The Impact of Mobile Technologies on Distance Education

By Shaunah Fuegen, East Carolina University Abstract

This article considers the growing amount of research on using mobile technologies in education. As mobile devices become increasingly more prevalent, it is imperative to study their use and effect on the growing field of distance education. This brief review of existing literature indicates that traditional theories of learning, in both traditional and distance settings, are relevant and applicable to mobile learning, and that mobile devices can be brought thoughtfully into pedagogy at the distance level. Flexibility, portability, and accessibility contribute to an overall positive impression on students, while faculty concerns can be met with appropriate training and tailoring to the various teaching and learning styles present in distance education. Student and faculty expectations of a mobile-integrated distance education experience will continue to grow, while teaching and learning should thrive in this increasingly more connected environment. Keywords: distance education; mobile learning; mobile technologies ing digital texts, such as PDFs and electronic books (Nie, Armellini, Witthaus, & Barklamb, 2011). Tablets are small profile computers with mobile-optimized operating systems, generally lacking a physical keyboard, that provide interactive opportunities through built-in functionality and third party applications. Smartphones are mobile handsets with data connections via cellular and/or wireless networks. They have similar capabilities as tablets, but a smaller screen size. What role does mobile usage play in distance education? That is the question being considered by this review of existing research. Integral to considering this question is the concept of mobile learning: its definition and potential for impact in a distance environment. According to Yousef (2007): Mobile learning is defined as the provision of education and training on mobile devices: Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), smart phones and mobile phones. One of the characteristics of mobile learning is that it uses devices which citizens are used to carrying everywhere with them, which they regard as friendly and personal devices, which are cheap and easy to use, which they use constantly in all walks of life, and in a variety of different settings (p. 117). The use of portable devices that are familiar to students is key to harnessing the potential of mobile learning. Research has shown that facilitating mobile learning can improve the entire distance education [experience] by enhancing ways of communication among distance learners, tutors, and supporting staff (Yousef, 2007, p. 114). This improvement in communication
TechTrends November/December 2012 49

istance education is growing rapidly as a means of teaching and learning in a flexible, online environment. Its rapid growth is staggering, as only 15% of U.S. households owned a computer in 1990 (Shelton & Saltsman, 2005); that number rose to 78.7% by 2008 (United Nations Development Programme, 2010). Within the past five years, not only has the number of people with computers increased, the emergence and prevalence of mobile devices has changed the personal technology landscape. As of February 2012, for example, 46% of adult Americans own a smartphone (Pew Research Center, 2012). There are several types of mobile devices, with each having differing features. Electronic book (or e-book) readers are small, lightweight devices that are designed primarily for read-

Volume 56, Number 6

is accompanied by an increase in flexibility, as mobile technology offers access to learning material regardless of location and time (Yousef, 2007, p. 117). This allows students and faculty the ability to use time that would otherwise be unavailable to them (such as while traveling or without computer access) for teaching and learning. The educational potential of mobile devices is large, and this paper attempts to examine it from several angles, including faculty and student concerns and expectations.

Transactional Distance Theory

Distance education, while a valuable and flexible option for both students and faculty, also brings with it some limitations and concerns. The transactional distance theory defines distance education in terms of not only the physical separation of teacher and student, but of a psychological separation as well (Park, 2011). Transactional distance is impacted by the amount of dialogue present in the course between instructor and learners. As communication between teacher and students increases, transactional distance decreases (Park, 2011). Mobile technologies, with their ability to create diverse learning contexts with increased dialogue and communication, have great potential to overcome the transactional distance divide that is inherently a part of distance education.

those theories. For example, collaborative learning seeks to promote learning through the use of active participation and communication between students. This can be accomplished with multiple Web 2.0 tools, social networks, mobile educational gaming, e-mail, or mobile video conferencing (Keskin & Metcalf, 2011). Learners can use mobile devices to engage in constructivist instruction through the use of virtual reality, communicating with mobile phones (using SMS, voice, e-mail, video conferencing, or social internet-based tools), or interactive podcasting (Keskin & Metcalf, 2011). These are but a few examples of the wide variety of ways that mobile devices can facilitate learning, including learning at a distance. Some other mobile strategies include using voice recording software, mobile response system applications, multimedia (images, film, television, animations, audio) viewing, simulations, electronic texts, mobile learning/course management system applications, instant messaging, interactive images, listening to course lectures, and virtual fieldtrips (Keskin & Metcalf, 2011). The portability of mobile devices, as well as the programmability their hardware, software, and operating systems provide, allows for a learning experience that can be customized to both student and faculty needs. Based on Yousef s (2007) research, mobile learning brings many benefits to the distance education experience: Can be used for independent and collaborative learning experiences Helps learners to overcome the digital divide Helps to make learning informal Helps learners to be more focused for longer periods The provision of course content to offcampus students The provision of feedback to off-campus students The provision of student support services to off-campus students Student-to-student interactivity Student to tutor and institution interactivity (pp. 117-118) The strongest advantage of learning with mobile devices, however, is portability (Park, 2011). While mobile technologies have huge potential for learning, particularly in a distance environment, they are not without their limitations.
Volume 56, Number 6

Educational Potential
The potential for mobile devices to both effect and affect learning in distance education environments is large. These devices have become even more relevant and dynamic as Web 2.0 (and, on the horizon, Web 3.0) tools and social networking applications have evolved into more sophisticated products that are designed to interact with mobile devices (Park, 2011). Attention should first be paid, however, to traditional learning theories and how mobile technologies can fit into them. This broad inspection is critical, as researchers seek to explore the influence of specific mobile devices on students and faculty. According to Keskin and Metcalf (2011), there are nine theories of learning that can be examined through the lens of a mobile environment: Behaviorist, cognitivist, constructivist, situated learning, problem-based learning, context awareness learning, socio-cultural theory, collaborative learning, and conversational learning. Each of these theories has a different focus, and mobile devices are well suited to applications of
50 TechTrends November/December 2012

Usability problems are prevalent, such as physical limitations (screen size, weight, battery life), software limitations (missing functionality, fragmented availability of applications across mobile platforms, initial procedural learning curve), dependence on available networks and speeds, and physical environment considerations (using the device outdoors, device security, exposure to radiation) (Park, 2011). Using students own devices helps to overcome some of these concerns, as individuals are more likely to have a base knowledge of their own hardware and software, rather than being assigned a specific device by their institution (Elias, 2011).

Student Needs and Expectations

As Shelton and Saltsman (2005) point out, the distance education student, more than other types, is removed from personal interaction with the institution (p. 83), both by geographical space and a psychological distance, as the transactional distance theory suggests. It is important to consider the student benefits of mobile learning when examining the overall impact of portable devices on the field of distance education. The population of distance education students is largely composed of those who work full-time and are balancing many demands on their time. Mobile technologies provide these students with the flexibility to access content at a time and place most convenient to them. This is not only a benefit to student scheduling, but is also helpful from a pedagogical perspective. The flexibility grants students the ability to progress in their learning at their own pace, maximizing their learning potential (Yousef, 2007). While distance learning is, by its very nature, more flexible than education that takes place in a traditional classroom, mobile learning is more interactive, involves more contact, communication, and collaboration with people (Yousef, 2007, p. 121). This helps substantially to overcome transactional distance and the challenges of being a part-time student and full-time employee. Students have voiced support for mobile learning, as it provides immediate support in a distance education environment (Youself, 2007, p. 119). Mobile technologies also assist with student organization, through the use of calendaring and scheduling utilities, as well as communication, collaboration, and the construction of knowledge, through the use of instant messaging and file sharing. These attributes allow students to both create and consume learning materials, individually as well as with others (Park, 2011). One of the larger factors driving the move to mobile learning is the expectations of the
Volume 56, Number 6

so-called Net Generation, students who have grown up with reliable access to the Internet, are comfortable using computers and mobile devices, and not only want, but expect, learning to be possible from these devices. According to Anderson (2008), this new generation of learners is smart but impatient, creative, expecting results immediately, customizing the things they choose, [and] very focused on themselves (p.203). Connecting all of these characteristics is a growing reliance on using multiple portable devices to customize this experience (Carlson, 2005). Distance education is drawing increasingly more of this type of student, but even those not of that generation are more comfortable with technology. Distance educators are finding themselves with technologically savvier students, and must adapt to meet their needs and expectations (Anderson, 2008). Students want to be able to access course resources from anywhere at any time. They want to be more in control of when and how they learn. According to Jafari, McGee, and Carmean (2006), learners determine what they see, hear, do, and access. Thus learners are in class while they are washing clothes in the Laundromat, cooking dinner, or driving to work (p. 58). Expectations are growing for not only a learning/course management system in distance education, but for an all-encompassing electronic learning environment (Jafari et al., 2006). Nie et al. (2011) provide compelling evidence of student impressions of a mobile device used in a distance education environment. Sony PRS-505 e-book readers were given to students in two distance education courses, and corresponding surveys on usage, usability, and usefulness showed students overall experiences were positive, and they reported several benefits to their learning. E-readers in general have a low learning curve, and students with varying degrees of technical aptitude were able to navigate the PRS-505 with little difficulty. Flexibility and portability were highly valued by the students, and many students used the e-readers while traveling or in public places. The use of e-ink on the device, as opposed to the backlit screen of a tablet or smartphone, increased readability and made it ideal for students who wanted to study outdoors. One student mentioned how convenient it was to pre-load course texts onto the e-reader, and then not need to worry about having access to an Internet connection while traveling. This increased the likelihood students would read course material outside of
TechTrends November/December 2012 51

their traditional study times (Nie et al., 2011). Another student reflected on how the e-reader brought more opportunities to study. The nature of distance learning means you have to squeeze in study whenever you have timeBefore this, I had been allocating weekends to spend on one or two units, and I would only study through the week if I had a few hours to spare (Nie et al., 2011, p. 29). The instant on and off functionality of the PRS-505, along with the ability to bookmark texts, increased the probability of students using the devices in short stretches of time and while traveling (Nie et al., 2011). In summary, the mobile device helped students make more efficient use of their time, and many students reported that the device affected how they studied. Students expressed concern over some limitations of the device, as well, although the majority of these have been resolved by hardware and software updates since the study was undertaken. The most pressing limitation noted was the lack of a note-taking feature, which has since been added (Nie et al., 2011). As with all mobile devices, the marketplace changes so quickly and frequently that limitations are rarely in place for long.

Many faculty members tend to view mobile technologies as benefitting their students more than their pedagogical and procedural interests. In a survey, faculty predicted that mobile learning would most improve, in ranked order, communication, student learning, faculty teaching, and collaboration (Shim & Shim, 2001). What may motivate faculty to embrace mobile technologies is to go beyond simply providing the devices. Organizing workshops, seminars, and training provides professors with the opportunity not only learn to how to use mobile devices, but to become enthusiastic about the pedagogical opportunities they present (Shim & Shim, 2001). As Park (2011) notes, instructional designers and teachers need a solid theoretical foundation for mobile learning in the context of distance education and more guidance about how to utilize emerging mobile technologies and integrate them into their teaching more effectively (p. 79). According to Elias (2011), a solid theoretical foundation in mobile learning addresses equitable use, flexible use, simple and intuitive interfaces, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical and technical effort, community of learners and support, and instructional climate. These principles could manifest themselves in the following ways: Equitable use: Use cloud-based storage for content delivery Flexible use: Consider unconventional assignment styles and delivery methods Simple and intuitive: Use minimalistic, open-source software Perceptible information: Add captions and descriptive text to all media, in case mobile screens dont properly align content Tolerance for error: Allow students to edit forum posts that may suffer from the limitations of small mobile screens and keyboards Low physical and technical effort: Select software and websites that are either formatted for mobile devices or are easily readable on smaller screens Community of learners and support: Group students based on technological abilities and preferences Instructional climate: Faculty member is regularly accessible and in contact via a variety of mobile-friendly methods (email, video conferencing, and instant messaging, for example)
Volume 56, Number 6

Faculty Concerns
Although technology is present, in some form, in most modern classrooms, many faculty members have been hesitant to embrace it and evolve their pedagogical practices to keep up with it. A number of factors contribute to this, including attitude, anxiety, self-efficacy, risk aversion, time commitments, competency with computers, and whether they feel technology is relevant to their pedagogy (Shim & Shim, 2001). Shim and Shim (2001) postulate that faculty need substantial training in and support of technology to reflect their increased usage. Some institutions of higher education have aimed to increase faculty familiarity with technology by issuing all professors laptop computers, yet putting the tools in faculty hands alone is not enough to effect change. According to Shim and Shim (2001), mobile computing is only as effective as the infrastructure supporting it on an institutions network. The researchers caution, however, that faculty use of computers, electronic mail, and the Web in classes appeared to have no association with their perceptions toward mobile computing for educational activities (p. 350).

52

TechTrends November/December 2012

Education that is inclusive and accessible by all types of learners is the goal of universal design principles. Mobile technologies have the ability to open distance learning to even more students in even more situations. The number of faculty, and certainly the number of students, asking for a more integrated course experience (including mobile integration) is growing. Faculty and students are looking for their online learning/course management systems to provide a fuller experience than simply delivery of text content. They expect multimedia along with intuitive chat and messaging tools, built into the software (Jafari et al., 2006). This is expanding to include accessibility of those features via a mobile device. At least half a decade ago, mobility became important to distance educators (Jafari et al., 2006). Mobility is no less important today. Mobile integration, much like it provides for students, allows additional flexibility for distance professors who are, out of necessity, connected to network services more often than traditional brick-and-mortar faculty.

Shaunah Fuegen, M.S.Ed (sfuegen@bates.edu) is a Curricular Technology Consultant for the humanities at Bates College. Ms. Fuegens research interests include mobile learning and distance education. She is currently a student in East Carolina Universitys Master of Science in Instructional Technology program.

References
Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008).The Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Second Edition.Edmonton, AB: AU Press. Retrieved from http://www.e-booksdirectory.com/details.php?ebook=2097 Carlson, S. (2005). The net generation goes to college. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(7), A34. Elias, T. (2011). Universal instructional design principles for mobile learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 143156. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com Jafari, A., McGee, P., & Carmeal, C. (2006, July/August). Managing courses, defining learning: What faculty, students, and administrators want. Educause. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com Keskin, N.O., & Metcalf, D. (2011). The current perspectives, theories, and practices of mobile learning. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 202-208. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com Nie, M., Armellini, A., Witthaus, G., & Barklamb, K. (2011). How do e-book readers enhance learning opportunities for distance work-based learners? Research in Learning Technology, 19(1), 19-38. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78-102. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com Pew Research Center, Internet & American Life Project. (2012). Nearly half of American adults are smartphone owners. Retrieved from http://pewinternet. org/Reports/2012/Smartphone-Update-2012.aspx Shelton, K., & Saltsman, G. (2005).An Administrators Guide to Online Education.Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Shim, M.K., & Shim, S.J. (2001). Mobile computing in higher education: Faculty perceptions of benefits and barriers. J. Educational Technology Systems, 29(4), 345-354. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com United Nations Development Programme. (2010). Human Development Report 2010; The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2010_EN_ Complete_reprint.pdf Yousuf, M.I. (2007). Effectiveness of mobile learning in distance education. The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(4), 114 124. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Conclusion
Although mobile technology holds great promise as a medium for learning, the challenge for educators is to create and provide instruction using the medium in order to engage learners and teach them effectively (Anderson, 2008). It is important to remember that while technology is a critical component of distance education, ultimately educators and administrators must remain focused on learner needs and instructional goals and outcomes (Yousef et al., 2007). While limitations and concerns about mobile learning exist, with regards to current mobile capabilities (as well as the impact on program administration, which was not discussed here), the increased flexibility, minimizing of transactional distance, and educational benefits seem to outweigh the disadvantages. As student and faculty expectations for mobile-integrated education grow, distance education programs and institutions will be pressed to keep up with demand. The demands, however, should result in more connected, efficient learners and instructors that will continue to thrive in an increasingly networked world.

Acknowledgements
This manuscript was originally submitted for a course in East Carolina Universitys Masters of Science in Instructional Technology program.

Volume 56, Number 6

TechTrends November/December 2012

53

Copyright of TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.