You have to pre-screen, but this is a good idea.
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.
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 Technology, 35(3).
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:
- The pedagogical use should include the cognitive, physical, psychological, personal and cultural factors and the of all to learning principles.
- ISTE standards
- UNESCO recommendations
- Adoption in other countries
- Rubrics and other evaluation methods
- Learning Objects for mobile learning
- Peer learning with mobile devices
- Combining apps with learning, camera, measurement, audio,
- 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” width=”525px” height=”371px” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>
Found this so interesting that I need to post it. For better learning during your lectures use thoughtful, debatable questions or visuals that are thought provoking and invite alternative explanations. Engage the “audience”. Let students construct their learning. Guide when needed. You will also benefit from the ideas and explanations that are generated.
Specifically, researchers have found that comprehension often suffers when learners get lost in a barrage of distilled facts and generalizations. Bullet-point lectures rarely engage audiences in critical active learning strategies such as discussion, debate, introspection, social interaction and problem-solving. Additionally, bullet lectures often combine displayed text, spoken words and images in ways that may actually hinder comprehension and make learning more difficult (Jordan & Papp, 2013).
AuthorsMitch Ricketts (Northeastern State University, Broken Arrow) Document IDASSE-18-09-34PublisherAmerican Society of Safety Engineers
Starting a new Adobe course on explanimations. This link is a great resource for the benefits. http://inservice.ascd.org/10-reasons-to-use-animation-in-the-classroom/
Authors found that groups with visual teaching guides improved more than those who had text or written teaching guides.
Differences in learning retention when teaching a manual motor skill with a
visual vs written instructional aide
Alice Cade, MHSc, BSc (Chiro), Matthew Sherson, BSc, BSc (Chiro), Kelly Holt, BSc (Chiro), PhD, Graham Dobson, DC, Katie Pritchard, BSc,
BSc (Chiro), and Heidi Haavik, BSc (Chiro), PhD