Hasnain Zafar hasnainzafar@ieee.org Supervisions : AP Dr. Azizah and Dr.

Noorminshah

Tell me and I will forget. Show me and I might remember. Involve me and I will understand.

What factors moderate the effectiveness of a mobile learning intervention? (G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk))

Development problems

Development of interventions / best practices:

y

How to develop new / adapt existing mobile learning interventions to solve current educational problems

 Problem space
Storytelling (structure, characterisation)

Collaboration (participation, integration) Mutual Understanding

Participation + negotiation + critical dialogue +critical reflection+ Scaffolding = collaborative learning

Image from The Learning in Informal and Formal Environments (LIFE) Center (http://life-slc.org/)

The processes of coming to know through explorations and conversations across multiple contexts amongst people and personal interactive technologies. (Mike Sharple 2008)

Learning must be transformed from signifying mobility to motivation. Moving ideas between media platforms is not helpful if a student does not have the context, framework or incentive to study------Tara Brabazon Collaboration in Context as a Framework for Designing Innovative Mobile Learning Activities---------Daniel Spikol, Arianit Kurti and Marcelo Milrad

Diana Laurillards definition of mobile learning incorporates the critical pedagogical design input of the teacher: Mlearning, being the digital support of adaptive, investigative, communicative, collaborative, cooperative, and productive learning activities in remote locations, proposes a wide variety of environments in which the teacher can operate. 2007

The challenge for the educators and technology developers of the future will be to find a way to ensure that this new learning is highly situated, personal, collaborative and long term; in other words, truly learnercentered learning. (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula & Sharples, 2004, p. 36)

Introduction

Problem Background

Problem statement

Research questions, and objectives

Research Scope and Research Significants.

 Group

of learner do activities using Mobile Devices (smart devices) D E M learning New Learning Paradigm where learning according to learner context.

Key Global Telecom Indicators for the World Telecommunication Service Sector in 2010 (all figures are estimates)
Global Mobile cellular subscriptions (millions) Mobile broadband subscriptions (millions) Fixed broadband subscriptions (millions) 5,282 Developed nations 1,436 Developing nations 3,846 Asia & Pacific 2,649 Arab States 282 Europe 741

940

631

309

278

34

286

555

304

251

223

148

Source: http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/at_glance/KeyTelecom.html

lack of Collaboration

Hi-tech technologies are not explored fully Change in Pedagogical aspt.

Non effective collaboration

collaboration/Cooperation < communication

Students with WMSD

Lack of MCLO Lack of Integration

To investigate the impact of Wireless Mobile Smart Devices on Mobile Collaborative learning.

SQ1: What is the perception of learner about using smart devices in Mobile Collaborative learning

SQ2: Does WMSD help higher Institution students to collaborate effectively?

SQ3: Develop Framework for effective Mobile collaborative learning ?

Area. Mobile Computing and Collaborative Learning using wireless and mobile smart devices (WMSD).

Title. To explore learner perception on the effectiveness/ impact of using Wireless Mobile Smart devices in Mobile Collaborative learning

Obj. the impact of WMSD in Mobile Collaborative Learning factors that contributes to effective Mobile Collaborative learning Effective Mobile Collaborative learning objects

Information System

Mobile Computing

Collaborative Learning Technologies

2000+ 1991 Mark Weiser father of ubiquitous computing

1945 Memex Vannevar Bush

1968 Dynabook Alan Kay

smart mobile devices

1990+ 1940 1920 1900 technologybased distance education Instructional media. Slides etc Television Successful as face to face

Learning by blended mode at learner pace.

1700 corresponde nce education

1896 Vygotskys inherent 1300 social nature Collaborative theory learning of zone

1900 learning and life goes together

1960s Stanford University Psychology Professors Patr ick Suppes Compu ters for Maths. autocratic teaching styles. Transfer of Informtion

1970+ Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) shared development of knowledge

1997 William D. 1993 Graziadei,Ronald N. Brown,Joseph William D. Sasiadek Graziadei online Asyn. and Syn. computer lecturer Teachingdelivery Learning Environments

1900 learning and life goes together

2006 E-learning 2.0 Wen 2.0 Social learning (FB, blogs, collaborative software, Wikis, Second Life , ePortfolios, and virtual classrooms.

2010 killer application (Mobile learning) Sharples et al., Pachler and colleagues Mobile Complex (meet the new literacy) MCLO learner Context

Mobile Collaborativ e learning

social

conversation Conflicts Mobility

Enhancement MCL

social mediation Mobile Technology

Theories

Mobile learning theory Activity Theory Convers ational Theory Social Constru ctivist learning

Zurita and Nussbaum, 2004

Brown et al., 1989; Vygotsky. 1978 Arrigo and Chiappone 2004 Mike Sharples
*Community of Practice Model: KM

We will first study the theories mentioned in previous slide and find out their limitations in explaining the impact of MWSD in supporting Mobile Collaborative learning Pilot study at UTM

MCL objects and formal and informal scenarios will be developed to define and illustrate the Mobile Collaborative learning using MWSD (SQ2). Scenarios can be created after carefully knowing the perception and impact of MWSD on learner in UTM and How to incorporate MWSD to MCL objects (SQ2) MCL objects (Collaborative games, supervised and unsupervised project based learning) Pretest and post test among the members of learning groups can show the impact of MWSD impact on Mobile Collaborative learning.

 Experimental

pilot case study at UTM Three experimental studies in other Universities Quantitative method by using the questionnaire. Qualitative approach can be applied to UTM case study. Multiple cases create more robust theories because the propositions are more deeply grounded in varied empirical evidence (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007, p. 27).

Context Pilot case study will be conducted in UTM. At intermediate level to advance level courses or students at their 3-4th year or Final year students by research. Domain of ICT Lerner will work in team of 3-5 members (Formal learning or Informal learning)

Task

Members

will receive same task as they were without WMSD. Each scenario will have scenariospecific instructions.

 Measures

Communication
Quantitative: No of messages, Frequency of messages, messages length, social networking analysis. Qualitative 1: messages content in terms of physical attributes such as text, sound (e.g., mp3, Wav, WMA), static images (e.g., Jpg, bmp, gif,), and dynamic images (e.g., mpg, mov, wmv)

Qualitative 2: message content in terms of usage and meaning measured through a coding scheme derived from Rainbow (Baker, Andriessen, Lund, van Amelvoort, & Quignard, 2007)

 Measures

Collaborative
Social presence: degree to which the other in a communication appears to be a 'real' physical person via Social Presence Scale (Kreijns, 2004) Sociability: degree of perceived sociability of an environment; that is the extent to which an environment can facilitate the emergence of a social space via Sociability Scale (Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, Van Buuren, 2005)

Social Space: the degree of perceived quality of a social space existing in a distributed learning group via Social Space Scale (Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, Van Buuren, 2004)

 Measures

Satisfaction
Supervisor : Satisfaction with the MCL,MCLO and the interaction with the supervisor (Questionnaire on Instructor Interaction (Wubbels & Levy, 1993)) Learner: Satisfaction with the MCL,MCLO and the interaction with the supervisor and Peers in group

Malaysia in International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention (IMETC2010)

IADIS International Conference Information Systems 2010, Portugal

IADIS International Conference Information Systems 2011,Spain

Part of SQ1(Saudi Context)

Year

Remarks

Activity
Literature review

2011 2012
X X X X X X X X X X

2013
In Process N/A

Study Perception of M-learning X in Malaysia Pilot Project requirement Identification Identifying and Selecting Universities Picking the Groups Publishing the result Developing MCLO Evaluating MCLO Data Analysis Thesis Writing X

N/A

X X X

Published 3 papers

X X

X X Chapter 1 Draft

G. Ayala and S. Castillo, Towards computational models for mobile learning objects wmute, pp. 153157, 2008. G. Zurita and M. Nussbaum, A conceptual framework based on activity theory for mobile cscl, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 211235, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.blackwellsynergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.14678535.2006. 00580.x C. N. Quinn, Flexible learning: Mobile learning objects, Knowledge Anywhere, Tech. Rep., November 2002, consultado en Abril 2007, [Online]. Available: http://whitepapers.techrepublic.com.com/whitepaper.aspx?doci d=89037 Ally, M. (2005a). Use of Mobile Devices in Distance Education. Paper presented at Mlearn 2005, October 25-28. Cape Town, South Africa. Ally, M., Schafer, S., Cheung, B., McGreal, R., Tin, T., Use of Mobile Learning Technology to Train

Sharples, M. (2009) Methods for Evaluating Mobile Learning. In G.N. Vavoula, N.Pachler, and A. Kukulska-Hulme (eds), Researching Mobile Learning: Frameworks, Tools and Research Designs. Oxford: Peter Lang Publishing Group, pp. 17-39. Stawarski, C. A., & Gadd, R. (2010). Evaluating mLearning. In ASTD Handbook for Measuring and Evaluating Training. Phillips, P. P. (ed). Danvers, MA: ASTD Press. C. N. Quinn, Flexible learning: Mobile learning objects, Knowledge Anywhere, Tech. Rep., November 2002, consultado en Abril 2007, [Online]. Available: http://whitepapers.techrepublic.com.com/whitepaper.aspx?doci d=89037

Wexler, S., Brown, J., Metcalf, D., Rogers, D., Wagner, E., Mobile Learning: What it is, why it matters, and how to incorporate it into your learning strategy , 360 Report, ELearning Guild.

 The

key word used for literature review Mobile learning, Collaborative learning , Cooperative learning , In-group Learning ,Project based learning , real world learning, Computer-supported collaborative work, learning by doing, technology-enhanced learning (TEL), Learning Objects.

 Collaborative

learning is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together. Collaborative learning refers to methodologies and environments in which learners engage in a common task where each individual depends on and is accountable to each other.