Distributed Mobile Learning

"When I was a boy, back in the nineteen-sixties, I'd have been at school at
your age... in those days, anything you wanted to learn, you had to get in
your own head. We didn't have miniputers in those days. Computers had
been invented, and they were getting smaller, but it wasn't until the great
developments in microtechnology in the seventies that portable computers
were made" (The Thing Under the Glacier', Brian Aldiss, Daily Express
Science Annual, 1963)

The concept of mobile learning has been theoretically and practically explored since Alan

Kay in 1968 first introduced the world to his groundbreaking conceptual product known as the

Dynabook. This device was to allow students to become the "heir to the thought and knowledge

of ages past" (Sharples, 2007), while being "no larger than a notebook, weighing less than four

pounds, containing a flat panel display screen, be able to store over 500 book pages, or several

hours of audio, access networks through global wireless high bandwidth communications, use

rechargeable batteries, and cost under 500 dollars" (Sharples, 2007). Educationally, the

Dynabook was to be "personal, highly interactive, allowing students to learn through play and

collaboration, provide instruction within informal settings, and utilize dynamic simulations

regardless of time or space" (Sharples, 2007). Dr. Kay's initial concept was "based on solid

educational theory" (Maxwell, 2006), and "is in many ways more compelling than anything we

have today" (Maxwell, 2006). In subsequent years mobile learning experimented with various

other technologies and projects such as HandLeR, MOBIlearn, Mobile Computer Supported

Collaborative Learning, even PocketPC's and PDA's, though none of these compared with the

potential presented by the original Dynabook.

Forty-Two years later, mobile learning is thought of as "always on, always on you, and

independent of time and space" (Knight, 2006) utilizing various technological resources, an idea

that is reminiscent of Dr. Kay's original work. However unlike the Dynabook, mobile learning is
now positioned to become a reality based solely upon the current growth and penetration of

mobile technologies into our global society. "The Center on Media and Child Health predicts

that 54 percent of American 8-to-12-year-olds will have cell phones" (Shuler, 2009) by 2011.

This massive growth of technological resources now allows schools and educators alike the

opportunity to leverage a plethora of technology for the sole purpose of education. In our own

country, it is predicted that "mobile technologies have the potential to provide Canadian learners

with increased access to information and learning materials" (Ally & Laughton, 2006). This

enhanced access will help students, in Canada and around the world, fight against academic

isolation by removing the barrier of location, and provide the necessary help to "motivate

students to learn, communicate, and collaborate" (Ally & Laughton, 2006), all of which are

fundamentally important life skills. Mobile learning is already being utilized quite effectively by

Apple, with the iTouch and iPhone. These devices when coupled with the power of iTunes U,

provides students with "constant access to information - in the classroom and beyond" (Mobile

learning and itunes u). These dramatic changes and advancements within mobile learning

allows one to easily argue the importance of its future within distributed learning environments.

It is clear to see, that "mobile technologies have come to play a significant role in society

at large. But how are they currently being leveraged to advance learning?" (Shuler, 2009) This

question brings forth a major issue in regards to the current research in the field of mobile

learning, in that there is no "appropriate theory of education for the mobile age" (Sharples,

Taylor, & Vavoula, 2007). Some researchers argue it is "only once we have a theory for learning

with mobile technologies in different settings and different populations can these devices be used

to their full potential" (Schuler, 2009). However, others feel that "learning is learning" (Winters,

2007), therefore is a new learning theory necessary when "learning mediated through mobile
technologies is still interwoven with other learning"? (Winters, 2007) If this basic idea holds

true, is it not possible to just utilize a distributed approach, selecting the best theories to suit

these ubiquitous devices and the resources they provide? Regardless of which direction is taken,

educational theorists must be careful as this field is still in its infancy, and any misstep could

easily lead to the downfall of a major educational opportunity for distributed learning.

Even without a specific learning theory, mobile devices are continuing to be explored and

utilized in multiple educational settings, however with continued use, many negative issues are

also being exposed. Carly Schuler, Ed. M, has closely examined some of the more current

negative aspects on the regular, if not daily use, of mobile technology for learning. Schuler

presents that even though these devices provide unparalleled opportunities to engage and

enhance learning, parents, teachers and schools still are concerned about "a number of cognitive,

social, and physical challenges" (Schuler, 2009) that need to be surmounted before incorporating

mobile learning into the lexicon of distributed learning. Some of the more serious issues

presented include the "difficulties in monitoring access to content, diminishing basic language

skills, issues on student privacy and data proprietary, and the real threat of cyberbullying"

(Schuler, 2009). It is these reasons why schools in Britain, India, and even my own have banned

the regular use of mobile technology within the school. However, countering research has

shown that "young people who would not normally write are often enthusiastic texters" (Plant,

2001), which increases engagement within their learning environment, showing that mobile

devices are a necessary element in modern education. It is this reason why more research is

needed to provide empirical evidence to supply and support best practices with mobile learning

so the positive experiences out weigh the negative concerns.

 Recent mobile learning research has also brought to light multiple technological

criticisms, the largest being the multitude of devices students can potentially use to access

learning materials. For example, as of February 11th, 2010, there were 577 different cell phones

available for purchase on Amazon.com. Forcing one to ask, how is it possible to "develop

software applications to facilitate learning" (Schuler, 2009) with such extreme differentiated

access on current and aging technology. Luckily, this concern is being currently addressed

through websites that now auto-format their content to suit the technical requirements of the

accessing device, such as Blip.tv, or the mobile applications that provide a new user interface

allowing various handheld devices access to multiple websites. Even if these advancements

allow distributed learning to leverage the functionality of mobile devices, how do schools and

teachers then manage a learning environment where potentially "parents do not allow their child

to own such a device, or contain students from families who simply cannot afford one" (Schuler,

2009). It is easy to say that these issues would not occur in a distributed learning environment,

as each student should own or be able to access the needed technology to complete the course.

However, should mobile learning by its vary nature create a digital divide in the world of

education, instead of helping to democratize it? More research, and potentially funding models

need to be explored before distributed learning can properly incorporate mobile devices within

its varied approaches to content delivery.

The physical limitations of mobile devices have been another area of criticism in the

research, as it has been shown that these issues may "adversely affect their usability and distract

from learning goals" (Schuler, 2009). The first major limitation is the small screen size, which

can cause eye strain if the material presented "is not designed specifically for a mobile device"

(Schuler, 2009). This issue also limits the types of activities that can be created and
implemented for mobile learning, for example activities heavy in literacy would prove difficult

to create, implement or accomplish. The entry of text is another formidable limitation, forcing

teachers to design assignments that require limited to no data entry by the student, as the

dexterity needed to enter any significant amount of information on the small partial or complete

Qwerty keyboard is problematic. The last major physical barrier mobile learning must consider

is that these devices require a significant network to operate on. In Canada our "mobile

infrastructure is still under development" (Ally & Laughton, 2006). If students are unable to

access the material, what is the point of using mobile devices within any model of instruction.

These management nightmares may cause educators to rethink or abandon the mobile learning

approach entirely, in favor of pedagogies that are time tested. However, as new technologies and

advancements are introduced, these momentary hurdles will be overcome paving the way for

mobile learning to become an integral part of distributed learning.

Even though the criticisms of mobile learning appears daunting, this form of content

delivery has the potential to enhance and take distributed learning to the next level in multiple

environments. Various educational institutions have realized this potential, and have begun to

embrace the gold rush of opportunities provided by mobile devices. "The Huerfano School

District Re-1 School Board has approved cell phone and iPod use at John Mall High School in

Walsenburg" (Aubry, 2010). This new policy allows students to utilize their mobile devices

within a monitored classroom setting. This forward thinking policy has created mobile and

distributed learning environments in a district historically weak with technology. Students are

now able to access the Internet to answer questions, create video footage of class content that can

be easily shared online for further discussion, and review specific course content before, during,

and after class. At the university level, institutions such as Abilene Christian University are
experimenting with the use of mobile technology to enhance the educational experience of their

student body. ACU's pilot program gave 1000 freshman students either an iTouch or iPhone to

help with their educational studies. These devices were used to "reach each student by providing

instruction in multiple media's inside and outside the traditional classroom" (Abilene Christian

Univeristy, 2009), "allowing for multiple forms of contact within the class, as well as providing

constant and in depth instructor feedback, including information regarding course deadlines"

(Abilene Christian Univeristy, 2009), and finally allowing for "non-linear engagement with

learning materials" (Abilene Christian Univeristy, 2009). To ensure this continued and improved

use of mobile devices, ACU has commissioned various studies to research this initiative, and to

provide guidance on the development of best practices for their university. The power of mobile

learning has just begun to be tapped into by schools at all levels, and already it is easy to see that

this form of content delivery melds nicely with the foundational ideas of distributed learning.

Even with its early success, mobile learning needs to take advantage of research

exploring and developing resources that utilize game play. Project mGBL has identified that

content is better "memorized in a playful situation than a formal situation" (evolarisnextlevel,

2008). If mobile learning were to enhance the delivery of their content through the use of

interactive games, student engagement in their own learning would be at a level not seen since

the release of "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego" in 1985. Mobile learning has also

begun to explore the real possibility of augmented realities, a combination of virtual and real

worlds with learning content that is immersive and highly interactive. The potential of this new

learning medium can be visualized through "Augmented (hyper)Reality: Domestic Robocop"

(Matsuda, 2010). Similar efforts that allow humans to access the power of their mobile device in

new and unique situations are also currently under development. The video titled "TED sixth
sense technology" (mobileUncle, 2009) provides a glimpse into the future of such a device,

showing how students could create an interactive learning environment regardless of their

physical location. Even though both videos presented are not strictly educational in nature, the

power to virtually manipulate and access information, including the ability to create mobile

distributed learning environments at will is enormous. However, before any of this occurs, a

mobile learning theory must be developed in order to allow for the creation of specific criteria to

select and use various technologies to enhance distributed learning environments.

On January 27th, 2010, Apple introduced the iPad, regardless of initial skepticism, this

device will provide many solutions to the criticisms faced by current mobile devices, and may be

the first step towards achieving the almost mythical Dynabook. First off, the iPad will have a 9.7

inch screen, reducing the potential for eye strain due to inappropriate content formatting, this

device also contains a touch screen keyboard, allowing for easier entry of text and the

exploration and creation of more elaborate assignments within all subject areas. The iPad will

also eliminate infrastructure issues, as this is an unlocked device that will allow students to

connect online using Wi-Fi and various 3G networks. This device, along with the iTouch and

iPhone, provides an almost complete mobile learning package, which takes into account various

educational, technical, and environmental requirements necessary for a student to properly

participate within a fully virtual distributed learning environment. However, before complete

implementation, more research needs to be conducted to fully understand the impact that Apple

and its multiple devices are currently and will have on mobile and distributed learning.

Now that we have explored the past and the present, as well as both the positive's and

negatives of mobile learning, we should briefly explore its potential future. At this point in time,
the most enticing concept is known as the History Sheet, this product aims to "make the

intangible, tangible, provide real-time, interactive, exploratory overlay of information, images,

and re-enactments over the real world" (Beale, 2007). This possible future for mobile learning

would take interaction within an educational environment to an almost complete immersive and

interactive level, allowing the device to "act as the prime focus for attention, drawing on both the

real and technological" (Beale, 2007), an experience that would overcome current technological

and physical distractions. However, at this time there exists no specific paradigm for the

interaction necessary to utilize this device, or the research and development to produce the

technology that would allow this vision to take form. Regardless, one must remember that the

importance is in the dream of creating a better education for all.

 References

Abilene Christian University. (2009). Mobile experimentation. [Video File] Retrieved from

http://www.acu.edu/technology/mobilelearning/video/index.html

Abilene Christian University. (2009). Mobile collaboration. [Video File] Retrieved from

http://www.acu.edu/technology/mobilelearning/video/index.html

Abilene Christian University. (2009). Mobile engagement. [Video File] Retrieved from

http://www.acu.edu/technology/mobilelearning/video/index.html

Ally, M., Laughton, S., (2006, August 03). M-learning in canada. Retrieved from

www.utm.utoronto.ca/~w3itl/mobile_learning_canada_final_submission.pdf

Aubry, J., (2010, February 01). Two new school policies: cell phones, iPods okay in classroom.

KKTV.com. Retrieved from http://www.kktv.com

Beale, R., (2007) How to enhance the experience without interfering with it?. In Big issues in

mobile learning. (pp.7-11) Retrieved from

www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/BIG_ISSUES_REPORT_PUBLISHED.pdf

evolarisnextlevel. (2008, November 19). mGBL. [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsGJeqU1Y6w

Knight, J., (2006). Mobile learning 2.0. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from:

http://pics.jmlnet.com/MobileLearning2.0.ppt

Matsuda, K., (2010, January 06). Augmented (hyper)Reality: Domestic Robocop.

[Video file]. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/8569187

Maxwell, J. W., (2006). Tracing the dynabook: a student of technocultural transformations.

Retrieved from http://thinkubator.ccsp.sfu.ca/Dynabook/dissertation

Mobile learning and itunes u. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.apple.com/education/mobile-learning

mobileUncle. ( 2009, March 11) TED sixth sense technology. [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUdDhWfpqxg

Plant, S., (2001) On the mobile: the effects of mobile telephones on social and individual life.

Retrieved from www.motorola.com/mot/doc/0/234_MotDoc.pdf

Schuler, C. (2009). Pockets of potential: using mobile technologies to promote children’s

learning. Retrieved from www.joanganzcooneycenter.org/pdf/pockets_of_potential.pdf

Sharples, M. (2007). A short history of mobile learning and some issues to consider. [Slideshare

slides]. Retrieved from Slideshare Site: http://www.slideshare.net/sharplem/history-of-

mobile-learning-mlearn-2007-doctoral-consortium-oct-2007

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., Vavoula, G., (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age (pre-print).

Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.126.1165&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Winters, N., (2007) What is mobile learning. In Big issues in mobile learning. (pp.7-11)

Retrieved from

www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/BIG_ISSUES_REPORT_PUBLISHED.pdf