Directory

1. What is this all about?
2. What is mLearning?
3. mLearning in the grand scheme of things
4. So what devices are mobile? And how many do I need?
5. Where do mobile devices and mLearning stand in relation to each other?
6. Mobile devices as on-the-go support

Mobile devices as on-the-go support

For this post I would like to turn to the down-to-earth matter of actually being productive on-the-go with your favourite instagramming and podcast listening device. This will include ways of mobile device use for learning and teaching purposes on the go. I will also touch on design and media extensions standardisation because these variables unavoidably either impede or enhance one's experience with the device. 

Again, a couple of to keep in mind regarding the nature of mLearning and teaching. Activities are short in time, sporadic in pattern and typically do not require high levels of concentration. The learning can constitute supplementary activities for an online or blended course or be undertaken of learner's own accord. Learning and learning-related activities can occur either in e-learning applications, such as Blackboard Mobile, native to the student's learning environment or in numerous third-party apps. 

As an example, consider the following list Quinn (2011) offers of his learning and learning-related activities that can be performed on a mobile device and coincide with mLearning principles:

• Check my calendar for availability, and add new events to it. 

• Put in my commitments as tasks. 

• Jot down notes as things occur, and refer to notes with useful frameworks. 

• Capture or reference contact details. 

• Take pictures of events, and refer to diagrams and images I save on my device. 

• Create diagrams to capture my understanding. 

• Use a browser to look up answers to questions and find information. 

• Use a variety of applications to access information “in the moment” (such as checking train schedules). 

• Use maps and map-linked applications to find things nearby and get directions. 

• Use a variety of applications to communicate with people with Twitter, Facebook, and more. 

• Store documents to be read. 

Ones I do not use so much, whether due to the lack on my device, or my own personal preferences, include: 

• Listen to audio files or watch videos. 

• Capture audio and/or video of interviews or events. 

• Augment the view through the camera with additional information depending on where I face. 

The goal of these activities is engage with the problem at hand and later develop your thoughts on a lagers device with more conventional and perhaps convenient keyboard. They are supposed to support your performance by being available for smaller momentary needs, not substitute it. As Quinn himself points out, these activities do not include completing formal courses assignments, but they do include supplementary tasks that contribute to completing of these assignments.  Thus, Quinn's areas of mobile device usage can be summarised as: time and location management, information collection and processing, internet browsing, communication/collaboration and, to a smaller degree, knowledge creation, combining, editing, and sharing. 

Teachers and students have to do all these thing on a daily basis. Familiarity with few basic design principles for small spaces could be beneficial for data recording, editing and knowledge production. In fact, these guidelines should also be applied to materials created on desktop computers if they are to follow current trends in information presentation for digital natives. As Quinn puts it:"our existing courses are bloated. And the principles that work for mobile delivery should also be seen in practice in non-mobile courses" (2011). So, the principles are these (loosely adapted from Quinn, 2011):

• cut the word count and think about phrase layout. If bullet points, incomplete sentences, different fonts and gaps make sense, use them. 
• work with colour. Use highlights and background colours to identify relationships between items.
• when producing audio, use full sentences and do not be afraid to be repetitive, especially if it the only medium.
• for graphics and video, use simpler designs and distinguishable colours.
• use combinations of media but beware of viewer's cognitive overload 
• think of how content is going to look and be edited on different devices (Wang & Shen, 2012). Avoid rigid formats, such as PDFs, when you have control over output file extensions.

Another useful way to think about mobile content design principles is proposed by Mayer and Moreno (2005):

• Coherence: eliminate extraneous content to promote coherence.
• Signaling: cue the reader on how to process information.
• Spatial contiguity: align printed words near graphics.
• Cognitive redundancy: avoid using the same stream for printed and spoken words.
• Temporal contiguity: present narration, keyword labels and animation together.

To put it simply, less is more and combining media is better that relying on just one. If learners are exposed to materials created using these principles, they might be inclined to adapt them and continue using them outside formal education, thus spreading further good practices of content design  that simplifies workflow. 

References: 

Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2005). A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: implications for design principles. Retrieved from http://www.unm.edu/~moreno/PDFS/chi.pdf

 Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing mLearning : Tapping into the mobile revolution for organizational performance. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. 

 Wang, M., & Shen, R. (2012). Message design for mobile learning: Learning theories, human cognition and design principles. British Journal Of Educational Technology, 43(4), 561-575.

What is mLearning?

The recognition of the vast educational opportunities presented by new technologies and the need to keep up with the pace of innovations have been voiced by a number of proponents of technological innovations in education. Here is just a couple of examples:

• "Things are moving faster: we have less time, there’s more information, we have fewer resources available, and we have more responsibility. In short, the demand is for increased performance. Couple that with the fact that we’re more mobile than ever, in meetings, visiting sites and people, at conferences, and we really need portable, personal performance improvement" (Quinn, 2011).
• "The only limits that exist on accessing education are those imposed by access to technology and by the availability of learning resources at the place where the persons interested to learn are, at the time they have available to learn" (Andronie & Andronie, 2014). 
• "Educators began to notice something different happening when they began to use tools like wikis and blogs in the classroom a couple of years ago. All of a sudden, instead of discussing pre-assigned topics with their classmates, students found themselves discussing a wide range of topics with peers worldwide" (Downes, 2005).
• "The lifelong learning is increasingly seen as a constant practice. Therefore, there is a great expectation about whether mobile technologies have the potential and feasibility to be used in lifelong learning systems in a large scale" (Negas & Ramos, 2011).

These concerns found their realisation in the emergence of a subtype of eLearning, mLearning. Just as eLearning, the concept of mLearning came to cover a number of connected but different things for different people, depending on their goals, background and overall attitude towards technology in education. To create the most comprehensive picture, it makes sense to look at several definitions (emphasis added): 

• "The term “mobile learning” can be applied to any learning activity that utilizes a mobile device (defined here as smartphone, tablet, or cell phone), from a simple text message to a sophisticated augmented reality experience" (Teachingcommons).
• "Mobile learning, or m-learning, can be any educational interaction delivered through mobile technology and accessed at a student’s convenience from any location" (Ormrod, 2012).
• "Mobile learning, as the intersection of online learning and mobile computing, promises the integral access to applications that support learning anywhere and anytime. Only the employment of specific types of technology differentiates mobile learning from other forms of learning. Namely, mLearning is learning that takes place via wireless devices, for example in the use of mobile phones, personal digital assistants or laptop computers." (Granič, Čukušič, & Walker, 2009).

The first two definitions are rather straightforward and, thus, do not offer much to be discussed. They approach mLearning as a combination of two elements: m, meaning 'utilising mobile devices and benefits that come with them, such as internet access, camera, microphone and applications for input processing' and learning, meaning 'learning activities performed on that mobile device'.  The third definition concurs with the previous ones in key points; however, it also goes further and makes two statements, one of which seems to be quite valid and another one less so. 

Firstly, Granič et al. (2009) eliminate a lot of fluff by stating that mLearning deserves a separate name only because it makes use of mobile technology that was previously unavailable to an ordinary user. What, it would seem, she does here is implying that no special pedagogical methodology needs to be developed here because all teaching has to 

appropriate new ways of information delivery and knowledge creation, which correspond with current students' needs and patterns of information consumption and communication. This approach is important because renders unnecessary some of the terminology that has sprung up around the topic. Such terms as 'ubiquitous learning' (ulearning) or 'workflow learning' (Downes, 2005), while undoubtedly significant in the eyes of their creators, proliferate confusion and delay the realisation changes need to be holistic, not patch up whatever holes technological innovations make the education theory of the day.

Secondly, Granič et al. (2009) list devices that fall into the 'mobile' category. This matter will be dealt with in more detail in later posts. At this point, it is enough to say that today laptops can hardly be considered mobile devices for two reasons: technology is becoming smaller and more powerful. An obvious example is the race of smartphone producers for thinner phones with larger memory chips and RAMs and more camera lenses. The news of ever-thinner devices seem to attract a fare share of attention: at the moment of writing, Vivo is in the lead. Today, the essential criterion for device mobility is that it should fit in the pocket or a small handbag and could be taken out and held comfortably in one palm in any place, especially a crowded one. A 13'' laptop hardly fits this definition. 

Cochrane (2014) has approached the definition differently. He also uses a smartphone as an entry point but puts more emphasis on learning as a process of production, not only reception on the part of learner.

(Source: Cochrane, T. D. (2014). Critical success factors for transforming pedagogy with mobile Web 2.0. British Journal Of Educational Technology, 45(1), 65-82.)

Thus, a smartphone for education purposes is conceived in the same way as for everyday use: people receive/record information, process/internalise it and, if necessary, create something new with it. This seems so natural and yet, it is perceived as innovative in education. The learning process and outcomes may benefit from appropriating of this dynamic because it could make learning fit into a daily routine, not interrupt it. 

Further, there appears to be a set of characteristics, both positive and negative, that is ascribed to mLearning at its current stage. Sometimes they coincide with eLearning, and sometimes they are unique to mLearning (a few of these have been discussed above, emphasis added): 

• "ubiquity and unique capabilities of mobile devices to make course materials available to students wherever they are, and to create new kinds of learning experiences... [and] opportunities for students to take [them] with them into the world" (Teachingcommons).
• "the user has to participate actively. It requires students to think about what they are doing as opposed to passively receiving information from the teacher, as in some traditional teaching methods" (Granič, Čukušič, & Walker, 2009).
• "development of independent learning skills and ability to apply knowledge, so preparing students for future careers" (Granič, Čukušič, & Walker, 2009).
• "problem-solving and enquiry based learning, which contribute to the development of qualities like critical thinking and problem-solving" (Granič, Čukušič, & Walker, 2009).
• "foster student engagement and offer opportunities to make learning integral to daily life" through "a variety of devices, many of which are ubiquitous in the lives of students" (Ormrod, 2012).
• "'Just-in-time', or 'on demand' learning is perfect for mLearning, as mobile or field-based employees [or students] will more often than not have their devices on them at the time they need the information, removing the locational restrictions that any potential pre-existing physical or computer-based job tools may have" (Ormrod, 2012).
• "The way mobile devices are used for learning must be designed to be similar to how users do other tasks on their phones – through a short burst of activity, rather than a drawn-out experience. Having the information simply available is not enough, it needs to be quickly accessible" (Ormrod, 2012).
• "What is needed is a sound and compelling pedagogy-driven approach for embedding ICT in learning and teaching" (Granič, Čukušič, & Walker, 2009).
• "Hardware for mobile learning represents a wide range of platforms, screen sizes, and functionality, and no clear standards exist for development that address all of the tools available. As a result, colleges and universities can find infrastructure issues tricky to resolve" (Ormrod, 2012 & 'mobile apps for learning' 2010).

Thus, to summarise, mLearning emphasises knowledge production and collaboration. It primarily involves supplementary activities that take place at learner's convenience within short temporal frames. Information is provided in small on-demand batches through various media by the means of formal and informal resources. mLearning should aim to be ubiquitous, which in practice means making content editable, synchronizable with lager systems, downloadable, shareable and available on desktop. 

References:

7 things you should know about mobile apps for learning. (2010). Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7060.pdf

Andronie, M., & Andronie, M. (2014). Information and communication technologies (ICT) used for education and training. Contemporary Readings In Law & Social Justice, 6(1), 378-386.

Cochrane, T. D. (2014). Critical success factors for transforming pedagogy with mobile Web 2.0. British Journal Of Educational Technology, 45(1), 65-82. 

Downes, S. (2005). E-Learning 2.0. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1104968

Granič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

Negas, M. C., & Ramos, P. (2011). Critical Factors in the use of Mobile Learning by "Digital Natives" on Portuguese Teaching. Proceedings Of The European Conference On 

Information Management & Evaluation, 333-340.
Ormrod, N. (2012). demystifying mLearning. Human Resources Magazine, 16(6), 16-17.

Teaching commons. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://teachingcommons.depaul.edu/Technology/moli.html#whatis

Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing MLearning : Tapping Into the Mobile Revolution for Organizational Performance. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Where do mobile devices and mLearning stand in relation to each other?

The influence of smartphones on our life was felt so profoundly when they first came about that a new learning model was created just to account for these devices in the learning and teaching. In less than 10 years smartphones and devices they inspired, namely tables, hybrid laptop and recently phablets (something cringes in me every time I see, type or pronounce this word, but it seems like it is here to stay), changed the patterns of information consumption, knowledge production and sharing and collaboration. Life seems to be moving even faster now than it was at the turn of millennia: a traffic jam or a long commute is no longer an excuse to neglect work responsibilities. In education theory and practice changes were already underway because of the reevaluation of the place, advantages and disadvantages of eLearning. What, it would seem, mobile technology did was it gave a push to adapt teaching even further to meet the market demands of the 21 century. To give just one example, on top of the list of new sought after skills now is networking, which was able to develop to its current level only thanks to mobile devices ubiquity. 

So, it appears necessary to have a closer look at what makes mobile devices was so important for enhancing learning and teaching experience. When going through research on the topic, a few main features can be identified that the researchers typically agree on:

• Learning continues beyond the classroom (Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience, 2009; Dublin Descriptors, 2005). 
• Quick content delivery, 
• enhanced support time in project-based group work, 
• a higher level of student engagement in learning-related activities within a multitude of diverse physical locations
• and enhanced availability and accessibility of information (Clough, Jones, McAndrew & Scanlon, 2007; Cowie et al., 2009; Falaki et al., 2010). 
• New ways of accessing and sharing knowledge (Saylor, 2012; Wong & Looi, 2011). 

Furthermore, Quinn (2011) provides a comprehensive review of mobile device features and named it 5C (emphases added):

• Content

"One of the common uses of mobile devices is access to media. Regardless of whether the content is dynamic, such as audio or video, or static, such as graphics, photos, and text, having information available on demand can be valuable."

• Capture

"In addition to presenting information, a second possibility is capturing information. Information can be captured in a mobile device by sensors, such as a microphone or camera, and also by text entry. Other sensors can be used for data capture as well, such as via a GPS. For instance, a performance can be videotaped, notes about a situation can be taken, or contextual data can be measured."

• Compute 

"Many times, individuals are not good at a variety of types of computation, but digital processors can be programmed to be. As a consequence, the combination of individual plus processor is more effective. Individuals can capture data and enter it, and the device can provide processing to transform that information into more relevant data."

• Communicate 

"One of the undervalued opportunities with mobile devices is the opportunity to connect with others, to communicate. Layers on top of these channels are also emerging as social networking. Applications currently exist on most smartphones for the most popular social networks: Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. "            Networking"While synching with a desktop was a critical step for mobile devices to really succeed, creating a unified information environment, the original mechanism was through a physical cable and so updates were only possible when the device was next to the computer. "

• Combinations 

"You could think of this as the fifth C, combinations of the first four elements. Augmented reality ... mixes capture of local context by sensors with compute to add information onto the existing information. Similarly, using capture to share the current context with peers or experts to collaborate mixes capture with communicate."

Unlike the authors cited above, Quinn does not make a difference between learning that happens in and outside of classroom. Rather, he perceives the role of mobile devices as simply being ubiquitously present and adaptable to all learning situations. 

With regards to software aspects of 'networking', it is worth noting that with the spread of cloud services, wireless synchronisation became a reality for many mobile devices. Synchronisation and updates can now occur on the level of a single app or a whole system. 

What new abilities of mobile devices brought home was the realisation that, in the world where such technology is available, one has to start think, working and communicating differently in order to take full advantage of it. According to Granič et al. (2009), in learning, incorporation of mobile devices results in these positive changes in learner behaviour:

• mLearning encourages student’s independent thinking through making observations and connections in interaction with environment. It renders traditional passive reception of information ineffective and outdated. 
• It allows to actively engage in the learning process by taking real life data or study materials and making them one's own 
• It encourages collaboration with fellow students.
• It creates individual experiences and encourages close analysis of smaller pieces information at student own pace and wish.
• Lastly, gives students the feeling of independence and empowerment by allowing to concentrate on topics that they find interesting. 

The hope, of course, is that the learner can take these skill out the real world with them and continue operate with mobile devices in a natural and efficient manner. 

References:

Clough, G., Jones, A. C., McAndrew, P., & Scanlon, E. (2007). Informal learning with PDAs and smart phones. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 359-371. 

Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. (2009). Higher education in a Web 2.0 world. Bristol: JISC. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/ documents/publications/heweb20rptv1.pdf

Cowie, J., Cairns, D., Blunn, M., Wilson, C., Pollard, E., & Davidson, D. (2009). A mobile knowledge management and decision support tool for soil analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 29(5), 397-406. 

Dublin Descriptors. (2005). Shared “Dublin” descriptors for the bachelor ́s, master ́s and doctoral awards. Draft 1.31 working document on JQI meeting in Dublin, 2004PC. 

Falaki, H., Mahajan, R., Kandula, S., Lymberopoulos, D., Govindan, R., & Estrin, D. (2010). Diversity in Smartphone usage. MobiSys 2010: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services, 179-194. 

Granič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing MLearning : Tapping Into the Mobile Revolution forranič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

Saylor, M. (2012). The mobile wave: How mobile intelligence will change everything. New York, NY: Vanguard Press. 

Wong, L. H., & Looi, C. K. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2364-2381. 

So what devices are mobile? And how many do I need?

Laptop, hybrid laptop, tablet, eRreader, phablet, smartphone and iPod. And this is by far not a full list. Thus the question arises what makes a device mobile? Certainly, all of them are easily portable because they typically do not weigh more than 3 kilograms or measure more than 15''. But is it enough to call all of them mobile?

 

Without launching into long and overly excited descriptions of features of these marvels of innovative thought, this post will try to pinpoint what makes a device mobile. 

The nature of mLearning (excluding the aspect of it that overlaps with blended learning) is such that it could be summarised as 'on-the-go'. Information is consumed in small doses over short and irregular time periods and knowledge production does not require high levels of concentration (Quinn, 2011).  Learning and teaching happens at one's convenience in any situation that can be described as intermission. For example, while commuting or waiting for an appointment. These intervals are typically and quite comfortably filled in by gaming or scrolling news feeds and social media. Thus, learning activities, if they are to fit into this pattern, should be of similar nature. The examples often provided are flashcards, educational games, jotting down ideas that can be later developed at the comfort on one's desk or collaboration. Another application of mobile devices is collection of real-life data and it's immediate editing and sharing. Quinn (2011) offers the following brief summary of what constitutes a mobile device:

"A subset of the laptop, however, can be considered a mobile device. Tablet computers are typically run with laptop-style processors and sport operating systems that are laptop-scale but with special stylus-capable interfaces instead of standard keyboards. They are also typically both thinner and lighter than laptops. Tablets have been used in medical situations, where doctors carry them around and use the interface to access custom applications for medical information, engineering, and aviation, among other things. ...
These devices can differ on a variety of dimensions. They can take a wide variety of form factors, have a variety of different ways to communicate with the digital world and with users, and may incorporate a variety of ways of sensing the non-digital world, but all share the portable processor and communication with the digital world and the user."

However, it is worth to go deeper and investigate what a device has to have in order to perform on par with the requirements above. Ideally, is should have the following features: 

• cellular and/or wireless internet access and bluetooth
• Camera and microphone 
• Speakers and headphones jack
• Display between 4" and 10''
• Weight up to 0,7 kg
• Touchscreen
• Enough storage space and RAM to store and process data (This is indeed rather unspecific, but tech reviews are outside the scope of this post, and the number of memory chips and processors is so big that it would require substantial time investments to provide a comprehensive review. Moreover, most of popular devices these days are equipped with powerful enough hardware not to have a lot of performance issues.)
• Software to collect, process and share data. Ideally, should be sychronizable with Cloud services.

Furthermore:

• It should fit in one hand and be navigable with a thumb or at least be comfortably held in one hand and worked on with another. 

In fact, it seems that this last point represents one of the key features that make a device mobile. It needs to be small and light enough to be comfortably held for longer periods of time in various situations, especially ones when it is impossible to sit down. For example, when standing in line or on public transport. 

The issue of comfort in possibly not so comfortable situations tags along all of the above points. The device needs to allow for easy audio and, especially, video recording and playing (usually, this is achieved by equipping a device with 2 cameras, one on the back and one on the front). The screen needs to be large but still conform to the one-hand rule. The content should be shareable without the need to for devices to be in proximity of each other or a cable. 

Thus, 

• laptops do not make the cut. 
• Hybrid laptops can be considered mobile when they are used separately from the keyboard.
• iPods and other audio players are somewhat more complicated. They seem to have become somewhat redundant today due to ever increasing storage capacity and battery lives of smartphones, phablets and tablets. Devices similar to iPod Touch may still have a niche and barely qualify as mobile because of possibilities of internet access, video and audio recording and data storage, processing and sharing. iPod Touch has been, indeed, described as an iPhone that does not ring. It also has an advantage of price over more expensive smartphones, but it brings up a question of multiplication of mobile devices, which is dealt with later on.
• eRearders. For all intents and purposes, an eReader is not a mobile device because it is so purpose specific, while a mobile device has to be versatile. Even if it has internet access, it lacks the software to process and share text on a level expected of a mobile device, leave alone do anything else. This does not mean, however, that it has no future in learning. Its case is similar to that of iPod and also dealt with later on.
• Smartphones and tablets, quite obviously, represent the epitome of mobile devices. The requirements specified above seemed unrealistic even 5 years ago when iPhone 3G came out, and it was already a huge leap compared to 2007 when the first iPhone was introduced. Today, they are a prerequisite for a middle-of-the-road smartphone available for the average price of $314 (Hamblen, 2014).

But again, the rate of progress is so fast and the mobile device market is so unpredictable that any new intermediate device might catch up and undermine all the above suppositions. For example, Apple, who has held a trendsetter position in the digital world for a while now, is rumoured to come out with a larger iPad in 2015; in fact, it might be as large as 12.7'', but it will not be a hybrid laptop (Macworld, 2014). 

This brings to light a larger discrepancy between mLearning (or any new learning model) theory and practice. The theory is reactive to practices that happen naturally in the real world. It has to come up with new branches and new approaches to incorporate what is already happening in the world into itself. On the one hand, it shows its flexibility, but on the other hand, it shows its inaptitude. In natural sciences when faced with contradicting theories, we accept as true the one that can account for more facts of the reality. Similarly, educational theory might be argued to need a more comprehensive model that would be applicable to practice regardless of the device used or a situation where learning/teaching occurs. This, of course, would be long-term goal. In the meantime, stakeholders have to deal with reality at hand in the most efficient way possible, which is exactly the purpose of the present discourse. 

Now, returning to the question of complimentarily of mobile devices. The most logical thing would seem to be to have one mobile device, albeit on the expensive side, that would be able to perform all necessary support all social and educational activities. It is particularly relevant if learning is to become a part of daily routine even when outside of formal education institutions. If a learner has to carry around and reach for a different device than they normally would in order to learn, than it can be perceived as an interruption of workflow, not its natural continuation. In institutions that can afford to take this view, it has become known as BYOD. Indeed, why spend time and resources on a separate device when an app on an already exciting device can perform the same functions. If accessing, for example, a flashcard app is as simple as picking up a device that is in your pocket anyway, maybe it could alleviate the anxiety sometimes connected with learning as well as rituals some surround the whole process with (such as social network binges as breaks).  

An eReader, however, could be a valuable addition to one's gadget collection. It has an incomparably long battery life (around 2 weeks), is more sparing to the eyes than a tablet (especially if it uses electronic paper technology), is light and slim (compared to a 500-page book) and is an eco-conscious choice. Of course, the question of material retention read on a screen versus a book is a whole other matter. 

As for the iPod Touch and other audio players with internet access and lager touch screens, they make sense for mLearning as tradeoffs for those who do not wish to splurge on/cannot afford a smartphone or a tablet. The main point of owning one is access to software and cloud services. For example, iPod Touch retails for about $200, while iPhone 6 in the basic configuration is around $650. Yes, iPod Touch is less powerful, but it offers the access to the App Store with thousands of apps for learning, sharing data and collaboration. 

References:

iPad Pro (or iPad Plus) release date rumours, leaked images: New concept video of the iPad Pro. (2014, Dec 5). Retrieved from http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/ipad/bigger-screen-ipad-pro-release-date-rumours-leaked-images-photo-3492180/

Humble, M. (2014, May 29). Smartphone prices are dropping, and will continue to dip through '18. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/article/2489944/smartphones/smartphone-prices-are-dropping--and-will-continue-to-dip-through--18.html

Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing MLearning : Tapping Into the Mobile Revolution for Organizational Performance. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

mLearning in the grand scheme of things

In order to move on to challenges posed by implementation of mLearning, it is necessary to establish in what relationship to other elements of the learning paradigm does mLearning stand. Establishing a systematic relationship between these elements will allow to identify and better comprehend the challenges and possibly suggest solution paths. More importantly, the introduction of a new element into the system may help not only understand its nature but also to deepen the understanding of already present elements and even help solve some of the exciting issues thus balancing out the system. 

Probably the most logical way of thinking about mLearning is as of an extension of eLearning. Both are grounded in technology and both induced and continue to induce changes in the teaching/learning paradigm. Granič et al. (2009) suggest the following placement of mLearning in the system:

(Source: Granič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184.)

They propose to view the move from distance learning to electronic learning to mobile learning in terms of evolution (Granič, Čukušič & Walker, 2009). The evolutionary aspects are both innovations in information technology and subsequent changes in the educational theory aimed at incorporation of these innovations in order to accommodate new learner needs. 
This approach seems valid enough. However, such activities as the use of mobile devices in class for collaboration or immediate feedback does not fit anywhere in the figure. If the emphasis in the definition of mLearning is put on the presence of a mobile device and not on quick and sporadic access to fragmented information, than the following figure might be more suitable for identifying the place of mLearning:

Fig 1. mLearning in relation to other elements of the system.

Three notes should be made here with regards to the figure:

• definitions of elements present are numerous and varied and their validity is contestable depending on the goals of any given work. Here, the approach is rather straightforward: in blended learning the proportion of f2f knowledge transmission is higher than in eLearning. Distance learning is an overreaching frame that involves such higher-order activities as education administration through ICT; it may or may not be present in blended learning.
• technology-free traditional learning is not included because it becomes increasingly difficult to imagine an efficient classroom where no use of the ICT for educational purposes is made whatsoever by any of the stakeholders. So, this traditional model is subsumed by the blended learning model.
• blended learning partially overlaps with eLearning because it may or may not include activities more typical of an eLearning model.

Furthermore, Granič et al. (2009) view mLearning and online learning as two separate subcategories of eLearning. Online learning can be characterised by access to formal (such as LMS and VLE) and informal sources from a desktop/laptop computer, by longer periods of time taken to process the information and by work that requires more concentration and in-depth analysis. But than, mLearning could be suggested to overlap with online learning as well based on at least one of the characteristics: access to sources. Mobile devices today have enough power and screen size (consider iPhone 6+ as an example of another victim fallen to the phablet trend) to allow stakeholders to access information online while providing an experience similar to that of a desktop/laptop computer. This experience can be and often is enhanced by purpose-specific apps and by HTML-coded pages that adapt their layout according to the device they are accessed from. 
The distinction between mLearning and online learning is further blurred by intermediary devices, such as tablets. They allow to combine sporadic access patterns with the periods of longer concentration on the task thanks to, among other factors, the increased convenience of typing on a lager screen. It can be suggested that, in time, the need for the methodological distinction between mLearning and online learning may disappear. After all, simplification is one of the key elements of well-balanced working systems.  

mLearning stretches both left and right in the figure above to overlap with blended learning and eLearning thus establishing its ubiquitous presence in the same manner as smartphones/tablets are currently present in our lives. Indeed, if a smartphone/table is always with you anyway, it makes all the more sense to make use of it on all levels of the system; this notion is represented by the mLearning circle being superimposed on all other elements of the figure it has contact with.

References:

Granič, A., Čukušič, M., & Walker, R. (2009). mLearning in a Europe-wide network of schools. Educational Media International, 46(3), 167-184. 

What is this all about?

The learning process and its goals have to be reflective of the demands of the age. The age we have been living in for the past 20 odd years is commonly identified as the Information Age. 'Information' refers to the manyfold and still ongoing increase in storage capacity of electronic devices that allows for the accumulation of information and knowledge. The consequences for the learning process and its goals are numerous, but the ones relevant for this work are:

Information overload and the subsequent need to sieve out pertinent information,

• which leads to the change in information consumption making it more dosed, fragmented, sporadic and expected to be provided on-demand (Downes, 2005). This induces fundamental changes in the learning materials design and provision patterns. 

Information overload is followed by habitual media overload when information is received simultaneously through two or even three channels, e.g., watching a TV while texting and having a conversation,

• which opens new opportunities for knowledge transmission through employment of various media or, even better, through a combination of media. 

Finally, the nature of the Information Age is such that constant presence online and a tendency for oversharing of non-pertinent and/or personal information have become a common denominator for a majority of digital natives. At first glance, one might exclaim 'The horror! The horror!' to ubiquitous and incessant twitting, status updating and snapchating. There is an argument to be made, however, that, if digital natives can confidently navigate through this informational chaos and since networking skills came to be viewed as desirable for employers, educators should not only not shy away from these trends but embrace them and exploit them to their advantage by transporting learning and teaching experiences online, to mobile devices (Downes, 2005). 

• It is a chance to better connect to students and present them with a tailored learning experience through actions that already come naturally to them while offering instant gratifications and shot-term goals as motivation boosters (Downes, 2005). 
• Moreover, it is a chance to encourage knowledge production and collaboration (again, since students do so seamlessly in their virtual lives). *One thing to look out for here is sharing of content without actual learner's input (analysis, critique, elaboration or source acknowledgement)*
• Lastly, it is a chance to overcome a barrier between formal and informal learning thanks to the processor capacity and versatility of mobile devices. 

All of this has, of course, been the educational buzz of the past decade. As Quinn (2011) aptly summarises: "The future of e-learning is social. ... Mobile devices will make this ... available ubiquitously and support a new level of creativity." The prospects seem to be indeed great, but there is a lot to be done before we can reach these 24/7 collaborative heavens both in terms of hard- and software and pedagogical theories that efficiently incorporate information technology.

Finally, it is necessary to emphasise that overreliance on technology, no matter how promising or advanced, can lead to the same pitfalls as at the dawn of the eLearning era. Technology is by no means a be-all and end-all of future education; nor is it a mere tool allows stakeholders (mainly, teachers and students) to fall back into familiar patterns and do the same routine over and over only faster, cheaper and with less effort. What technology is is "a catalyst for change" (Educause). Technology in education is neither good nor bad, but it is an opportunity to improve, revamp, create, engage and connect. Of course, this opportunity has to be handled with caution and regard to technology limitations and shortcomings.

The purpose of this blog is, thus, to define mLearning and to investigate the place of mobile devices and mLearning as such in the current educational process. Another goal it to look into practical issues that most users of mobile devices for education have to face.

References:

Downes, S. (2005). E-Learning 2.0. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1104968

Mobile Teaching Versus Mobile Learning. (2011, March 29). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/mobile-teaching-versus-mobile-learning

Quinn, C. N. (2011). Designing MLearning : Tapping Into the Mobile Revolution for Organizational Performance. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.