You are on page 1of 15

112 Int. J. Learning Technologv, Jol. 8, No.

2, 2013
Copyright 2013 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.











The presence of mobiIe devices among business
students
Viktorija Florjani*
Faculty oI Management,
University oI Primorska,
Cankarjeva 5, 6000 Koper, Slovenia
E-mail: viktorija.IlorjancicIm-kp.si
*Corresponding author
Alja sakovi
E-mail: alja.isakovicgmail.com
Abstract: World and local usage oI smart mobile devices has been growing on
a year over year basis. Increasing capabilities and popularity oI such devices
had prompted us to research the usage oI mobile devices and services among
students oI a business school. The research, perIormed on two groups oI
students, showed a smartphone penetration rate among our students that is
comparable to data Irom other European countries. The research also proved
statistically signiIicant diIIerences between Iull and part time students, and
among varied usage oI mobile devices. Not surprisingly, students who use
smartphones and/or tablet computers use more mobile services than students
without smart mobile devices. Research also showed a more positive attitude
towards study among students with access to diIIerent devices when compared
to students, who only use personal computers.
Keywords: mobile devices; e-learning; smartphones; tablet computers; mobile
apps; learning technology.
Reference to this paper should be made as Iollows: Florjani, V. and
Isakovi, A. (2013) The presence oI mobile devices among business students`,
Int. J. Learning Technologv, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp.112126.
Biographical notes: Viktorija Florjani supports e-learning at the Faculty oI
Management. She provides pedagogical and didactical support Ior teachers and
technical support Ior students. Her master and PhD thesis were Iocused on the
Iield oI distance learning and e-learning. In her PhD thesis, she researched the
critical Iactors that inIluence the eIIectiveness oI blended courses. She
developed and perIormed several online courses in the Iield oI business
inIormatics and e-learning. Online e-tutor training is her speciality. She has a
Moodle Teacher CertiIicate and uses Moodle Ior most oI her e-learning
projects. She is actively involved in national and international e-learning
projects.
Alja Isakovi is a writer Ior a leading national blog on mobile technologies and
Community Manager at CubeSensors. Her Iields oI expertise include mobile
technologies, social media, educational technology and startups. She previously












The presence of mobile devices among business students 113













worked as an Online Tutor and has experience with both delivering and
organising technology workshops and lectures Ior various audiences. She is
currently also a member oI the Young Advisors Expert Group on
implementation oI the Digital Agenda Ior Europe.

1 Introduction
These days it is already diIIicult to Iind a mobile phone without a web browser or the
ability to access the internet, at least using a GPRS connection. Most Ieature phones
provide at least a basic web browser, and smartphones, which are increasingly popular,
not only enable us to call and send messages, but also provide advanced Ieatures and
applications that are beginning to resemble the capabilities oI personal computers.
Smartphones are run by advanced operating systems, the most popular being Google`s
Android, Apple`s iOS, Nokia`s Symbian, RIM`s BlackBerry OS, Samsung`s Bada and
MicrosoIt`s Windows Phone (Gartner, 2012a).
Even though Gartner`s (2012a) data shows that smartphones capture about a quarter
oI worldwide mobile phone sales, the smartphone share is rapidly increasing on a year
over year basis. For instance, 472 millions smartphones were sold in 2011, which is 58
more than in 2010. In total, 1.8 million mobile phones were sold in 2011, 11.1 more
than in 2010, which means the growth in sales was higher among smartphones.
Data provided by the website Our Mobile Planet (2011) shows that smartphone
penetration in other European countries varies Irom 18 (Germany) to 34
(Switzerland). When we only take a look at the 18 to 29 years age group, the penetration
is signiIicantly higher, Irom 37 (Poland) up to 60 (France, Holland, Norway). Our
country, Slovenia, is not among the European countries Our Mobile Planet studies, so we
had to look Ior data elsewhere. According to the latest data by Mobitel, the biggest
mobile operator in Slovenia, about a third oI its customer base uses smartphones (Mobitel
Tehnik, 2012). The second largest mobile operator in the country, Simobil, reported a
40 smartphone penetration among its users in January 2012 (Telekom Austria Group,
2012).
Alongside smartphones, tablet computers, being led by Apple`s iPad, are also gaining
popularity Iast. The iPad has only been released in April 2010, yet by the end oI the same
year it has already captured 7 oI the total personal computers market share; by the end
oI 2011, the share has Iurther increased to 17 (RosoII, 2012). II we also take into
account that 2011 has seen a decrease oI 16 in sales oI personal computers in Western
Europe compared to the year 2010 (Gartner, 2012b), it is becoming obvious that
smartphones and tablets have already started replacing traditional personal computers Ior
many users (Dediu, 2012).
These conclusions are also being conIirmed by research among proIessional users,
which shows that 60 oI proIessional users in Europe use iPads at work, while 80 use
iPads Ior work related communication even though only 40 oI these iPads have been
provided by their company (IDG Connect, 2012). This is also why IDC (2011) Iorecasts
that by the year 2015, more US users will access the Internet using mobile devices, such
as smartphones and tablets, than traditional personal computers.









114 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












Mobile devices have also been studied in educational contexts Ior a long time now.
Mobile learning (m-learning) started appearing in reviewed research papers as early as in
2003, as Iound by Hung and Zhang (2012). The same study Iound that between the year
2003 and 2008 one third oI m-learning papers come Irom Taiwan (27.7), 15.13 Irom
USA and 9.24 Irom South Korea (ibidem). The most popular research Iields in m-
learning are its learning eIIectiveness, evaluation and personalised systems (ibidem).
However, it is worth noting that mobile devices and their usage have changed drastically
since the introduction oI the iPhone in 2007 and the opening oI the App Store in 2008.
Similarly, modern tablets have only started taking oII aIter the introduction oI the iPad in
2010.
These trends have encouraged us to study the spread oI mobile devices, especially
smartphones and tablets, among the students oI our business school. Apart Irom
ascertaining the penetration oI smartphones, we are also interested in the student
availability oI these devices Ior the potential inclusion oI mobile devices in the
educational process. Currently, mobile devices are neither being used nor being
encouraged to be used in the educational process at our institution (and other educational
institutions in our country). Other research also seems to indicate that mobile devices are
still being used more oIten as an inIormation retrieval tool rather than a pedagogical tool,
even in developed countries such as the USA |Cheon et al., (2012), p.1054|. The
implementation oI m-learning in higher education is still challenging because oI social,
cultural and organisational circumstances (Corbeil and Valdes-Corbeil, 2007; Traxler,
2010). Public higher education institutions in our country are even more rigid and closed
to new technologies and innovative pedagogical approaches than Western higher
education institutions, especially private ones.
The research, whose Iindings we wish to present in this paper, has been carried out on
two groups oI students: a group oI Iull time students (November 2011) and a group oI
part time students (January 2012). The basic goal oI the research is to ascertain the spread
oI diIIerent mobile devices, the Irequency oI usage oI diIIerent mobile services, and also
an initial consideration oI a potential implementation oI mobile devices in the teaching
process at our institution.
We limit our research to two groups oI business school students Iull time and part
time students. This limitation is not due to the age gap, but rather to the question oI
whether there are any work related diIIerences that inIluence the usage oI mobile devices.
DiIIerent attitudes toward e-learning between part time and Iull time students have been
Iound in some previous researches made on the same population at our business school.
Part time students have been Iound as more motivated and as having more selI-initiative,
both characteristics that are appreciated in e-learning |Suli, (2007), p.214|. Our
research is mostly concerned with mobile devices that can be used to access web pages
and the study content in the Moodle learning management system (LMS) that is already
used to support e-learning at our research institution.
The research tries to validate the Iollowing hypothesis:
H1 There are statistically signiIicant diIIerences related to the usage oI ICT devices and
mobile services based on gender. The hypothesis is based on research made in our
country |Podovsovnik Axelsson, (2009), pp.193194; Suli, (2011), p.56|, which
has Iound males to be more skilled in computer and Internet usage, and Iemales to











The presence of mobile devices among business students 115













communicate more using e-mail and Facebook. The gender diIIerences have also
been uncovered by an international study |Florjani and Pastuszak, (2012),
pp.310311|.
H2 There are statistically signiIicant diIIerences between how Iull time and part time
students, and between how users oI diIIerent mobile devices use mobile services.
H3 There are statistically signiIicant diIIerences between the intensity oI usage oI
mobile devices and an aIIinity towards e-study.
The data, which has been gathered through an online questionnaire, has been analysed
with SPSS soItware (version 19.0). Besides descriptive statistics methods, we have also
used correlation analysis to ascertain the relations among variables.
2 Mobile devices in education
The Horizon Report (NMC, 2012) highlights mobile apps and tablets as two main trends
that will enter mainstream usage in teaching and learning in higher education. Mobile
apps are mainly deIined in terms oI smartphones, which provide apps with access to
cloud services, the usage oI cameras Ior capturing photos and videos, location services
based on GPS sensor data and other smart sensors. Tablets, which also support similar
smart apps, are seen as an additional tool to smartphones, mainly because their larger
screens make knowledge acquisition that much easier.
Modern mobile devices are locally and contextually aware, portable and cost Iriendly
small computers with a large array oI apps, which not only provide diverse Iunctionality,
but also a more simple user experience through manipulation oI user interIaces with
touch and gestures. However, because mobile apps and tablets represent a relatively new
trend (the Apple App Store was opened in July 2008, the iPad released in April 2010),
educational institutions are still deIining guidelines and tools Ior an eIIective introduction
oI mobile devices and apps in the learning process.
Initial pilot projects, such as the one at the Abilene Christian University (ACU),
where students and staII were provided with access to iPhones and iPod Touch devices,
1

have yet to show that mobile devices inIluence student success (only a slight increase in
average grades has been Iound). However, the teachers have already noticed diIIerences
in students` attitude towards study. Some teachers reported that students, who use
iPhones, watch video lectures more oIten and consequently have Iewer questions Ior
teachers than students without smartphones. This also leads to iPhone users being more
independent at their studies (Cox, 2010).
As already mentioned, m-learning is not an entirely new phenomena. In the previous
decade there were several attempts at using SMS messaging in education (Ozok and Wei,
2007), although it is clear that modern mobile devices and their advanced apps oIIer a
wider range oI possibilities. In addition to a better user experience, mobile devices also
provide the advantage oI time and local independency, which leads students to Iavour m-
learning over similar classroom based courses |Larsson et al., (2007), p.335|. The same
study also concluded that m-learning seems better suited Ior advanced programmes and
less suitable Ior beginner levels (ibidem).









116 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












2.1 Use cases for mobile devices in education
Cheon et al. (2012, p.1055) distinguish Iour types oI learning supported by mobile
devices individualised learning, situated learning, collaborative learning, and inIormal
learning. At the same time there is also some evidence that mobile devices still have
some technical limitations that make them more likely to be used Ior hedonic uses
(ibidem). Some authors, cited by Cheon et al. (ibidem) propose that study materials Ior
m-learning should be speciIically adapted to the smaller screen size.
Based on our pedagogical experience and the way our institutions operate, we present
an overview oI various use cases Irom diIIerent perspectives in the Iollowing pages.
These use cases have been gathered Irom a literature review oI diIIerent case studies
around the world, but structured in the same way as institutional processes are organised
and managed.
Firstly, institutions can use mobile devices to support various administrative
processes:
As a support tool for students. institutions can use mobile apps to notiIy students
about campus news and events, provide inIormation about courses, exam enrolments
and grades, and other administrative processes. For instance, University oI Princeton
oIIers its students a mobile app Ior iOS, BlackBerry and Android devices, and a
mobile website iPrinceton (http://mobile.princeton.edu/). The Princeton apps provide
students with a directory oI students, news, events and sports inIo, list oI courses and
schedules, campus maps, video and photo galleries, library search, access to the
university`s Blackboard LMS, emergency numbers and even campus bus schedules.
An all-in-one mobile app solution that covers all student needs.
As a support tool for staff. Iar less common in practice, but mobile devices could
also be used to communicate with staII members and coordinate group activities
across the campus. For instance, making reservations Ior special classrooms could be
arranged through a mobile interIace whenever a teacher might need it.
However, it is Iar more common to see examples oI teachers integrating mobile devices
into traditional lectures on their own to enhance teaching in physical classrooms:
Mobile devices as a teaching tool: most smartphones and tablets can be connected to
projectors already Iound in lecture halls, either using cables or apps that can
wirelessly connect to a personal computer. The ACU pilot project, which provided
teachers with mobile devices, Iound out that there is no killer app that would cover
the needs oI all teachers and teaching methods (Young, 2011). Instead, teachers at
diIIerent institutions use a variety oI apps that Iit their speciIic teaching approach and
area; Irom apps that can be used as an interactive whiteboard replacement (Splashtop
Whiteboard) to apps that help teachers manage and track students better (Teacher
Pal).
Gathering student feedback during lectures: mobile devices can be used by students
to answer teacher`s questions or provide real time Ieedback about the lecture. This
enables students to become active participants and shape the pace and content oI the
lecture with Ieedback or questions. The ACU project Iound out that students
preIerred using iPhones Ior this purpose (Young, 2011). The number oI services and
apps that support this usage is also growing rapidly. For instance, GoSoapBox
(http://gosoapbox.com/) is just one oI the services that enables teachers to open









The presence of mobile devices among business students 117













simple surveys, quizzes, and discussions to better gauge students` understanding.
Services like this oIten enable students to participate not only with their smartphones
or tablets, but also with laptops.
Finally, mobiles devices can also be used by students themselves as a learning tool:
Accessing e-materials or e-books. tablets and e-book readers make the reading
experience more comIortable than personal computers. Holding a tablet in our hands
is more similar to the Ieeling oI holding a physical book, yet tablets also provide
access to advanced Ieatures that physical books cannot. For instance, immediate
access to dictionaries, the ability to search the web when additional background
inIormation is needed, the ability to add interactive bookmarks and notes. Buying e-
books and e-materials has also become easier due to the easily available app stores
on mobile devices. iPad users can, Ior instance, buy books and textbooks in the
iBookstore and read them in the iBooks app, which can be synchronised across all
Apple mobile devices. E-books bought on Amazon can be read on Kindle e-book
readers or the Kindle app, which is available Ior Iree on all major mobile platIorms.
Apple also oIIers iBooks Author (http://www.apple.com/ibooks-author/), a Iree
authoring app Ior OS X, which can be used to eIIortlessly create interactive
textbooks to be oIIered to students via the iBookstore. The latest version oI the iOS
iTunes U app (http://www.apple.com/education/itunes-u/) also allows teachers to
oIIer entire courses through the app, including materials, books, audio and video
recordings oI lectures and links to useIul mobile apps. Samsung, the largest
manuIactures oI Android mobile devices, is also planning to enter the educational
space through the Learning Hub service, which will provide interactive materials Ior
Galaxy tablets (http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/02/22/education-is-the-sincerest-
Iorm-oI-Ilattery-samsung-readies-learning-hub-Ior-galaxy-tab/).
Accessing existing learning environments. the increased popularity oI mobile devices
is also pressuring providers oI online LMS to become mobile Iriendly. Moodle, the
most popular open-source LMS in Slovenian schools, started oIIering My Moodle
(http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/my-moodle/id461289000?mt8), the oIIicial iPhone
app, since version 2.1, and they have recently started development oI a new, HTML5
based app (http://moodle.org/mod/Iorum/discuss.php?d206758) that will make it
easier to access Moodle across diIIerent mobile platIorms. In addition to the oIIicial
Moodle HQ mobile eIIorts, there are also several other third-party apps, such as
mTouch (http://www.pragmasql.com/moodletouch/home.aspx), and design themes
such as myMobile (http://moodle.org/mod/data/view.php?d26&rid4757), which
adjusts the layout oI Moodle to better Iit the smaller screens we Iind on mobile
devices.
Apps as an additional learning tool. students can supplement the course materials
and tools with apps that either help them learn better or organise their study
activities. The Apple App Store now Ieatures over 650,000 mobile apps, while
Google Play, the oIIicial Android app store, oIIers over 600,000 apps (Fingas, 2012).
A great number oI these apps can also be used Ior learning and studying. For
instance, the App Store Ieatures apps such as WolIram Algebra Course Assistant that
can help students solve mathematical problems, Monster Anatomy Ior studying
human anatomy based on MR scans, Symphony Pro Ior creating music with other
100 musical instruments and much more (Apple, 2012). In addition to apps that can









118 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












be used Ior particular courses or subject matters, students can also choose Irom a
variety oI general purpose apps Ior creating study notes with multimedia elements
(Evernote), organising class schedules and keeping track oI assignments (iStudiez
Pro) and much more. ShowMe (http://www.showme.com/) is another example oI a
general purpose learning app, which enables iPad users to record an explanation oI
any subject on an interactive whiteboard. Lessons, recorded in the app, can be shared
Ior Iree with other app users, thus creating an inIormal community oI teachers and
students, covering diIIerent areas oI expertise and skills. This is a great example oI
how mobile devices provide students with new opportunities Ior learning outside oI
classroom. Traditional lectures can now be supplemented with lectures Irom other
institutions or even other students and enthusiasts around the world.
It is becoming quite clear that mobile devices, especially smartphones and tablets that
have access to advanced apps, can be used in education in a variety oI ways. They can
also be used to support various theme-based learning activities |Liu et al., (2011), p.87|.
OI course, one oI the basic conditions Ior doing so is having students and teachers with
access to such devices. However, we need to keep in mind that even though it seems that
mobile devices provide us with several possibilities Ior innovative learning, the
implementation oI mobile technology still relies on humans (Kukulska-Hulme, 2007) that
know how to use the technology eIIectively and critically. Technology per se will not
bring us innovation in the learning process.
3 The spread and usage of mobile devices among students of a business
school
The research about the spread and usage oI mobile technologies was carried out among
undergraduate business school students as part oI the regular evaluation oI a compulsory
Business InIormatics course and an elective E-learning course. For this reason we were
able to connect questions related to the usage oI mobile devices to some oI the other
collected data.
For Iull time students, the compulsory business inIormatics course is delivered with a
combination oI Iace-to-Iace meetings and online student activities. Part time students and
students oI the elective E-learning course work mostly online, with the exception oI the
introductory Iace-to-Iace meeting. The obligatory course in our research included both
Iull time students and part time students, and students at a diIIerent study level. For a
better overview oI the structure oI students, included in our research, we provide the
number oI students in each group in Table 1.
Table 1 Surveying schedule and number oI students/respondents in each group
Group Time No. of students No. of response response
Obligatory course
Full time VS November 2011 39 31 79.5
Part time VS/UN January 2012 44 39 88.6
Full time UN April 2012 19 13 68.4
Elective course April 2012 23 21 91.3
Notes: VS proIessional higher education study programme, UN academic study









The presence of mobile devices among business students 119













In total, 104 students participated in our survey. 73.1 are students oI a proIessional
higher education study programme, the rest are students oI an academic study
programme. 60.6 oI the surveyed students were Iemale. Regardless oI the number oI
students in each group (Table 1), 57.7 were Iull time students, 65.9 oI students
participated in the course online.
3.1 The usage of mobile devices
The questions related to the usage oI mobile devices and services were included in the
course evaluation Ior the Iirst time. Firstly, we checked the type oI devices students use,
Iollowed by various types oI usage. Table 2 shows the percentage oI students using a
certain device or rather a group oI devices.
Table 2 Usage oI devices
Device Total () FT PT Sig. 0.05
Desktop computer 44.2 33.3 59.9 0.01
Laptop computer 91.3 95.0 86.4
Tablet 11.5 13.3 9.1
Smartphone with a touch screen 44.2 41.7 47.7
iPod Touch 3.8 5.0 2.3
Notes: FT Iull time students, PT part time students
Laptop computers are replacing desktop computers Ior an increasing number oI students
(correlation coeIIicient 0.28), especially among Iull time students (Table 2). Part time
students are more likely to use desktop computers, which turned out to be a statistically
signiIicant diIIerence (Table 2). Even though there are some diIIerences in terms oI usage
oI mobile devices and the way oI study, the only statistically signiIicant diIIerence was
the usage oI desktop computers (Table 2). A potential explanation oI this diIIerence could
be the Iact that part time students usually have access to desktop computers at their
workplace.
Students, who use smartphones, were also asked to speciIy their mobile operating
system. The majority oI smartphone users have Android smartphones (60.9), about a
tenth (10.9) iOS (iPhone), and 8.7 Symbian. One respondent chose Bada,
BlackBerry, Windows Phone and I don`t know` respectively. About a tenth oI users
(10.9) also chose the option Other`.
3.2 Frequencv of usage of mobile services
We also wanted to Iind out how oIten students use their mobile devices Ior diIIerent
services. Participants rated the Irequency oI each service`s usage on a 5-grade scale.
2

It turned out that most respondents still use their mobile phones, smart or not, Ior
sending SMS messages (M 4.8, SD 0.6) or making voice calls (M 4.7, SD 0.9) on
a regular basis. Cameras are another oIten used capability (M 3.9, SD 1.0). Students
also use their phones to browse the web and check their e-mail, although the answers to
these questions were very distributed (SD 1.6) (Table 3). For instance, a IiIth oI
students (21.4) never uses e-mail or does not have a phone that supports this service.
Even though 44.3 oI students use smartphones, a lot oI them do not use advanced
mobile services (Table 3).









120 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












Table 3 Frequency oI usage oI mobile services

M
o
b
i
l
e

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

M

S
D

N
e
v
e
r

(

)

M

F
T

M

P
T

S
i
g
.

F
T
/
P
T

M


n
o

S
P

M

S
P

S
i
g
.

S
P

M


n
o

T
C

M

T
C

S
i
g
.
T
C

S
M
S

m
e
s
s
a
g
i
n
g

4
.
8

0
.
6

1
.
0

4
.
8

4
.
7

0
.
4
1

4
.
8

4
.
7

0
.
0
9

4
.
8

4
.
7

0
.
5
6

V
o
i
c
e

c
a
l
l
s

4
.
7

0
.
9

2
.
9

4
.
6

4
.
8

0
.
1
6

4
.
6

4
.
8

0
.
1
9

4
.
6

4
.
9

0
.
3
3

C
a
m
e
r
a

3
.
9

1
.
0

1
.
0

4
.
0

3
.
9

0
.
7
8

3
.
8

4
.
2

0
.
0
7

3
.
9

4
.
1

0
.
6
2

W
e
b

b
r
o
w
s
i
n
g

3
.
8

1
.
3

8
.
7

4
.
0

3
.
6

0
.
0
7

3
.
4

4
.
3

0
.
0
0

3
.
7

4
.
5

0
.
0
6

E
-
m
a
i
l

3
.
4

1
.
6

2
2
.
1

3
.
4

3
.
4

0
.
7
1

2
.
9

4
.
1

0
.
0
0

3
.
4

4
.
0

0
.
1
9

M
M
S

m
e
s
s
a
g
i
n
g

3
.
4

1
.
2

3
.
8

3
.
4

3
.
4

1
.
0
0

3
.
3

3
.
5

0
.
3
9

3
.
4

3
.
7

0
.
4
6

S
o
c
i
a
l

n
e
t
w
o
r
k
s


3
.
2

1
.
6

2
6
.
0

3
.
8

2
.
4

0
.
0
0

3
.
0

3
.
4

0
.
1
8

3
.
1

3
.
6

0
.
3
5

I
n
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
g

a
p
p
s


2
.
5

1
.
6

4
3
.
3

2
.
6

2
.
3

0
.
2
5

1
.
9

3
.
2

0
.
0
0

2
.
3

3
.
8

0
.
0
0

G
a
m
e
s

2
.
3

1
.
1

2
6
.
0

2
.
6

1
.
8

0
.
0
0

2
.
2

2
.
4

0
.
3
6

2
.
2

3
.
0

0
.
0
1

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

o
r

n
a
v
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

2
.
3

1
.
2

3
7
.
5

2
.
4

2
.
2

0
.
5
6

2
.
0

2
.
7

0
.
0
0

2
.
2

3
.
2

0
.
0
1

O
p
e
n
i
n
g

o
r

e
d
i
t
i
n
g

I
i
l
e
s

2
.
0

1
.
3

4
5
.
2

2
.
3

1
.
8

0
.
0
4

1
.
8

2
.
2

0
.
0
5

1
.
9

3
.
0

0
.
0
0

W
a
t
c
h
i
n
g

v
i
d
e
o

o
r

T
V

1
.
8

1
.
2

5
1
.
9

2
.
2

1
.
6

0
.
0
2

1
.
6

1
.
8

0
.
1
3

1
.
8

2
.
9

0
.
0
1

M
o
b
i
l
e

p
a
y
m
e
n
t

1
.
7

1
.
1

6
1
.
5

1
.
9

1
.
5

0
.
0
6

1
.
6

1
.
8

0
.
2
8

1
.
7

1
.
8

0
.
8
5

V
i
d
e
o

c
a
l
l
s

1
.
6

0
.
9

6
5
.
4

1
.
7

1
.
4

0
.
1
9

1
.
5

1
.
6

0
.
4
2

1
.
5

2
.
0

0
.
0
7

N
o
t
e
s
:

M


a
r
i
t
h
m
e
t
i
c

m
e
a
n
,

S
D


s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

d
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
,

S
i
g
.


t
-
t
e
s
t

s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l

s
i
g
n
i
I
i
c
a
n
c
e
,


S
P


s
m
a
r
t
p
h
o
n
e
,

T
C


t
a
b
l
e
t

c
o
m
p
u
t
e
r









The presence of mobile devices among business students 121













We also wanted to Iind out whether there are any diIIerences in usage oI mobile services
among Iull time and part time students. Statistically signiIicant diIIerences (Sig.) in the
arithmetic mean oI usage oI mobile services are represented in Table 3. Despite
noticeable diIIerences in mean values, we only Iound statistically signiIicant diIIerences
(Sig.0,05) in the usage oI social networks, games, opening and editing Iiles, watching
videos or TV; all oI these services are more oIten used by Iull time students.
We also Iound statistically signiIicant diIIerences among owners oI traditional Ieature
phones and smartphone owners. The later use their phones more intensively Ior web
browsing, e-mail, installing apps, location services and navigation, and opening or editing
Iiles. It is evident that more powerIul mobile devices encourage a wider range oI
advanced mobile services. Interestingly enough, tablet users are also more likely to use
advanced mobile services, such as installing apps, watching videos, or using location
services on their mobile phones (Table 3: Sig. TC0,05). Tablet users also use their
mobile devices Ior games more oIten with statistical signiIicance.
The test oI diIIerences in mean values can conIirm H2, which predicted statistically
signiIicant diIIerences among Iull time and part time students and among users oI various
mobile devices.
3.3 Mobile devices and services in relation to other variables
Table 3 shows statistically signiIicant diIIerences in the arithmetic mean oI both groups
oI students (Iull time and part time study), which was also conIirmed by the correlation
analysis, during which we conIirmed dependencies among the study method and the
usage oI social networks (0.43), gaming (0.42), and the usage oI mobile devices to
watch videos or TV (0.25). All correlations are statistically signiIicant.
Interesting and statistically signiIicant correlations were also Iound among the
intensity oI usage oI some mobile services and printing instructions or other study
materials. All statistically signiIicant correlations are negative, meaning that respondents,
who print less instructions, use voice calls (0.21), MMS messaging (0.24), social
networks (0.20) and play games on mobile devices (0.30) more oIten than students,
who print instructions
3
more oIten. Similarly, students who use their mobile device Ior
social networking (0.23), gaming (0.22), playing games (0.21), and watching videos
or TV (0.25), are less likely to print other study materials. All these correlations show
that more proIicient mobile users rely less on various printed materials than their less
mobile savvy peers.
As we were interested in the connection between the usage oI mobile devices and
services, we introduced a new variable called ICT devices, which combines all devices
presented in Table 2. Our correlation analysis showed that the more devices a student
uses, the more likely she is to use e-mail (0.21) and web browsing (0.20) on her mobile
phone. Users oI a wide range oI devices are also more likely to download mobile apps
(0.34), use location services (0.26), and edit Iiles (0.20) on their mobile phones. All
relations are statistically signiIicant.
We also looked at statistically signiIicant connections among variables Irom Table 3
and gender. Female students use their phone more oIten Ior sending SMS (0.26) and
MMS (0.30) messages, and taking photos or videos with their phone camera (0.27).
Gender is also statistically signiIicantly related to the usage oI mobile phones Ior social
networking Iemale students use their phones Ior this purpose more oIten (0.21). On the









122 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












contrary, male students use their mobile phones more oIten Ior watching videos or TV
(0.27), and use a wider range oI devices (0.28).
The correlation analysis conIirmed statistically signiIicant diIIerences in terms oI ICT
devices and mobile services usage based on gender, thus conIirming hypothesis 1.
In order to test hypothesis 3, we created another variable affinitv to e-studv. The
variable was composed with averages oI agreement
4
with the Iollowing statements:
e-study improves the successIulness oI study
e-study would also be a preIerable delivery method Ior other courses
e-study increases the level oI gained knowledge.
Our correlation analysis showed a positive statistically signiIicant connection oI the
variable AIIinity to e-study and the variable ICT devices (0.25). Meaning, students, who
use more ICT devices, also have a greater aIIinity towards e-study, thus confirming H3,
which predicted statisticallv significant differences between the intensitv of usage of
mobile devices and an affinitv towards e-studv.
Because we had a large number oI variables related to the usage oI mobile services
(14 variables presented in Table 3), we used a Iactorial analysis to reduce the number oI
variables (Cronbach`s Alpha 0.838, KMO 0.804, Bartlett test: Sig. 0.000).
Table 4 Correlation analysis
5

1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Factor 1
2 Factor 2
3 Factor 3
4 Factor 4
5 Factor 5 0.20* 0.23*
6 AIIinity to e-study
7 Gender 0.32** 0.42**
8 Devices 0.20* 0.25*
9 Study mode 0.25** 0.20* 0.20*
Notes: *correlation is signiIicant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
**correlation is signiIicant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Due to an uneven weight oI Iactors (most variables were combined under Factor 1), we
also perIormed a Warimax rotation. Based on the Iactor analyses the 14 variables related
to the usage oI mobile services were reduced and extracted into 5 Iactors explaining
69.94 oI variability. The Factor 1 includes variables web browsing, e-mail and social
networking. The Factor 2 includes advanced mobile services, such as Iile management,
watching videos or TV, usage oI location services. While variables SMS and MMS
messaging hold most oI the weight in Factor 3, MMS messaging and video calls lead
Factor 4. Factor 5 is mainly comprised oI usage oI mobile phones Ior voice calls.
Table 4 shows that male students are more likely to use advanced mobile services
(Factor 2) (0.32). We have already ascertained that male students also use a wider range
oI mobile devices (0.20). Factor 2 is also related to the study mode (0.25), which means
that part time students are more likely to use advanced mobile services.









The presence of mobile devices among business students 123













3.4 Mobile access to the facultvs website
In addition to the research oI usage oI mobile devices and services among the students oI
the Business InIormatics courses, we also gathered visitor data Irom Google Analytics Ior
our Iaculty`s (FM) website (http://www.Im-kp.si/) in years 2009, 2010, and 2011, and Ior
the period Irom 1 January to 30 April 2012. Since the second halI oI February 2012, we
also started collecting visitor data Ior our e-classroom (Moodle LMS). As can be seen
Irom Table 5, the percentage oI visitors accessing the Iaculty`s website is increasing on a
year over year basis. Even more interesting is the data that shows that about a tenth oI
visits to the e-classroom originate Irom mobile devices, even though there is no special
mobile layout provided.
Table 5 Mobile visits to the Iaculty`s website and e-classroom (LMS)
Time range
= visitors
FM website
mobile
access
= visitors
LMS
mobile
access
2009 127,373 0.5
2010 678,932 0.6
2011 672,372 1.4
1 January12 November 2012 489,915 3.8 3,565 10.1
Data Irom Table 5 clearly shows an increase in the usage oI mobile devices, which
conIirms the validity oI considering the implementation oI mobile technologies in the
educational process. Also, the Iaculty`s main website and especially the e-classroom
should be made more accessible to students using mobile devices.
4 Discussion
The research provided a better picture oI which devices and services are being used by
our students. We Iound out that the smartphone penetration among our students (44.3)
is comparable to the average European data oI the 19 to 29 years age group, while tablets
are not yet that common (being used by 8.6 students). The usage oI mobile devices
should certainly be monitored, as it is very likely that the penetration oI smart mobile
devices will increase each year.
We also discovered a growth in the percentage oI mobile accesses to the Iaculty`s
website and a surprisingly high percentage oI mobile accesses to our e-classroom. This is
why we believe that we should be thinking about providing better support Ior mobile
devices (especially smartphones, which are already being used by almost halI oI the
surveyed students) both Irom an administrative and educational point oI view. When it
comes to the development oI mobile apps, it would make most sense to Iirst support
Android in our case, as it is being used by 60.9 oI smartphone owners. However, other
platIorms are also present, so a web based, cross-platIorm solution might be even better.
Our students are still more likely to use their mobile phones Ior voice calls and SMS
messaging. The later is especially popular among Iemale students. However, e-mail and
web browsing are also popular mobile services, especially among students with multiple
mobile devices and among smartphone owners.









124 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












One oI the most interesting Iindings oI the research was the Iact that students, who
use a wider range oI ICT devices, were also more successIul at the Business InIormatics
course. This is why our recommendation to higher education institutions is to start
considering pilot projects that would improve students` access to mobile devices and
Iurther research the link among the accessibility oI ICT devices, study success,
motivation and attitude towards study. Our research also showed that students with more
ICT devices have a greater aIIinity towards e-study.
It is also worth noting that a Iew smaller diIIerences emerged in terms oI usage oI
mobile devices and services based on the study method and based on their work
experiences. Full time students were statistically signiIicantly more likely to use social
networks and games (entertainment apps) on their mobile phones. ThereIore it might
make sense to include these elements in education oI Iull time students. For instance,
social networks could be used as a channel Ior announcements and news, didactical
games could be used to improve learning.
Our research was the Iirst research oI this kind in our country, so it could be used by
other institutions Ior Iurther in depth researches in the Iield oI m-learning. The main
Iindings that could be analysed and deeply investigated are:
A gender divide is still present at our institution Iemale students use their phones
more oIten Ior sending SMS and MMS, they also take photos or videos more oIten
compared to their male colleagues. Female students also use mobile phones to
interact with Iriends on social networks. On the other hand, male students are more
likely to watch videos or TV on mobile devices. They also use a wider range oI
devices.
An increasing number oI students use their mobile devices to access inIormation on
the institution`s web site or the e-classroom.
Part time students have more experience with diIIerent mobile devices and are more
likely to use ICT devices as an utility or work tool. Full time students preIer to use
mobile devices Ior leisure and entertainment.
5 Conclusions
M-learning is not yet being used at our institution in any Iorm. However, our research
Iindings show that it is time to start thinking about study materials that can be accessed
on mobile devices (audio or video Iiles, interactive study materials, location-based
activities etc). Especially because the research showed that more proIicient mobile users
rely less on various printed materials, and because an ever increasing number oI visits to
our web site and Moodle originate Irom mobile devices (chapter 3.4).
The research Iindings inIluenced our teaching approach in this academic year. Almost
all Iull time students (95.0) have a laptop computer, so why should we not encourage
them to use their laptop in the classroom? They have to take notes during classes anyway,
and when we introduced tools like the Evernote (http://www.evernote.com) web
application, students were more motivated to attend lectures with their laptops and take
notes in real time. AIter the lectures they can supplement notes with other study materials
delivered through the e-classroom (Moodle) and share notes with their teacher. In this









The presence of mobile devices among business students 125













way we try to encourage students to study regularly, which has been a consistent issue in
the previous academic years when students would not take notes regularly.
In the Iuture it would make sense to carry out a similar research on a bigger sample oI
students, on diIIerent levels oI study (postgraduate) and in diIIerent study areas. To better
support a potential implementation oI mobile devices on an institutional level, it would
also make sense to include teachers and other Iaculty staII in the research. As mobile
devices start spreading into the educational process, a number oI questions regarding the
eIIiciency oI delivering study materials through mobile devices will surely be opened as
well.
References
Apple (2012) Apple in Education Apps |online| http://www.apple.com/education/apps/ (accessed
20 February 2012).
Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S.M. and Song, J. (2012) An investigation oI mobile learning readiness
in higher education based on the theory oI planned behavior`, Computers & Education,
Vol. 59, pp.10541064, Doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.015.
Corbeil, J. R., and Valdes-Corbeil, M.E. (2007) Are you ready Ior mobile learning?` Educause
Quarterlv, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp.5158.
Cox, J. (2010) Network World. Can the iPhone Save Higher Education? |online|
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/032310-iphone-higher-education.html (accessed 12
February 2012).
Dediu, H. (2012) Asvmco. The Rise and Fall of Personal Computing |online|
http://www.asymco.com/2012/01/17/the-rise-and-Iall-oI-personal-computing/ (accessed 18
January 2012).
Fingas, J. (2012) Engadget. Google Plav Hits 600,000 Apps, 20 Billion Total Installs |online|
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/27/google-play-hits-600000-apps/ (accessed 18 July 2012).
Florjani, V. and Pastuszak, Z. (2012) Business school students ICT attitude. An international
comparison`, TIIM 2012 Conference. Competences, Svnergv and International
Competitiveness Influence on the Technologv Innovation and Industrial Management, Maria
Sklodowska-Curie University, Lublin, pp.303312.
Gartner (2012a) Gartner Savs Worldwide Smartphone Sales Soared in Fourth Quarter of 2011
With 47 Percent Growth |online| http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id1924314 (accessed
16 February 2012).
Gartner (2012b) Gartner Savs Western European PC Shipments Fell 16 Percent in Fourth Quarter
of 2011 |online| http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id1915815 (accessed 16 February
2012).
Hung, J.L. and Zhang, K. (2012) Examining mobile learning trends 20032008: a categorical
meta-trend analysis using text mining techniques`, Journal of Computing in Higher Education,
No. 24, pp.117, DOI 10.1007/s12528-011-9044-9.
IDG Connect (2012) iPad for Business, Survev 2012 |online|
http://www.idgconnect.com/download/8007/ipad-business-survey-2012?sourceconnect.
(accessed 16 January 2012).
International Data Corporation (IDC) (2011) More Mobile Internet Users Than Wireline Users in
the US bv 2015 |online| http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerIdprUS23028711 (accessed
16 January 2012).
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007) Mobile usability in educational contexts: what have we learnt?`,
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 8, No. 2.









126 J. Florfani and A. Isakovi












Larsson, E, Janish, H., Kekle, T. and Helo, P. (2007) Mobile learning as an alternative Ior
competence development in industrial engineering and logistics`, Int. J. of Mobile Learning
and Organi:ation, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 327341.
Liu, T.Y., Tan, T.H., Lin, M.S. and Chu, Y.L. (2011) Educational aIIordances oI ubiquitous
learning`, in Chen M. et al., pp.8691.
Mobitel Tehnik (2012) Dele uporabnikov pametnih telefonov pri nas v:trafno raste predvsem na
raun Androida |online| http://tehnik.mobitel.si/delez-uporabnikov-pametnih-teleIonov-pri-
nas-vztrajno-raste-predvsem-na-racun-androida/ (accessed 14 November 2012).
NMC (2012) Hori:on Report. Higher Education Edition
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdI/HR2012.pdI (accessed 14 February 2012).
Our Mobile Planet (2011) Smartphone Penetration |online|
http://www.ourmobileplanet.com/omp/T1123797789 (accessed 1 February 2012).
Ozok, A.A. and Wei, J. (2007) Short messaging service use among college students in USA and its
potential as an educational tool: an exploratory study`, Int. J. of Mobile Learning and
Organi:ation, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.355374.
Podovsovnik Axelsson, E. (2009) Socialno-psiholoski faktorfi in drubene determinante
raunalniske in internetne pismenosti med slovenskimi osnovnosolskimi maturanti, Ljubljana,
Pedagoski Institut.
RosoII, M. (2012) iPads Are Outselling Desktop PCs, And Are Now Equal To 17 Of The PC
Market |online| http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-what-the-post-pc-era-looks-like-more-
ipads-than-desktop-pcs-2012-1 (accessed 26 January 2012).
Suli, V. (2007) Is e-learning more suitable Ior Iull-time or Ior part-time students?`, in
Abramowicz, W. and Mayr, H.C. (Eds.): Technologies for Business Information Svstems.
Heidelberg, Springer, pp.205215.
Suli, V. (2011) Raunalniska in internetna pismenost slovenske mladine`, Uporabna informatika
Jol. XiX, No. 3, pp. 147157.
Telekom Austria Group (2012) Creating Apps. Slovenia. Now more Android than Svmbian Users
on Si.mobil |online| http://creatingapps.telekomaustria.com/slovenia-mobile-operating-
systems-numbers.html (accessed 8 August 2012).
Traxler, J. (2010) Sustaining mobile learning and its institutions`, International Journal of Mobile
and Blended Learning, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp.5865, DOI: 10.4018/jmbl.2010100105.
Young, J.R. (2011) Smartphones on Campus. the Search for Killer Apps` |online|
http://chronicle.com/article/Smartphones-on-Campus-the/127397/ (accessed 23 January 2012).
Notes
1 The main diIIerence between an iPhone and an iPod Touch is that the later cannot access
mobile networks Ior calling, sending SMS messages or using mobile data transIer.
2 1 never/my phone does not support, 2 rarely, 3 occasionally, 4 oIten, 5 regularly.
3 The presented research is part oI an extended evaluation process, where other students`
characteristics and study Ieatures are also investigated. One oI these is also the inIormation
about how study materials are being used. We speciIically asked students about how much
study instructions and study materials they print. The question oIIers 4 possible answers
1 they did not print anything, 2 they printed a minor part oI them, 3 they printed a major
part oI them, 4 they printed all materials.
4 1 I do not agree at all, 5 I agree very much.
5 The statistical non-signiIicant correlations are presented in the Table 4.

You might also like