technology for the language teacher

Mobile learning
Nicky Hockly

In this series, we explore current technology-related themes and topics. The

series aims to discuss and demystify what may be new areas for some readers
and to consider their relevance to English language teachers. In future
articles, we will be covering topics such as learning technologies in low-
resource environments, personal learning networks, and e-learning.

In this third article of the series, we explore mobile learning, also

referred to as ‘m-learning’ or ‘learning with handheld devices’. We
analyse what it is and what the implications of the rise of mobile
learning are for English language teachers. We also examine a number
of classroom tasks and the concept of mobile literacy.

What is mobile Exactly what we mean by mobile learning is the subject of some debate
learning? (Kukulska-Hulme 2009; Traxler 2009). Does mobile learning refer
to the mobility of learners—the idea that one can learn anytime and
anywhere—or to the portability/mobility of mobile devices themselves?
Both of these aspects are clearly important but current definitions also
emphasize the importance of context. This refers to the ability of mobile
learning to encompass both formal learning within the classroom, and
informal and formal learning outside the classroom, across myriad
devices, in a variety of physical and temporal arenas. Interaction with
mobile devices is only one part of the picture; of key importance in any
discussion of mobile learning are the interactions that it supports and
the ways in which these lead to learning.

Sharples, Milrad, Arnedillo-Sánchez, and Vavoula (2009: 225) define

mobile learning as
the processes (both personal and public) of coming to know through
exploration and conversation across multiple contexts among people
and interactive technologies.
This view is supported by Kukulska-Hulme, Sharples, Milrad,
Arnedillo-Sánchez, and Vavoula (2009: 20)
… the mobile technology, while essential, is only one of the different
types of technology and interaction employed. The learning

80 ELT Journal Volume 67/1 January 2013; doi:10.1093/elt/ccs064

© The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication November 22, 2012
 experiences cross spatial, temporal and/or conceptual borders and
involve interactions with fixed technologies as well as mobile devices.
Weaving the interactions with mobile technology into the fabric of
pedagogical interaction that develops around them becomes the focus
of attention.
Part of the challenge in arriving at a single definition of mobile learning
has to do with the fact that it is a rapidly changing field, with new
and more sophisticated handheld devices constantly appearing on the
market. The devices themselves used in mobile learning can range
from mobile phones and tablet computers to MP3 and MP4 players,
digital cameras, and gaming consoles. However we define m-learning,
it is clear that when we talk about the use of mobile devices in
education, the discussion needs to be framed within the wider context
of pedagogy and learning.

m-learning in ELT Definitions aside, the increasing ubiquity and accessibility of mobile
devices and access to mobile networks globally is beyond dispute.
Despite continuing barriers to mobile learning in education, which
include technical constraints, cost, and attitudinal factors (JISC 2012:
43–4), mobile learning is on the rise. This has important implications
for educators, who need to first recognize this fact and then take
advantage of it. Kukulska-Hulme (op.cit.: 158) sums this up as follows:

To a certain extent, by dint of their ubiquity, mobile devices are

already influencing how people learn; on the other hand, educators
need to do more than just watch it happen.
Mobile assisted language learning (MALL) has indeed made an
appearance within the field of ELT, first around 2009 with the
appearance of mobile ‘apps’ (applications, or programs) for language
learning developed by the British Council, closely followed by major
ELT publishers producing stand-alone and coursebook-related apps
(Dudeney and Hockly 2012). However, beyond this content-driven
approach, the implementation of MALL in ELT to date in individual
classrooms has in the main been ad hoc and limited to early adopters.
This is in stark contrast to mainstream education, where large-scale
projects integrating MALL into curricula, such as MOLENET in the
United Kingdom, or school and university initiatives, such as those
by Forsyth County Schools, Abilene Christian University, or Kansas
University in the United States, have been running for several years.
Likewise, research into the integration of mobile devices into classroom
teaching in countries such as Australia has tended to focus on
mainstream education (Pegrum, Howitt, and Striepe 2012; Pegrum,
Oakley, and Faulkner 2012). In the field of ELT, the British Council
is implementing larger scale app-based mobile learning projects in
developing countries such as Sudan and China, but as this is relatively
new territory for English language teachers, ELT-related m-learning
research studies are still few and far between. The dearth of studies
is compounded by the facts that the rapid evolution of devices makes
longitudinal research studies difficult (Pachler 2009: 4) and many

Mobile learning 81
 institutions actively ban the use of mobile devices in classrooms (JISC
op.cit.: 3).

Implications for Although there is a reductionist tendency within the field of ELT
English language to equate mobile learning with the use of apps on smart phones or
teachers tablet computers, with learners accessing this content outside of class
time, there is no reason why mobile devices cannot be integrated into
formal learning both inside and outside the classroom. For teachers
to take full advantage of the potential of mobile learning, it requires a
shift in thinking about not just where mobile learning can take place,
but also a realization that mobile or handheld devices have many
more affordances than simply the consumption of language in pre-
packaged apps. As with any technology, it is not the technology itself
that enhances teaching or learning, but rather the use to which it is
put. In this context, it is useful to distinguish between mobile learning
activities that focus on consumption of content, and activities that
encourage the production of language.

Learning activities can be designed which simply substitute a mobile

device for a traditional tool, or learning activities can be designed which
would be impossible to carry out without a mobile device. It is these
latter activities that fully realize the potential of MALL. Puentedura’s
(2010) SAMR model is one that can usefully be applied to the design
of mobile learning activities for ELT. The SAMR model suggests that
technology can be used in learning activities in the following ways:
■■  ubstitution: technology acts as a tool substitute, with no
S
functional change
■■ Augmentation: technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with
functional improvement
■■ Modifications: technology allows for significant task redesign
■■ Redefinition: technology allows for the creation of new tasks
previously inconceivable.
(Puentedura op.cit.)
The SAMR model describes the use of technology in learning
tasks, from the simplest (substitution) to the more complex and
innovative ones (redefinition). The SAMR model sees Substitution
and Augmentation as ways to enhance learning tasks, whereas
Modifications and Redefinition allow for transformation.

Classroom tasks To clarify the SAMR model, how might each of these stages translate into
classroom tasks with mobile devices? Below are task examples for each stage
of the SAMR model using mobile phones (although other handheld devices
such as tablet computers could be used to carry out some of these tasks).

At the simplest level, a mobile learning task that involves Substitution

might involve giving learners short dictations, which they take down as
SMS text messages or in a note-taking function on their mobile phones.
Here we simply substitute a mobile device for pen and paper; the
dictated texts can be saved and shared electronically.

82 Nicky Hockly
 Going up a step in the SAMR model, a mobile learning task that
involves Augmentation might involve learners using the text function
on their phones to create a chain story in groups, which is then
uploaded to a blog, with comments from other groups, classes, or even
parents (of young learners) solicited. In this task, although the phone
text function has again substituted for pen and paper, by creating a
chain story in electronic format and sharing it via a blog, we have added
a level of ‘functional improvement’ and enhancement: the stories
can easily be shared with an audience beyond the classroom, inviting
interactions that would otherwise not be as easy to achieve.
A classroom activity reflecting the SAMR model’s Modifications stage
might provide learners with the chance to work in pairs, rehearsing and
video recording short oral presentations on their phones. In this case,
the mobile device allows learners to practise, record, and re-record until
they are happy with the final version. The class time spent on repetition
and rehearsal provides learners with intensive language practice and no
loss of motivation, by giving them the chance to examine their output
immediately in relative privacy and to improve their performance on
subsequent takes. Once learners have produced a final and polished
version of their oral presentations, these can be shared electronically via
a video-sharing site, a class blog, or a wiki. In this example, the use of
mobile technology has transformed a traditional oral task and resulted
in a significantly higher proportion of class time being spent on
repetition and rehearsal, an important part of language learning. And
as with the chain story example above, the final products can easily be
shared electronically with a wider audience beyond the classroom.
Finally, a classroom task that allows for Redefinition as per the SAMR
model might use the affordances or functions of a mobile device to
create a completely new task. For example, a treasure hunt that uses
GPS (global positioning system) enabled devices for learners to receive
clues to be solved in specific locations in or outside the school. This
creates a completely new learning experience and comes closest to the
definition of mobile learning that foregrounds the potential of mobile
learning to straddle various contexts. For examples of such ‘geolocation’
tasks with EFL learners, see Fox 2011 and Driver 2012.

Mobile literacy The classroom activities outlined above suggest a certain amount of
familiarity with mobile devices on the part of teachers and learners.
This familiarity, which we can refer to as ‘mobile literacy’, is an
increasingly important skill. Parry (2011: 16), for example, argues
that ‘The future our students will inherit is one that will be mediated
and stitched together by the mobile web’. He adds, ‘Teaching mobile
web literacy seems to me as crucial as teaching basic literacy’ (ibid.).
Integrating activities such as those described above into our classroom
practice, especially those activities that enable the transformation of
traditional classroom tasks through the use of mobile devices, can help
learners develop their mobile literacy within the context of English
language learning. The future is increasingly mobile, and it behoves us
to reflect this in our teaching practice.

Mobile learning 83
References to take the tablet: how pre-service teachers use
Driver, P. 2012 forthcoming. ‘Pervasive games iPads to facilitate their learning’.
and mobile technologies for embodied language Pegrum, M., G. Oakley, and R. Faulkner. 2012
learning’. International Journal of Computer- in press. ‘Schools going mobile: a study of the
Assisted Language Learning and Teaching adoption of mobile handheld technologies
(IJCALLT) 2/4. in Western Australian independent schools’.
Dudeney, G. and N. Hockly. 2012. ‘ICT in ELT: Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.
how did we get here and where are we going?’ Puentedura, R. 2010. ‘SAMR and TPCK: intro to
ELT Journal 66/4: 533–42. advanced practice’. Available at http://goo.gl/78UJn
Fox, A. 2011. ‘The history game: part 2’. Blog. (accessed on 4 September 2012).
Available at http://goo.gl/0sqa7 (accessed on 10 Sharples, M., M. Milrad, I. Arnedillo-Sánchez,
September 2012). and G. Vavoula. 2009. ‘Mobile learning: small
JISC. 2012. ‘Mobile learning infoKit’. Available devices, big issues’ in N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen,
at http://goo.gl/txDkB (accessed on 4 September T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, S. Barnes, and
2012). L. Montandon (eds.). Technology Enhanced
Kukulska-Hulme, A. 2009. ‘Will mobile learning Learning: Principles and Products. Dordrecht:
change language learning?’ ReCALL 21/2: 157–65. Springer.
Available at http://goo.gl/Pbv5n (accessed on 4 Traxler, J. 2009. ‘Learning in a mobile age’.
September 2012). International Journal of Mobile and Blended
Kukulska-Hulme, A., M. Sharples, M. Milrad, Learning 1/1: 1–12.
I. Arnedillo-Sánchez, and G. Vavoula. 2009.
‘Innovation in mobile learning: a European
perspective’. International Journal of Mobile and The author
Blended Learning 1/1: 13–35. Nicky Hockly is a Director of Pedagogy of The
Pachler, N. 2009. ‘Research methods in mobile Consultants-E (www.theconsultants-e.com), an
and informal learning: some issues’ in G. Vavoula, online training and development organization.
N. Pachler, and A. Kukulska-Hulme (eds.). She has been involved in EFL teaching and
Researching Mobile Learning: Frameworks, Tools, and teacher training since 1987 and is co-author of
Research Designs. New York, NY: Peter Lang. How to Teach English with Technology, Learning
Parry, D. 2011. ‘Mobile perspectives on teaching: English as a Foreign Language for Dummies,
mobile literacy’. EDUCAUSE Review 46/2: 14–8. Teaching Online, and most recently Webinars:
Available at http://goo.gl/AKizd (accessed on 4 A Cookbook for Educators. She maintains a blog
September 2012). about e-learning at www.emoderationskills.com
Pegrum, M., C. Howitt, and M. Striepe. 2012 and is a keen user of new technologies.
manuscript submitted for publication. ‘Learning Email: [email protected]

84 Nicky Hockly
Copyright of ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal is the property of Oxford University Press /
USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.