M-Learning Standards

UX andInstructional Design Guidelines for M-Learning
Spark Page:  
https://spark.adobe.com/page/pYzc8YZlWZ2b0/
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeH85oQyk_aGXCEe8nTy19OsQ1lRBqkr9vgMi-xCh330BzObQ/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1

Please take this survey to share your thoughts and opinions on the need for m-Learning UX and Instructional Design Standards. https://goo.gl/FNPAJZ
Recently I attended SITE 2019 and proposed standards for designing and developing standards for m-Learning.   This presentation explains the basis for these standards.

Presentation on link below:

https://spark.adobe.com/page/pYzc8YZlWZ2b0/

Advertisements

Comparisons of M-Learning to E-Learning

The authors have pinpointed some very valid differences and advantages for M-Learning.  Although their perspective is mainly for children, it applies to adults who frequently need to use their “other” brain.

“PCs are deskbound and ideally suited to individual or pairs of children sitting in front of a computer screen, focusing their attention on solving a problem or completing a set task during a lesson.  Mobile technologies are handheld and ideally suited for relatively short bursts of use … .” p. 4

Advantages:  “What appear to be disparate activities can now be integrated over time and space. By making more connections between their emergent ideas, prior knowledge, and ongoing observations of the world, children are starting to view and understand the world differently. P. 4

“… enable children to move in and out of overlapping physical, digital and communicative spaces p. 5f

Druin,  A. (2009). Mobile technology for children: Designing for interactionand learning. Morgan Kaufmann.

Distraction, disruption, irrelevancy

According to a study in the Australian Journal of Education Technology,  there is a seductive effect of decorative images used in learning content.

These influences are relevant in terms of the hypotheses posited to explain the seductive detail effect. Harp and Mayer (1998) proposed three main hypotheses: drawing attention away from relevant information (distraction hypothesis), interrupting the coherent mental model construction process (disruption hypothesis), and irrelevant prior knowledge activation (schema hypothesis). They found that the best explanatory hypothesis was the activation of irrelevant schema, given that the moment when the detail was presented (early on but not at the end) led to different outcomes. Irrelevant schemas would prompt the construction of the text representation to be structured around that information. Nevertheless, they did not find evidence to justify either the distraction or the disruption hypothesis. 

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2019, 35(3).

The implication for the design of core information for smaller screens, i.e., mobile devices, is that simpler is better and the graphics and any other media should be carefully placed as suggested my Mayer and others.


The seductive effect can be elicited by a text passage (Chang & Choi, 2014; Garner, Gillingham, & White, 1989; Lehman, Schraw, McCrudden, & Hartley, 2007; Mayer, Griffith, Jurkowitz, & Rothman, 2008; Rowland, Skinner, Davis-Richards, Saudargas, & Robinson, 2008; Saux, Irrazabal, & Burin, 2015), narration (Mayer, Heiser, & Lonn, 2001; Yue & Björk, 2017), images or graphical elements (Bartsch & Cobern, 2003; Harp & Mayer, 1998; Park, Kim, Lee, Son, & Lee, 2005; Peshkam, Mensink, Putnam, & Rapp, 2011; Sanchez & Wiley, 2006), videos, or music (Moreno & Mayer, 2000). 

González, F. M., Saux, G., & Burin, D. (2019). The decorative images’ seductive effect in e-learning depends on attentional inhibition. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology35(3).

mLearning Standards–

Where are they?

 In many reads, e.g., edtech for higher ed type magazines and journal, there is little mention about designing courses or developing strategies that use the power of mobile technologies.  Specifically, it is rare to read anything about using mobile phones for more than sending group or individual messages regarding the online or on ground course. There is a need to look at pedagogical use of mobile devices, not just as devices for social interaction or messaging (although these are also important for learning.)  Some specifics to be examined here:

  1. The pedagogical use should include the cognitive, physical, psychological, personal and cultural factors and the of all to learning principles.
  2. ISTE standards
  3. UNESCO recommendations
  4. Adoption in other countries
  5. Rubrics and other evaluation methods
  6. Learning Objects for mobile learning
  7. Peer learning with mobile devices
  8. Combining apps with learning, camera, measurement, audio,
  9. Active engagement of learners using the apps

Also, where should higher education be headed?

<iframe style=”border: 1px solid #777;” src=”https://indd.adobe.com/embed/25f31d7a-6241-45a3-a43d-7fccdf11308a?startpage=1&allowFullscreen=false&#8221; width=”525px” height=”371px” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>