16 SES 04 A, Mobile Learning
Paper/Pecha Kucha Session
A vast literature has proven multiple mobile learning positive benefits and impacts (Miller2012; Islam & Grünlund 2016;Fisher 2011;Holomb 2009;Penuel 2006) Furthermore, literature has significantly proven success on specific formulated mobile learning strategies, such as TPACK, Learning Design, resources affordability and availability such as BYOD or space management such as Flipping rooms (Bell 2002; Chai & Siu-Cheung 2016; Camacho 2016; Cambrun & Han 2015; Dalziel, et al. 2016; Hassan & Geys 2016; Penuel, Fishman, Cheng, & Sabelli 2012; Toch 2016; Williams & Larwin 2016; Shirley 2016; Redondo et al. 2014). In a survey study, Abachi and Muhammad (2014) found that instructors and students had generally positive views toward mobile learning. Using mobile devices benefits effective technology integration into learning (Cochrane and Bateman 2010; Gikas and Grant’s 2013). The literature review by Wu et al. (2012) notes that 86% if the 164 mobile learning studies present positive outcomes in general Although still some uncertainties regarding mobile learning contribution to education, some studies proved better performance using mobile devices (Martin and Ertzberger 2013; Tossell et al. 2015; Wong et al. 2015).
Despite the extensively recognition of the need to make education more digital, and the availability of mobile learning devices, , apps tools, guides, strategies and frameworks, education, remains steadfast and considerable number of school’s reality is still quite analogic (Voogt, Knezek, Cox, Knezek, & Brummelhuis, 2013; Stevenson, Hedberg, O'Sullivan, & Howe, 2015; Hao, Dennen, & Mei, 2017).
Frameworks to implement mobile learning have been developed focusing on technology, content and pedagogical aspects, the purposes of which mainly were: designing and develop tools, analysis tools, evaluation tools and guiding tools. (Tan, Zhang, Kinshuk and McGreal, 2011; Issa, Al-Bahadili, and Abuhamdeh, 2011; Ozdamli, 2012; Kearney, Schuck, Buden, and Aubusson, 2012; Sha, Looi, Chen, and Zhang, 2012; Wei and So, 2012; Ng and Nicholas, 2013; Prasertsilp,2013; Bensassi and Laroussi, 2014; Scanlon et al. 2014; Rijala 2016). However, there is a lack of frameworks orchestrating and encompassing, in a helictical way, the whole strategic process; coordinating and integrating roles and responsibilities of all educational stakeholders, formulating and combining key mobile learning strategies available and evaluating results (Baran, 2014; Sutton & DeSantis, 2016: Cochrane T. D., 2014).
The purpose of the research is to seek to further identify the main factors that affect a prototype framework to adoption and sustainable use of mobile learning in secondary school context developed by Moya and Camacho (2018). Figure 1 shows the prototype framework. The research aims to answer the Research question of what factors matter most for secondary schools succeed in mobile learning?
The results show five main categories are affecting frameworks for mobile learning adoption: factors related to technological resources, related to digital literacy, pedagogical, related to individuals and related to leadership.
Different methods and mixed collection data tools were employed with the objective to triangulate and validate research hypothesis and prove evidence.
Research objectives are: first, to understand crucial categories affecting mobile learning, second to collect evidence to uncover useful underlying motivations and factors that influence mobile learning in, third to identify evidence regarding cause-and-effect factors affecting mobile learning and forth to explain and validate findings from research.
Research objectives are: first, to understand crucial categories affecting mobile learning in secondary school’s environments and, second to collect evidence to uncover useful underlying motivations and factors that influence mobile learning in secondary school’s environments, third to identify evidence regarding cause-and-effect factors affecting mobile learning and forth to explain and validate findings from research. Different methods and mixed collection data tools were employed with the objective to triangulate and validate research hypothesis and prove evidence. Regarding the first objective, the approach was explanatorily systematic review and expert judgment were the two data collection methods employed. Concerning the second and third objective, a cause-effect approach was the paradigm, a questionnaire to 350 informants was conducted. The research was conducted in the context of Spanish secondary schools in spring 2018.
The purpose of this study was to conduct an analysis of the factors that affect most for adoption of Mobile Learning. The study had employed different research methods to gather evidence of the main categories of factors. Findings showed a prioritization of the main categories of factors: technological resources, digital literacy; pedagogy; behavior, attitudes and ethics; and leadership
Bell, L. (2002). Strategic Planning and School Management: full of sound and fury, signifiying nothing? Inagural Lecture given Tuesday, 19th February 2002 (pág. 19). University of Leicester. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230210440276 Camacho, M. (2016). Los dispositivos móviles en educación y su impacto en el aprendizaje.Madird: Samsung Electronics Iberia, S.A.U. Cambrun, E. M., & Han, S. W. (2015). Infrstructure for teaching reflexion and instructional change: An exploratory study. Journal of educational change, 511-533. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9252-6 Chai, C. S., & Siu-Cheung, K. (2016). Education, Professional learning for 21st century. Journal of Computer Education. doi:DOI 10.1007/s40692-016-0069-y Chang, G.-C. (2006). Strategic Planning in Education Some Concepts and Steps. Paris, France: Division of Educational Policies and Strategies, UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Chang, Y., Jang, S.-J., & Chen, Y.-H. (2015). Assessing universtity students'perceptions of their physics instructors'TPACK development in two ontexts. British Journal of Educational Technology, 1236-1249. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12192 Cheng, G., Guan, Y., & Chau, J. (2016). An empirical study towards understanding user acceptance of bring your own device (BYOD) in higher education Australian journal of technology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,, 32(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2792 Cochrane, T., Buchem, I., Camacho, M., Cronin, C., Gordon, A., & Keegan, H. (2013). Bulding global learning communitites. Research in learning technology. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.21955 Dalziel, J., Conole, G., Wills, S., Walker, S., Bennet, S., Dobozy, E., . . . Bower, M. (2016). The Laranca Declaration on Learning Design. Journal of Internactive Media in Education, 1(7), 1-24. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jime.407 Dublin, L. (2004). The nine myths of e-leaning implementation: Ensuring real return on your e-leaning investment. Industrial and commercial training, 36(7), 291-291. doi:10.1108/00197850410563939 Fullan, M. (2005). Fundamental Change. International Handbook of Educational Change. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4454-2 Glueck, W. F. (1980). Business policy and strategic management. McGraw-HIll. Goyal, E., Purohit, S., & Bhagat, M. (2010). Factors that affect information and communication technology usage: case studey in managment education. Jouranl of Information Technology Management, 21(4). Hao, S., Dennen, V. P., & Mei, L. (2017). Influencial factors for mobile learning acceptance among Chinese users. Educationa Tech Research Dev, 65, 101-123. doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9465-2 Hassan, M., & Geys, B. (2016). Expectations, realizations, and approval of tablet computers in an educational setting. Journal of educational change, 171-190. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9270-4 Islam, M., & Grünlund, A. (2016). An international literature review of 1:1 computer in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 191-222. doi:10.1007/s10833-016-9271-y Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scolrecard. Harvard Business School Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-9320-5_12
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.