Abstract
This is a theoretical methodology, aiming to provide practical guidance by establishing a series of consolidated frameworks for designing a mobile teaching environment (MTE) tailored to a specific institution’s settings. This paper also tries to apply the proposed theory to reality by providing a case study on Nan Tien Institute (NTI) so that a practical guidance will be given to NTI for its MTE’s implementation.
It is the authors’ understanding that by no means there would be a standardized designing method in MTE, which is usually sought after by MTE designers as their convincing reference. As a matter of fact, under the magic of age of standardization, MTE designers tend to follow the empirical experience, rendering one of the critical points ignored – uniqueness that their institution holds, which will be incarnated in this paper as the major benchmark.
The intention of the framework is to help MTE development methodology designers to reorganize and reexamine the institution’s information regarding MTE for the precaution and proactivity.
The frameworks are constructed based on their uniqueness in various dimensions; however, this does not deny any other form of methodology in this regard. It is well advised that any other form of methodology should take a close consideration of the uniqueness for its validation.
Upon the placements on frameworks, a concept of “weight” is introduced to leverage the varied importance of the proposed uniqueness. This is used to quantify the result of placement as a whole. An application on NTI was provided to exemplify the ideas.
It should be noticed that this paper aims to provide quantitative solution, yet it is based on qualitative data due to the insufficiency of validated data. Therefore, the further follow-up researches are welcome to contribute to this database establishment.
References
Allen, I.E., and J. Seaman. 2011. Going the distance: Online education in the United States, 2011. Newburyport: Sloan Consortium.
Berge, Z.L. 1998. Barriers to online teaching in post-secondary institutions: Can policy changes fix it?. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 1(2). http://www.westga.edu/~distance/Berge12.html
Bocchi, J., J.K. Eastman, and C.O. Swift. 2004. Retaining the online learner: Profile of students in an online MBA program and implications for teaching them. Journal of Education for Business 79(4): 245–253.
Carroll, J. 2014. Tools for teaching in an educationally mobile world. London: Routledge.
Cheon, J., S. Lee, S.M. Crooks, and J. Song. 2012. An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers & Education 59(3): 1054–1064.
Giemza, A., P. Verheyen, and H.U. Hoppe. 2012. Challenges in scaling mobile learning applications: The example of quizzer. In WMUTE, pp. 287–291. Takamatsu, Kagawa Japan
Goodyear, P., G. Salmon, J.M. Spector, C. Steeples, and S. Tickner. 2001. Competences for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology Research and Development 49(1): 65–72.
Handal, B., J. MacNish, and P. Petocz. 2013. Adopting mobile learning in tertiary environments: Instructional, curricular and organizational matters. Education Sciences 3(4): 359–374.
Hayes, J., L. Wilson, M. Gielniak, and E.L. Peterson. 2012. Revolutionizing education through technology: The project RED roadmap for transformation. International Society for Technology in Education.
Hsu, L. 2013. English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile assisted language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning 26(3): 197–213.
Hur, J.W., and S. Bannon. 2013. Pre-service teachers’ perception and intention to use mobile device for teaching. In World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications, Victoria, Canada, Vol. 2013, No. 1, 223–227.
Khaddage, F., and G. Knezek. 2011. Device independent mobile applications for teaching and learning: Challenges, barriers and limitations. In Global learn, Melbourne, Australia, Vol. 2011, No. 1, 1–7.
Kim, K., and C.J. Bonk. 2006. The future of online teaching and learning in higher education: The survey says. Educause Quarterly 29(4): 22.
Kim, D., D. Rueckert, D.J. Kim, and D. Seo. 2013. Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning. Language, Learning & Technology 17(3): 52.
Ko, S.S., and S. Rossen. 2010. Teaching online: A practical guide, vol. 3. New York: Routledge.
Kukulska-Hulme, A. 2012. How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for teaching and learning? The Internet and Higher Education 15(4): 247–254.
Kulich, M., J. Chudoba, K. Kosnar, T. Krajnik, J. Faigl, and L. Preucil. 2013. SyRoTek – Distance teaching of mobile robotics. Education, IEEE Transactions on 56(1): 18–23.
Lorz, O., and G. Willmann. 2013. Size versus scope: On the trade-off facing economic unions. International Tax and Public Finance 20(2): 247–267.
Luftman, J.N., C.V. Bullen, D. Liao, E. Nash, and C. Neumann. 2004. Managing the information technology resource: Leadership in the. New York: Prentice Hall.
Martin, K.U. 2013. Delivering complex learning content on mobile devices. In World conference on E-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education, Chesapeake, VA, USA, Vol. 2013, No. 1, 161–166.
Murphy, E., M.A. Rodríguez-Manzanares, and M. Barbour. 2011. Asynchronous and synchronous online teaching: Perspectives of Canadian high school distance education teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology 42(4): 583–591.
Ostashewski, N., D. Reid, and M. Ostashewski. 2011. The iPad as mobile teaching device: Multimedia database access in a classroom context. In Global TIME, Vol. 2011, No. 1, 49–53. http://blog.aace.org/2010/11/16/global-time-2011-online-call-for-participation-3/
Park, H., J.J. Ree, and K. Kim. 2013. Identification of promising patents for technology transfers using TRIZ evolution trends. Expert Systems with Applications 40(2): 736–743.
Pollara, P., and K. Kee Broussard. 2011. Student perceptions of mobile learning: A review of current research. In Society for information technology & teacher education international conference, Nashville, TN, USA, Vol. 2011, No. 1, 1643–1650.
Rutz, F. 2012. Recording mobile learning: An evaluation of the number of audio recorders needed in an M-Tel study. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL) 4(3): 68–82.
Short, S.S., A.C. Lin, D.J. Merianos, R.V. Burke, and J.S. Upperman. 2014. Smartphones, trainees, and mobile education: Implications for graduate medical education. Journal of Graduate Medical Education 6(2): 199–202.
Stark, J. 2011. Product lifecycle management, 1–16. London: Springer.
UNE’s Strategic Plan. 2011. http://www.une.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/14618/3rd20proof20revised20strat20plan2011-2015.pdf. 12 August 2014.
Venkatesh, V., M.G. Morris, G.B. Davis, and F.D. Davis. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27: 425–478.
Wu, C.S., F.F. Cheng, D.C. Yen, and Y.W. Huang. 2011. User acceptance of wireless technology in organizations: A comparison of alternative models. Computer Standards & Interfaces 33(1): 50–58.
Zeichner, K. 2010. Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college-and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 61(1–2): 89–99.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this entry
Cite this entry
Li, CH., Lu, Y., Li, Z. (2014). Uniqueness in Mobile Teaching Environment Design Methodology. In: Zhang, Y. (eds) Handbook of Mobile Teaching and Learning. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_63-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_63-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41981-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences