of intellectual property in a distributed
networked environment [ALA 2003], and the wireless network itself, are some of
the major issues affecting the spread of m-learning and the classroom use of
networked handheld devices.
There is no easy resolution to these battles for control of distribution channels and
content. Knowledge of the dynamics driving such struggles is however a vital part of any
concerted m-learning strategic planning process.

Wireless wars
A similar battle is being waged in the wireless environment and Robsons observations are
once again pertinent:
Wireless connectivity itself seems inevitable. Wireless is more convenient and it costs a
lot less to install and maintain a wireless network than a copper or fibre-based network.
However, there are two competing approaches to providing wireless connectivity. One
approach is through mobile telephony. PDAs and mobile phones are merging, so one
possibility for the m-learning device is the Smart Phone that is both a mobile phone
and mobile personal computer. The other approach is through WiFi, which is already
being used by PDAs and Pocket PCs. Although it will not affect the pedagogic or
sociological implications, competing choices of this nature are not welcomed by people

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 7

investing in an organizations technology infrastructure and inevitably slow the adoption

process.
Comparing the two choices, the mobile phone approach has the advantage that
connectivity is passed from cell to cell. Even with competing standards (CDMA, TDMA,
GSM etc.) a GSM mobile phone can effectively be used world wide and can be used
without significant interruption while travelling from home to school or to work.
But a serious battle is taking place. In an attempt to control the distribution channels,
mobile phone manufacturers are selling phones that are locked to a specific carrier (eg.
Vodafone, t-mobile, Telstra, Virgin Mobile, Orange etc.), and in an attempt to control the
content, carriers are trying to force end users to access content only through their
services. This is not a stable situation. It is already possible to download J2ME (Java 2
Micro Edition) applications to mobile devices via the Internet and smart cards,
completely bypassing the cellular channel. It is also hard to believe that consumers will
accept a world that is partitioned into non-intersecting carrier-centric communities, each
of which requires a separate set of subscriptions to access the same content.
Meanwhile, WiFi is gaining in popularity and hot spot aggregators are now offering
access somewhat akin to cellular roaming. The IEEE Computer Society 802 standards
committee has released not only the 802.11 series of WiFi standards but also standards
(802.16) for metropolitan area networks with ranges measured in kilometres instead of
meters [Geier 2003]. These standards, as well as some competing proprietary
approaches, promise to provide the wireless last mile [Cherry 2003]. While the mobile
phone industry is straightening itself out, it may well be that metropolitan area WiFi
advances to the point where a single access point can cover a school (or work) campus
and possibly the area in which most people live, shop, work and go to school. There is
even the possibility that WiFi roaming will become a reality, although there are many
problems that need to be solved along the way [Chai 2003].
The pace of change in these areas of growing technological convergence is unpredictable
and beyond the control of m-learning communities. The challenge is to develop incremental
business strategies that can be sustained through times of rapid technological change.

Technical requirements
Having briefly surveyed the current state of the mobile technology market from an m-learning
perspective, it is possible to list a common set of technical characteristics and factors that
need to be taken into account in developing an m-learning strategy.
The principal mobile system components are summarised by Singh (2003) as follows:

Authoring tools for content capture and conversion for mobile delivery;

Mobile games and simulation templates;

Mobile learning content management systems that download and manage a repository
of mobile content;

Mobile learning management systems to track mobile learning use;

Enterprise application integration tools such as CRM and HRIS.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 8

From a different perspective, Singh (2003) identified the many different factors that have to be
taken into account in selecting the right device. These factors include: cost; battery life;
display size; data input; form factor; processing power; storage capacity; communications
options; security; application development tools; and IT support.
Irrespective of the m-learning environment, all these factors will need to be taken into
account, although the solutions or technology combinations may vary greatly according to the
particular implementation.

Business requirements
From a business perspective a different set of factors come into play. Any feasibility study
requires attention to the following factors:

The feasibility of delivery of learning materials through mobile devices.

The identification of learning contexts and activities appropriate to mobile

technologies.

The development of pilots to explore how technologies can best support life long
learning.

The identification of the means and methods for delivery of mobile learning in a
commercially sustainable way.

In more specific terms the business guidelines have been summarised by C. OMalley et al
(2003) in the following form:
1.

Costs

2.

Systems design

3.

Choice of technology

4.

Roles for initiating and supporting m-learning

5.

Procedures and strategies management

6.

Equipment

7.

Training and technical support

8.

Teacher to discover suitable applications

9.

Security and privacy

10. User content on data

11. Combination of old and new activities
12. Collaboration
13. Flexibility.
There is nothing particularly unique to m-learning about this checklist, however it is rare to
find a comprehensive management approach to the use of such a checklist in the current mlearning initiatives.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 9

Pedagogical considerations
There are many overlaps between e-learning and m-learning pedagogical considerations.
While e-learning has been developing over a number of years, there is surprisingly little
research into the pedagogical effectiveness of the learning experience through technology
enhancement. Much of e-learning develops as a response to the convenience factor of more
flexible study patterns. Enhancement of the learner experience has not been a key driver so
far, although there are now signs of growing interest in learner outcomes derived from elearning environments.
Given this situation, there are lots of warning-bells for the m-learning fraternity who face
much more difficult challenges in terms of providing evidence of a satisfactory learning
experience, because of the limitations of the mobile technologies and communication
networks.
Chen and colleagues (2002) has noted that the principal pedagogical considerations to be
taken into account are:

1. Urgency of learning need

2. Initiative of knowledge acquisition
3. Mobility of learning setting
4. Interactivity of learning process
5. Situatedness of instructional activities
6. Integration of instructional content.
A most comprehensive explanation of the processes supporting effective pedagogy
pedagogical processes has been provided by Singh (2003). He says that the new paradigm
is more proactive in pushing information to people in the following ways:
From courseware to performance-ware. The stand-alone learning content model
needs to transform to a context-driven, task-sensitive, performance-support model.
Examples include guide tasks, instructions, job-aids, and reference-ware. In addition,
standards need to be defined to interchange performance-objects, which are delivered
within the context of a job-task, with learning objects, which focus on modular course
content.
From course management to business workflow. Business workflow and processes
become the delivery platform for mobile learning and performance support.
From instructional design to performance-based design. Compiling content and
courses transforms into job, task, activity, and business application context analysis.
This links workflow to granular content.
From mouse-and-click to pen-and-voice interface. New forms of interactivity include
small or non-existent keyboard interfaces. In the future, pen-based handwritingrecognition and voice-recognition tools to capture and access information will become
the norm.
From centralized server to peer-to-peer networks. Peer-to-peer networks facilitate
communication, collaboration, and resource sharing at the edge of the Internet
compared to the traditional client/server networking model.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 10

It is interesting to note that terms such as adaptivity, ambience, intelligence, context

awareness, and personalisation appear with regularity in the m-learning literature. There is,
as yet, little evidence that m-learning applications harness these capabilities or fulfil any novel
pedagogical aspirations.

Finding a Market
Having surveyed the theory of what experts say about business requirements it is now
necessary to make some assessment of assumptions in the market place. A great deal of
confusion exists in the current market place, which is to be expected as the various players
try to establish a market base.
There is a number of sometimes-conflicting assumptions underpinning the prevailing thinking
on marketplace possibilities, which can be summarised in the following form:

The concept of anytime/anywhere excites the marketplace.

On-the-job training is frequently targeted as the area most suited to the application of mlearning, irrespective of the particular market niche.

There is a wealth of experiments being reported in the literature on the use of mobile
devices and wireless connections in classroom environments.

There are strong proponents of the notion that developing countries could find mlearning attractive simply because of the ubiquity of the mobile phone (see Brown, T H
2003).

There is often a lack of differentiation between the potential for specific activities within
traditional education and training settings and the more holistic application of m-learning
to the delivery of complete courses online.

While there is a lot of experimentation in various niche markets, there appears to be an

absence of comparative cost analysis.

The present state of the technology means that most implementations of m-learning
have very limited functionality and hence, a cool response from user communities.

The various technology players in the market remain preoccupied with selling the
potential of their technology, without consideration for investment in practical
applications that would assist m-learning activities.

This analysis suggests that for all the hype in the marketplace there are, as yet, few signs of
sustainable cost-effective markets for m-learning.

Strategic Proposal
The aim of this section is to develop a strategic proposal that can be acted upon by the
sponsors of this study (Oxford University, Macquarie University and the Vodafone Group).

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 11

The proposal would assist in addressing the host of concerns in the marketplace and would
provide demonstrable applications of mobile devices in m-learning environments.
The basic premises underpinning this strategic proposal include:

Any initiative must improve on existing practices or do something that cannot be done
using existing technologies and practices.

The application of emerging learning activity technologies such as those being

developed by James Dalziel of Macquarie University are a key to success in the use of
heterogeneous mobile devices.

Technology infrastructure providers such as Vodafone need to invest in the soft side of
applications development, which can be deployed by their particular range of mobile
device products.

There should be no attempt to provide a total solution to any learning program.

The deployment of mobile devices for collaborative activity that happens outside the
classroom is a rich field for research and evaluation.

Cost factors need to be constantly kept in mind.

In terms of innovation, seeing-is-believing, hence the value of demonstrator projects

with fairly rapid deliverables.

The rendering of content in suitable formats is achievable, but requires collaborative

effort and joint investment between the proposed partners.

The development of appropriate open standards should be integral to the project.

There are two principal thrusts for the development of demonstrator projects:

1. To make use of mobile devices in the classroom in conjunction with specified activities
using the Macquarie University Learning Activity Management System (LAMS) The
Classroom Project.

2. To select a cohort of students in the Oxford context and capture their informal out-ofclass interactions on a given learning topic, irrespective of their location The
Collaborative Student Interaction Project.
These are outlined in further detail below:

The Classroom Project

This project has the potential to meet the dual criteria of improving on existing practices and
providing new ways of interacting within a learning activity, whilst also providing a context for
evaluating the quality of students learning in this environment (the detailed proposal is
contained in Appendix 1). The Macquarie University Learning Activity Management System
has received widespread international interest over the past year, because it is the first

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 12

example of the application of technology to learning activities as distinct from content

development. It is an ideal vehicle therefore, to link with the use of mobile devices and
should provide a firm foundation for real innovation that will impact on a wide variety of
learning communities. The results of this research and demonstrator project would be of
considerable relevance to the application of m-learning in developing countries because it will
be low cost and it will have the potential for immediate adoption.

The Collaborative Student Interaction Project

There has been a growing interest world wide in the use of m-learning technologies to
enhance learning through formal and informal collaboration between groups of students with
common interests in particular learning topics.
The paradigm is particularly relevant in the Oxford University context because informal, outof-class interactions between students is a fundamental part of the learning environment.
To be able to capture these informal interactions and allow access to information resources
and/or activities, as specified by the academic tutor, would be an example of achieving
something new and highly informative which cannot be captured by any form of existing
technology. This idea has already been floated informally with the Director of Computing
Services, Dr Paul Jeffreys, and it deserves serious attention as a joint project. Depending on
the resources available, it may well be possible to replicate the collaborative investigation in
the Macquarie University context.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This brief analysis of the emerging m-learning industry suggests that it is still suffering many
birth-pangs. As is common with technology pushes, there is far too little attention being
paid to social processes and emergent behaviour of learning communities who adapt to new
technologies, such as the mobile phone.
With regard to the need for technological infrastructure to support m-learning activities, the
informal feedback experts associated with m-learning activities such as Mobilearn suggest
the following:

there is not yet an appropriate array of compatible mobile devices to perform useful
learning or training activities;

network structures remain complex and relatively expensive;

there is a dearth of suitable m-learning content;

there is insufficient localisation of technological infrastructure;

user management, access control and activity management receive too little systemic
attention at the institutional or organisational level; and,

the idea of harnessing ambient intelligence, which is floated in projects such as

Mobilearn, remains a considerable challenge.

There is however room for optimism, as suggested in the latter part of this paper. Highly
focused demonstrator projects are required in which major stakeholders combine their

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 13

expertise and efforts to achieve quality learning experiences through community building and
activity building in specific learning environments.
Bearing in mind the sponsors of this study, the analysis shows that there are significant
opportunities for Oxford University, Macquarie University and the Vodafone Group to mount
some ground-breaking demonstrator projects which will provide a basis for developing muchneeded new paradigms in the application of m-learning.
It is recommended therefore that the three parties use this report as a basis for developing a
concerted program of development research and evaluation within selected demonstrator
environments.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 14

References
ALA (2003). Digital Rights Management and Libraries. American Library Association.
Available at
http://www.ala.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Our_Association/Offices/ALA_Washington/Issues
2/copyright1/digital_Rights_Mangement/Digital_Rights_Mangement.htm
Brown T H (2003). Towards a Model for M-Learning in Africa.
Available at http://www.up.ac.za/telematic/article.pdf
Chai W (2003). Bumpy Road Ahead for Wi-Fi Roaming. CNETAsia. 18 March 2003.
Available at http://www.silicon.com/news/500018/1/3347.html
Chen Y S, Kao T C, Sheu J P, and Chang C Y (2002). A Mobile Scaffolding-Aid-Based BirdWatching Learning system. In M Milrad, H U Hoppe and Kinshuk (Eds), IEEE International
Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (pp 152 156). Los Alimatos,
USA: IEEE Computer Society.
Cherry S (2003). The Wireless Last Mile. IEEE Spectrum. September, 2003.
Available at http://asia.cnet.com/newstech/systems/0,39001153,39121008,00.htm
Geier J (2003). 802.16: A Future Option for Wireless MANs. WiFi Planet. July, 2003.
Available at http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/2236611
Kinshuk (2003). Adaptive mobile learning technologies.
Available at http://www.globaled.com/articles/Kinshuk2003.pdf
Mobilearn (2003). The Mobilearn Project Vision.
Available at http://www.mobilearn.org/vision/visiton.htm
OMalley C et al (2003). Mobilearn WP4 Guidelines for Learning/Teaching/Tutoring in a
Mobile Environment. Available at: http://www.mobilearn.org/download/results/guidelines.pdf
Quinn C (2000). M-Learning. Mobile, Wireless, In-Your-Pocket Learning. Linezine, Fall 2000.
Available at http://www.linezine.com/2.1/features/cqmmwiyp.htm
Robson R (2003). Mobile Learning and Handheld Devices in the Classroom. Private
communication.
Singh H (2003). Leveraging Mobile and Wireless Internet.
Available at http://www.learningcircuits.com/2003/sep2003/singh.htm
Vavoula G N and Sharples M (2002). KleOS: A Personal, Mobile, Knowledge and Learning
Organisation System. In M Milrad, HU Hoppe and Kinshuk (Eds), IEEE International
Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (pp 152 156). Los Alimatos,
USA: IEEE Computer Society.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 15

Appendix 1
Mobile Learning and LAMS
LAMS (Learning Activity Management System) is a next generation collaborative learning
system for empowering synchronous and asynchronous learning. LAMS is internationally
recognized as a ground-breaking new e-learning technology with rich pedagogical potential.
Implementations of LAMS have elicited the highest praise and confirmed its potential as a
transformational technology for education.
LAMS provides a powerful plug in architecture for the development of new educational tools
to enhance different modes of teaching and learning. The LAMS architecture is ideally suited
to mobile learning, but to date no plug in tools have been developed explicitly for mobile
contexts. The opportunity is to leverage the LAMS platform to develop innovative tools for
mobile learning that are applicable to (1) synchronous formal learning (eg, classrooms) and
(2) asynchronous informal learning (eg, discussion in the cafeteria).
(1) Synchronous Formal Learning: There are a number of learning activities in formal
educational environments (such as teacher-led classroom scenarios) which are ideally suited
to mobile learning tools in LAMS. Synchronous learning activities such as polling/voting and
question and answer (where LAMS immediately collates all responses and presents an
aggregate view of votes or answers to all students) are ideal for pedagogically rich mobile
learning. Features which are unique to LAMS and which would enhance this mobile learning
include:
the ability to easily sequence activities into re-usable lesson plans (using a simple
visual drag and drop lesson planner);
recording of student responses for later review by students/teachers; and
the option for teachers to create Question & Answer activities with either anonymous
or identified answers from students (which provides a basis for more honest answers
due to the lack of peer pressure).
(2) Asynchronous Informal Learning: Informal learning scenarios (such as student discussion
in a cafeteria, coffeeshop or pub) provide environments where mobile devices can support
flexible, on the fly learning opportunities. Valuable learning activities in these contexts could
be supported by a content/URL sharing tool, notebook/scratchpad tool, and discussion
forums and live chat/instant messaging for questions and responses to other learners or the
teacher. Again, LAMS provides unique features to support these activities by providing an
environment to manage and deliver these tools in the context of asynchronous (and
synchronous) informal learning, including recording of activities for later student/teacher
review, and creation of re-usable lesson plans (based around informal student learning using
flexible toolsets).
In terms of technology, LAMS is web-based with server-side processing of intensive requests.
It can support a wide range of mobile devices, such as laptops, palmtops, etc. A key element
of this project will be testing the new LAMS mobile tools in several different device contexts to
demonstrate support for heterogeneous mobile device environments. In addition, there is the
potential to integrate cellular technologies such as SMS text messaging with LAMS tools as
an alternative mobile platform for student responses (eg, polling/Q & A) to be part of this
project, this element would require additional scoping and technical support from Vodafone.
This project would be conducted over a 6 month development and testing period, followed by
a 6 month period of teacher and student trials and evaluation. The investment required for
this project is 80,000. The project would be led by Macquarie University in collaboration with
Oxford University.

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 16

The key outcomes of this project will be:

- Development of new mobile learning tools in LAMS to support formal and informal
learning
- Testing of new tools in heterogeneous mobile device environments
- Trialing and evaluating of new mobile tools with teachers and students

Prof. James Dalziel

Macquarie University
2003

284950738M-Learning Paradigm

Page 17