Download to read offline
Uploaded byMike Sharples
20 years of mobile learning - what have we learned?
- Mobile learning has progressed from early concepts like the Dynabook in the 1970s to worldwide projects implementing learning across physical and digital contexts. - Early studies found mobile organisers were occasionally useful for students but did not necessarily improve learning, and students preferred integration with existing tools. - Later projects engaged learners in context-aware inquiry across museums, classrooms, and online, evaluating impact at micro, meso, and macro levels. - Personal inquiry platforms now support citizen science investigations on mobile devices at massive scales, but challenges remain in curriculum integration and teacher support for innovative pedagogies.
More Related Content
Similar to 20 years of mobile learning - what have we learned?
More from Mike Sharples
20 years of mobile learning - what have we learned?
- 1. Mike Sharples Institute ofEducational Technology The Open University www.mikesharples.org 20 years of mobile learning What have we learned? @sharplm
- 2. Reflections on 20years of mobile learning research projects
- 3. 20 years ofmobile learning Sharples, M. (2000). The Design of Personal Mobile Technologies for Lifelong Learning. Computers and Education, 34, 177-193
- 4. Kay, A., &Goldberg, A. (1977). Personal Dynamic Media. IEEE Computer, 10(3), 31-41. Xerox PARC Dynabook Concept for mobile learning device in early 1970s
- 5. Student project atthe University of Birmingham Implemented Dynabook concept with available technology Supported personal, mobile, lifelong learning Designed mockups and working prototypes World’s first public demo of a multimedia smartphone, on BBC TV Handler 1998-1999 Personal tool for lifelong learning
- 6. highly portable whereverthe user needs to learn; individual adapting to the learner’s abilities unobtrusive so the learner can capture situations without the technology interfering available anywhere, to enable communication with teachers, experts and peers; adaptable to the learner's evolving skills and knowledge; persistent to manage learning throughout a lifetime useful for everyday communication, reference, work and learning intuitive for people with no previous experience of the technology Handler Personal tool for lifelong learning Design aims (Sharples, 2000). Technology for lifelong learning should be:
- 7. Technology existed (justabout) in 1998 to build usable mobile learning devices There is a good alignment of mobile technology with personalised lifelong learning What did we learn?
- 8. Handheld device (wirelessPDA) Learning organiser software for university students Time manager Course navigator and documents Communication (email, messenger) Concept mapping tools 17 Masters students for 1 year (2002-3) Aims (Corlett et al. 2005): - discover whether students benefitted from an integrated mobile learning organiser - find which tools have most value - explore patterns of use Student learning organiser, 2002 Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Chan, T., Bull, S. (2005) Evaluation of a Mobile Learning Organiser for University Students, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, pp. 162-170. Holme, O. and Sharples, M. (2002) Implementing a Student Learning Organiser on the Pocket PC Platform. Proceedings of European Workshop on Mobile and Contextual Learning, Birmingham, UK, p.41-44.
- 9. Student Learning Organiserwas occasionally useful, but it didn’t improve their learning Wireless connection essential Students didn’t need a dedicated learning organiser They wanted integration with their current office and social tools What did we learn?
- 10. Worldwide European-led project,€7.4 million funding 24 partner organisations across Europe, Israel, US, Australia Developed technology and services for mobile learning Focus on learning outside the classroom Scenarios Art gallery, First aid, Work-based MBA course MOBILearn 2002-2004 Lonsale, P., Baber, C., Sharples, M., Byrne, W., Arvanitis, T.N. & Beale, R. (2004) Context Awareness for MOBIlearn: Creating an engaging learning experience in an art museum. In J. Attewell and C. Savill-Smith (eds.) Mobile Learning Anytime Everywhere: A Book of Papers from MLEARN 2004. London: Learning and Skills Development Agency, pp. 115-118. OMAF systems architecture for MOBIlearn
- 11. To design anopen service-based architecture for mobile learning that included: Content management Context awareness Collaboration Mobile multimedia Adaptive interface Demonstrate learning effectiveness in museums including Uffizi Gallery, Florence and Nottingham Castle Museum Gallery MOBIlearn Research aims:
- 12. Context and mobilelearning Context is a fundamental construct to understand learning outside the classroom Learn in context Learners construct situated knowledge Learn through context Learners create educative contexts by interacting with technology, surroundings, objects, people Learn about context Learners explore their location Learn despite context Learning continues despite changes to context Sharples, M. (2015) Making sense of context for mobile learning. In J. Traxler & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Mobile Learning: The Next Generation. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 140-153.
- 13. High interaction withcontext Low interaction with context High learner awareness of context Learning through context Learning about context Learning in context Learning despite context Low awareness of context
- 14. It’s the learnerthat’s mobile Need for a flexible, modular, blended, system How learning is interwoven with everyday life Mobile learning can both complement and conflict with formal education Context is constructed by learners through movement and interaction Ethical issues: privacy, ownership What did we learn?
- 15. How can wemake school trips to museums or heritage centres more engaging and educative? Learning through guided inquiry and crossover learning Investigation starts in the classroom guided by the teacher, continues in the museum and online, then developed and shared back in the classroom Students as media makers and curators MyArtSpace 2005-2007 Connecting learning in classroom and museum
- 16. Service on mobilephones that automatically sends each activity (situated presentation, audio recording, photo, note) to student’s personal web area Combines physical space (museum, classroom) virtual space (online store and gallery) personal space (mobile phones) Museum test sites Urbis (Manchester) The D-Day Museum (Portsmouth) The Study Gallery of Modern Art (Poole) About 3000 children during 2006 MyArtSpace 2005-2007
- 17. Micro: User experience Meso:Pedagogy Macro: Practice 3-level Evaluation At each level 1. What was supposed to happen Pre-interviews with stakeholders (teachers, students, museum educators) Documents provided to support the experience 2. What actually happened Observer notes and video capture Post-experience focus groups Student content & interaction data 3. Differences between 1 & 2 Reflective interviews with stakeholders Critical incident analysis
- 18. Good design: keepit simple Single button press, automatically sent to personal website Focus on the learning Pedagogy-led design Teacher development Need to prepare the teachers for a new experience Get the business model right Everyone should gain Who pays: Schools? Museums? Students and parents? What did we learn?
- 19. PEDAGOGY INCLUDING LEARNING PROCESSES ANDOUTCOMES Pedagogy-led design Assessing Browsing Case-based Collaborative Construction Conversation Cross-context Delivered Embodied Game-based Inquiry-driven Networked Performative Problem-solving Reflective Simulation
- 20. Guided active learningthat starts by asking big questions Personally-meaningful investigations Connects learning in classrooms, home and outdoors nQuire 2007-2020 Personal inquiry learning in multiple settings Sharples, M., Scanlon, E., Ainsworth, S., Anastopoulou, S., Collins, T., Crook, C., Jones, A., Kerawalla, L., Littleton, K., Mulholland, P. & O’Malley, C. (2015). Personal Inquiry: Orchestrating Science Investigations Within and Beyond the Classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 308-341.
- 21. Personal inquiry learning Studentscarry out investigations that are personally meaningful and relevant to their everyday lives Use the nQuire platform to manage the inquiry, collect data and share results
- 22. Citizen inquiry Large-scale inquiry-ledinvestigations into wellbeing and environment citizen science + collaborative inquiry learning
- 23. ‘Explore myself andmy world’ Mobile first design Confidential ‘survey’ missions Anonymous or registered users Open ‘social’ missions with discussion Personalised feedback Secure data Consent forms Publication of findings Collaboration between OU and BBC nQuire: an open platform for personal and citizen inquiry www.nquire.org.uk
- 24. Noise map What kindof noisy environments make studying difficult? www.nquire.org.uk ‘Social mission’ with audio data from mobile devices, shared and discussed
- 25. Gardenwatch Citizen investigation ofUK gardens Partnership of Open University, BBC, British Trust for Ornithology Prime time TV, every evening for four weeks 240,000 contributions 65% on mobile devices Mobile learning at massive scale
- 26. Build and runnew nQuire missions
- 27. Guided personal inquiryis a powerful pedagogy Mobile devices as scientific tools Finding a good ‘big question’ is difficult Classroom lesson to share data is a challenge Too-personal inquiry (e.g. food diary) Citizen inquiry works at big scale What did we learn?
- 28. Focus on themobility of learning, not just the device Theories of learning for a mobile world Context created through interaction How to evaluate learning within and across locations Importance of teacher development and preparation How to evaluate at multiple levels, in many locations, for all stakeholders How to design and implement mobile learning at big scale What we know now that we didn’t know 20 years ago
- 29. How to integratemobile learning into the school curriculum How to support mobile learning in developing countries How to support teachers in innovative mobile pedagogy How to design personal technology for lifelong learning (objective of the original HandLer project) What we still don’t know Four challenges for the future
- 30.