International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
A Mobile Design Framework for Continuous
Mobile Learning Environment in Higher Education
Paduri Veerabhadram1, D de.Beer2, Pieter Conradie3
Department of Information and Communication Technology
Vaal University of Technology
Private Bag X021, Andries Potgietar Blvd,Vanderbijlpark 1900, South Africa vpaduri@gmail.com,veerabhadramp@vut.ac.za, deond@vut.ac.za,pieterc@vut.ac.za,
Abstract— This paper proposes a conceptual framework for mobile learning applications, that provides systematic support for the design of a mobile continuous learning system. It is based on a combination of the theory of continuous learning, mediated by technol- ogy, and several literature studies on mobile learning. It explores how mobile device learning application can be designed with refer- ence to identified theories, factors and tools. The proposed framework provides support for the successful design of mobile continuous learning systems.
Index Terms- mobile learning, conceptual framework, social networks, Continuous learning.
—————————— • ——————————
-learning centers on the acquisition of knowledge through a mobile device and focuses on how society and its institutions can support an increasingly mobile population (macro-level), how mobile learning technol-
ogy can be coupled with other forms of learning taking place in organizations and schools (meso-level), and aims for a clari- fication of the conditions necessary for m-learning to be suc- cessful for a learner or a group of learners (micro-level) [Sandberga, et al. (2011)].
Extensive attention has been focused on new learning strate- gies with appropriate software tools and environments ([Chun, Hwangb, Tsaib & Tsengc (2010)], [Chen, Hsieh & Kin- shuk (2008)], [Yeh, Chen, Hung & Hwang (2010)]. Further- more, the 21st century, called the ‘Information Age’, brought along with itself an era where computer technologies develop rapidly and become widespread among all levels of the com- munity (Isman, 2006).
As such, Daoudi Najime (2008: 11) defines m-learning as the
————————————————
F. A. Mr.Paduri Veerabhadram with the Vaal University of Technology, Vanderbijlpark,South Africa.( e-mail:vpaduri@gmail.com).
S. B. Pieter Conradie Jr., is with the Vaal University of Technology ,
use of mobile technologies for learning. Jihen Malek (2008: 20) defines it more specifically as any learning that takes place when the student is not confined to a pre-determined site, or as training that takes place when the student takes advantage of the opportunities mobile technologies offer.
In this paper, we discussed the pedagogical perspectives of mobile learning in section 2. Section 3 provides a literacy re- view for existing systems, while section 4 outlines a frame- work for mobile learning. In section 5 the proposed design framework and concept for mobile learning application envi- ronment is discussed, concluding in section 6 by again high- lighting the benefits and merits of mobile framework for con- tinuous learning.
Several pedagogical approaches to learning can be identified. These include the beviourist, constructivist, problem-based, context-awareness learning, socio-cultural theory of learning, concersational learning and activity theory pedagogies.
Vanderbijlpark,South Africa.( e-mail: pieterc@gmail.com).
T. C. D de Beer is with the the Vaal University of Technology , Vanderbijlpark,South Africa.( e-mail: debeer@iclix.co.za.deond@vut.ac.za)
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
Within the behaviourist learning paradigm, learning is thought to be best facilitated through the reinforcement of an association between a particular stimulus and a response (drill and feedback). Mobile devices in particular can enhance the behaviourist learning process. The use of mobile devices to present teaching materials/content specific questions (stimu- lus), obtain responses from learners (response), and provide appropriate feedback (reinforcement) – provide ‘drill and feedback’ activities, fits within the behaviourist learning pa- radigm.
Constructivist learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based on their current and past knowledge (Bruner, 1966). Within a constructivist learn- ing framework, instructors should encourage students to dis- cover principles for themselves, thereby transforming learners from passive recipients of information to active constructors of knowledge. Instructors must give learners an environment in which to participate in the learning process, and the appro- priate tools to work with that knowledge. Mobile devices pro- vide a unique opportunity to have learners embedded in a realistic context at the same time as having access to support- ing tools. Each learner carries a networked device which al- lows them to become part of the dynamic system they are learning about.
Problem-based learning (PBL) (Koschmann et al. 1996) aims to develop students’ critical thinking skills, by giving them an ill- defined problem that is reflective of what they would encoun- ter as a practicing professional. Throughout the process of exploring a problem, students are encouraged to identify the areas of knowledge they will require to understand the prob- lem. The group then collects these learning issues, along with data, hypotheses and plans for future inquiry in a structured manner, which can be facilitated by shared information re- sources (e.g. physical or electronic whiteboard), using the col- lected information to develop a plan for the next iteration of problem formulation, solution, reflection and abstraction.
Context awareness means gathering information from the environment to provide a measure of what current phenome- na occurs around learners. Activities and content that are par- ticularly relevant to that environment can then be made avail- able. Mobile devices are especially well suited to context- aware applications, simply because they are available in dif- ferent context, and so can draw on those contexts to enhance the learning activity. Context-aware mobile devices can sup- port learners by allowing a learner to maintain their attention on the world, and by offering appropriate assistance when required. Context awareness is being explored not just as a way to deliver appropriate content, but to enable appropriate actions and activities, for example, interactions with other learners in the same or similar contexts.
The sociocultural theory of learning views that learning takes place in a social context (Rogers, 2002), and the forming and re-forming of concepts need not necessarily take place only at the level of the learner, but that collaborative group work and sharing with peers can be a powerful way of confronting learners’ own conceptions (pre-conceptions), contributing to the need to restructure cognitive schemas. Learning is per- ceived as being as much about communication as it is about content. Of course, communication is not confined to peer-to- peer. It can involve teachers, experts, experienced colleagues, workmates, friends and family.The mobile environment can make a significant contribution to this process, by facilitating the rapid access to other users at any time and in any place. By sharing content, knowledge, and experience, learners can de- velop into ‘communities of practice’ (Wenger, McDermott and Snyder, 2002). These informal discussion groups can form as and when needed to optimise the learning process. Mobile collaborative learning specific focuses on the use of mobile technologies to promote, facilitate and enhance interactions and collaborations between students. Both the capabilities of mobile devices and their wide context of use contribute to their propensity to foster collaboration.
Conversation learning (Pask, 1976) describes learning in terms of conversations between different systems of knowledge. Learning is a continual conversation with the external world and its artefacts, with oneself, and also with other learners and teachers. The most successful learning comes when the learner is in control of the activity, able to test ideas by per- forming experiments, ask questions, collaborate with other people, seek out new knowledge and plan new actions.
The most compelling examples of conversational learning oc- cur when mobile technology is used to provide a shared con- versation space. Effective learning occurs when people can converse with each other, by interrogating and sharing their descriptions of the world. A mobile learning device can assist conversational learning by integrating learning descriptions across different locations, for example, by making connections between exhibits in a museum, or by holding the results of learning actions for later retrieval and reflection. It can also provide tools to support learning in context, such as electronic measuring instruments, maps, and reference guides.
Activity theory builds on the work of Vygotsky (1978, 1987) and is a way of considering learning using three features, namely, a subject (the learner), an object (the task or activity) and tool or mediating artefacts. Its central tenet is that human behaviour is situated within a social context that influences their actions. The meanings of actions are mediated by the rules of their community and the division of labour within the community, thererby influencing the ways in which partici- pants will behave.The emphasis that activity theory places on
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
tools, including computer based tools, thererby mediating activities, is very helpful. This shifts the attention away from simply the interaction between computers, but to the activity as a whole. Activity theory is thus a productive way to eva- luate learning environments that are rich in technology.
A possible mobile framework is offered by Mohammad et al. (2007). As such, Mohammad et al. (2007) view their work as an extension of e-learning. Their work revolves around the idea of adapting e-learning materials for the use of mobile devices. They argue that in doing so, a number of key points have to be addressed, identifying a few dimensions that need to be adapted. The dimensions are context, user, mobile device and connectivity. Furthermore, by analyzing the context in which the mobile learning will be used, they considered the users and their characteristics as well as learners’ learning strate- gies. Technical aspects studied included the technology envi- ronment in which the mobile learning will be operating, for example connectivity speed and cost. These technical aspects are also outlined by Sharples et al. (2002), Liu et al. (2008) and Parsons et al. (2007). Parsons et al. (2007) specify that there are four requirements for a general framework for mobile learn- ing. They are the generic mobile environment issues, the mo- bile learning contexts, the learning experience and the learn- ing objectives. The framework offered by Parsons et al. (2007) was generated from their research on successful mobile learn- ing programmes. Parsons et al. (2007) propose a framework that could be used in designing materials for mobile learning. Sharples et al. (2002), Liu et al. (2008) again suggested that the design of a mobile learning framework should detail the en- tire process, from determining the environment in which it will be operating, to the steps needed in designing the actual activities. Therefore, the framework includes generic ele- ments, as well as enhancement of the learning experience.
Portraying learning as a mobile activity is not to separate it from other forms of educational activities, since some aspects of learning are fundamentally mobile in the ways outlined above. By placing mobility of learning as the objective of anal- ysis, it might be comprehended, specifying how knowledge and learning materials can be transferred across contexts (e.g., homes and schools, delivered and managed across life transitions new technologies can be designed to support schools). Indeed, wireless devices have the potential to give instant gratification to students, by allowing them to interact with the Internet, access course materials and retrieve infor- mation from anywhere.
Mobile applications generally allow users to control or filter information flow and interaction through handheld devices. BenMoussa (2003) identified several benefits for mobile con- nectivity. First, mobile devices offer personalized or individu- alized connectivity. Second, mobile connectivity improves collaboration via real-time or instant interactivity that may
lead to better decision making. Third, mobile connectivity enhances users’ orientation or direction. These benefits are proved to be equally useful in improving the learning envi- ronment. Churchill and Churchill (2008) explicated that mo- bile technology provides five affordances, namely as a multi- media-access tool, connectivity tool, capture tool, representa- tional tool and analytical tool. Additionally, Churchill and Churchill (2008) also state that handheld technologies for edu- cation have five potential educational benefits. First, portabili- ty, as handhelds can be taken to different locations. Second, social interactivity, as handhelds can be used to collaborate with others. Third, context sensitivity, as handhelds can be used to find and gather real or simulated data. Fourth, con- nectivity, as handhelds enable connection to data collection devices, and to a network. Fifth, individuality, as handhelds can provide scaffolding to the learners’ approaches to investi- gation.
A central concern is to the understanding of how people art- fully engage with their surrounding environments, thereby creating impromptu sites of learning. Sharples (2000) contends that the advances in learning and technology have facilitated setting the stage for a successful mobile learning environment. As learning has become more individualized, learner- centered, situated, collaborative, and ubiquitous, continuing technology has similarly become more personalized, user- centered, mobile, networked, ubiquitous, and durable (Moti- walla, 2007).From the concept of the activity theory, En- geström analyzes the collective activity through an expanded framework that shows the interactions between tool-mediated activity and the cultural rules, community and division of labor. Rules operating in any context or community refer to the explicit regulations, policies, and conventions that con- strain activity as well as the implicit social norms, standards, and relationships among members of the community (Jonas- sen.2002). The community consists of the individuals and subgroups that focus at least some of their effort on the object. Division of labor refers to both the horizontal division of tasks between cooperating members of the community and the ver- tical division of power and status (Engestrom, 1999). Sharples et al. (2005) adapted Engeström’s framework to show the di- alectical relationship between technology and semiotics. They renamed the terms – control, context and communication – that could be adopted either by learning theorists or by tech- nology designers (refer figure 1). Thus, based on the technolo- gical approach of the activity theory (such as mobile devices for learning), learning is mediated by knowledge and technol- ogy that act as instruments for productive enquiry in a mu- tually supportive and dynamically changing relationship. The mediation can be analyzed from a technological perspective of human–computer interaction, physical context and communi- cation activities.
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
first, students are active learners, not passive recipients of knowledge. Second, students acquire new knowledge within meaningful learning activities. Third, teachers have to provide adequate learning technology or tools for students’ learning activities, and finally, to frame the mastery of a new activity in a series of interrelated stages. Arievitch (2007) also argues that to ensure that learned actions are effective, three psychologi- cal requirements should be fulfilled during learning, namely to ensure the action is meaningful and intelligent, to ensure the action is based on operating with cognitive tools such as signs or symbols, and to ensure the action is independent and competent.
Figure 1: the technological approach of the activity theory
The control of learning may be focused on the teacher, or can be distributed among the learners. From the activity theory, control rules operating in any context or community, refers to the explicit regulations, policies, and conventions that con- strain activities, as well as the implicit social norms, stan- dards, and relationships among members of the community (Jonassen, 2002). Thus, control may also pass between learners and technology. The technological benefits are derived from the way in which learning interact with the technology, whether learners can access e-learning materials convenient- ly, whether they can control the learning pace and style of interaction. Thus, from the m-learning perspective, the control of learning is based on learners’ self-regularity or autonomy.
The general requirements supplied by Sharples et al. (2005) are also shared by Parsons et al. (2007). They argue that be- cause of the uniqueness of mobile learning, one cannot use an e-learning framework for mobile learning materials. The bene- fits and limitations of mobile devices have to be noted and addressed accordingly in the design of learning materials for mobile usage. There are a number of mobile content frame- works available to assist the design and development of mo- bile content materials. Liu et al. (2008) mention that there are four elements that need to be incorporated into the design of a mobile framework. Their framework was developed based on the reflections of action research from the Nokia Mobiledu Project. With mobile learning activity design as the core of the framework, the four elements include (1) requirement and constraints analysis, (2) mobile learning scenario, (3) technol- ogy environment design and (4) learner support services de- sign, illustrated in figure 2.
From a technological perspective of context of learning, there have been some debates about whether context can be isolated and modeled in a computational system, or whether it is an emergent and integral property of interaction. Indeed, context of learning can embrace multiple communities of actors (both people and interactive technology) who interact around a shared objective. In other words, context of learning is an emergent and integral property of interaction. Thus, from the m-learning system perspective, the context of learning is based on the quality of system interactive functions, physical context, or learning content. Basically, the higher the quality of a system’s functions, the more satisfaction learners have been getting. Regarding communication of learning, if a tech- nological system enables certain forms of communication (such as email or online discussion), learners begin to adapt their communication and learning activities accordingly. As
Mobile learning scenario design
Requirement & Con- straints Analysis
Mobile learning
Activity Design
Technology envi- ronment design
Learner Sup- port Services Design
learners become familiar with the technology, they invent new
ways of interacting, by creating new rules and exclusive communities. This appropriation of technology not only leads to new ways of learning, it also sets up a tension with existing technologies and practices. On a broader scale, mobile tech- nology supports interactions and communication, such as file and information retrieving and knowledge sharing. Moreover, Arievitch (2007) states that the main educational principles originating from activity theory can be outlined as follows:
Figure 2: Design framework for mobile learning (Liu et al. 2008)
Requirement and constraints analysis looks at the demand for mobile learning by studying two levels of requirement analy- sis: the general level and the concrete level. The general level seeks to find the answers to the common features of mobile learning, the position and status of ICT in education, the po- tential users and existing mobile learning applications, as well as motivations and expectations. Meanwhile, requirement
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
analysis contemplates the users and the users’ learning envi- ronment. It comprises potential users’ attitudes, skills, expe- riences, use patterns, learning characteristics, motivations, learning tasks and possible barriers, as well as possible mobile learning situations, environment and influencing factors. Liu et al. (2008) emphasise that the understanding of user needs and the factors that influence their learning is crucial to the design of mobile learning activity. Mobile learning scenario is another factor that is essential to mobile learning activity de- sign. Liu et al. (2008: 186) describe mobile learning scenario as describing how learners with certain characteristics in certain settings carry our various activities to achieve learning goals. Describing a mobile learning scenario requires those involved to brainstorm and translate the results onto a storyboard. Fo- cus groups are formed to discuss various aspects of a mobile learning scenario and finally an evaluation is conducted to see the significance of mobile learning in increasing the
level of learners’ motivation. Learners also need support ser- vices to increase their confidence and competencies, as well as to overcome any arising difficulties. Liu et al. (2008) suggest four areas that could be addressed in support services: (1) consulting services, (2) blended learning services, (3) training and (4) community support services. It is noted that the framework proposed by Liu et al. (2008) is comprehensive in the sense that it has taken into account all the necessary fac- tors that concern the users, the learning itself and the envi- ronment in which the learning will operate. According to Par- sons et al. (2007), a generic mobile environment encourages a close examination of the following: mobility, user interface, the use of a rich media and communication support. A study conducted by Dewitt (Saedah and Dewitt 2007) also demon- strates the use of text messages among secondary school stu- dents and how this promotes collaborative learning. Parsons
et al. (2007) classify this as user roles and profiles. Parsons et al. (2007) categorise it as core, periphery and context. The second element proposed by Parsons et al. (2007) is mobile learning contexts. They categorise this element into six dimen- sions: (1) identity, (2) learner, (3) activity, (4) collaboration, (5) spatial–temporal and (6) facility. They place the first four as situational context for mobile learning and the last two as en- vironmental context. Similar, to the general requirements out- lined by Sharples et al. (2005) this involves a closer look at the users themselves and the role that they play. For example, do the users take up the role of a learner or teacher? In consider- ing the ‘learners’, one is forced to look at a number of psycho- logical factors which include learners’ needs, their study pre- ferences, motivation levels and their experience in using the devices. The last two elements proposed by Parsons et al. (2007) are learning experience and objectives. They noted two useful metaphors in mobile design: cinematic metaphor and the game metaphor. The former deals with story elements and narrative, while the latter deals with the features of games, such as excitement, competition and popularity.
The present available literature was explored to identify exist- ing mobile learning frameworks based on actvity theory, ei- ther adopted by learning theorists or by the technological ap- proach of the activity theory. Liu et al. (2008) can be identified as comprehensive in the sense that it has taken into account all the necessary factors that concern the users, the learning itself and the environment in which the learning will operate. Based on these factors, we developed a proposed continuous mobile design framework (refer figure 3), specifically for the Black- Berry mobile, to be used among Vaal University of Technolo- gy students.
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
Universities/Institutions
Lecturer
Syllabus
Module name
Mobile De- vice
Video/Lessons/PPT
Course
Syllabus/outcomes
Exercises
Time table Assessments e-books
Social network
Face-to- Face
Stu- dent/Lecturer/Ad min
Academic Mobile appli- cation
Mobil Commu- nication
SMS/MMS Academic Toolkit Software
Email
e-Research
Internet- WAP/EIS/WNS
Student Information Lecturer information Lecturer Notes Learner Guide Research assignment
/Podcast Database Students Feedback
Exams Tests Fees Exam Reports Graphics lessons \
Student Login Lecturer Login Admin Login E-Library Notifications Email Staff/Student Community forum
Figure 3: The design and the role of different academic tools
The process of designing and evaluating a mobile learning system revealed that the framework of an academic tool kit is important. It is, however, realized that this framework cannot be utilized in all types of the mobile learning systems. The mobile learning system is again usable in all kinds of courses offered in information technology. However, this research has not considered specific courses in information teachnology, for example software engineering or any other project based courses.
Utilizing the framework requires reviewing the structures and redistributing the actions and services, based on the course requirements. The mobile learning system is usable for those students and employees who are on the move most of the time. In this system all students and lecturers have an equal opportunity to have access to the course material and re- courses, assignments, presentation and communications, in- cluding newsgroup, chat and e-mail. Students and lecturers
do not need to wait for available computers in order to per- form their course responsibilities when they are on the move. A notable value for students is to have instant access to course resources whenever needed thereby enabling them to return assignments and receive feedback, and they are able to com- municate with the course staff and other students. The lectur- ers or the system are able to provide instant feedback to stu- dents’ assignments; this can be considered as an encouraging reward for students. Lecturers and other staff have direct access to students and can solve their problems in real time. The lecturers are able to inform others of any changes to the schedules almost instantly. By having direct access to the feedback database, the teacher can evaluate student progress in any course.
This paper discussed the factors relevant in designing a
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
framework for continuous education, and subsequently pro- posed a design framework being implemented by the authors. The factors identified are mainly from the work of Parsons et al. (2007). In addition, an important factor added to the re-
search is the element of theories of learning. Especially with regard to continuous learning, it is postulated that the propsed framework will be of benefit in designing m-learning environments.
The authors wish to thank Mr.Roger Baxter and Mrs.Antoinette from ICT Department. Lombard(HoD) This work was supported in part by a grant .
[1] ACMComputing Curricula (ACM-CC 2001): 1 http://www.acm.org/education/education/education/curric_vols/cc200
1.pdf. Accessed: August 19, 008 Mahmoud, Q.H., and Dyer, A.,
[2] Integrating BlackBerry Wireless Devices into Computing Program ming and Literacy Courses”, 2. Proceedings of the 45th Southeast Conference, Winston-Salem, NC, USA, March 2007, pp. 495-500.
[3] Abd Rahman, H., Badusah, J. and Wahid, R. (2009) ’ Penggunaan
Telefon Bimbit/PDA Dalam Kalangan Pelajar Institusi
Pengajian Tinggi Swasta’, in Proceedings of Seminar Pendidikan
Serantau ke 4 2009, UKM.
[4] Brindley, G. (1984) Needs Analysis and Objective Setting in Adult Migrant Education Program, Sydney: NSW Adult Migrant Education Service.
[5] Dewey, J. (1916) Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education, New York: Free Press.
[6] Hargreaves, A. (2003) ‘Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the age of unsecurity’.Online, available
at http://books.google.com.my/books (accessed 1 March 2009).
[7] Knapper, C. and Cropley, A.J. (2000) Continuous learning in
Higher Education. London: Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group).
http://learning.erocsson.net/mlearning2/project_one/index.html
(accessed 2 November 2007).
[9] Kukulska-Hulme, A. and Traxler, J. (eds) (2005) ‘Mobile Teaching and Learning’ in Mobile Learning: A handbook for
Educators and Trainers, London: Routledge.
[10] Liu, H., Salomaa, J., Huang, R. and Ma, D. (2008) ‘An Activity- Oriented Design Framework for Mobile Learning Experience’
in Fifth IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile and
Ubiquitous Technology in Education: pp185–7.
[11] National Research Council (1999) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
[12] Maarschalk, J. (1988) ‘Scientific literacy and
informal science teaching’, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 25(2):135–46.
[13] Mohammad, H., Mohammad A., Hamdan, Z. and AboAli,
A. (2007) ‘A Framework for Mobile Learning Content Design’,
Paper presented in ICT-Learn 2007 Sixth International Internet Education
Conference and Exhibition, Cairo.
[8] Keegan,D.(2002)The future of learning: From elearning to mlearning Online available at
[14] Parsons, D., Ryu, H. and Cranshaw, M. (2007) ‘A Design Require
ments Framework for Mobile Learning Environments’,
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
Journal of Computers 2 (4) Academy Publisher.
www.compassproject.net/sadhana/teaching/readings/sharplesmobil
e.pdf(accessed 27 February 2009).
[15] Preece, J., Rogers, Y. and Sharp, H. (2007) Interaction
Design: beyond human computer interaction (2nd ed), New York: John Wiley & Sons.
[17] Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Game Based Learning,New York: McGraw-Hill.
[18] Idrus, R. and Hanafi, A. (2007). ‘Lifelong and lifewide distances education’in Abdul Razak, N., Kamarul Kabilan, M. and Silong, A. D. (eds) Online Continuous learning in Malaysia: research and practice: pp1–8, Serdang: University Putra Malaysia Press.
[19] Rogers, Y and Price, S. (2004) ‘Extending and Augmenting Scientific Enquiry through Pervasive Learning Environments’ in Children, Youth and Environments 14(2):67–83. Online, available at www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/
[24] Vavoula, G. and Sharples ,M. (2001) ‘Studying the Learning Practice: Implications for the Design of a Continuous learning Support System’ in IEEE: pp379–80.
[25] Wan Mohd Fauzy.(2007) ‘Chunking for contextual mobile learning’ in
1st InternationalMalaysian Education Technology Convention
Proceedings: pp457–63.
[26] Wang, Y. (2004) ‘Context Awareness and Adaptation in Mobile Learn ing’presented in the 2nd International Workshop on Wireless
and Mobile Technologies in Education.
[27] Thornton, P. and Houser, C. (2005) ‘Using mobile phones in English education in Japan’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
21:217–28.
(accessed 2 March 2009).
[28] Thorpe, M. (2005) ‘The Impact of ICT on Continuous learning’
[20] Saedah, S. and Dewitt, D. (2007) ‘Collaborative mobile learning’ in1st InternationalMalaysian Education Technology Convention Proceed ings: pp930–5.
[21] Sharples, M., Corlett, D and Westmancott, O. (2002) ‘The Design andImplementation of a Mobile Learning Resource’ in Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 6:220–34.
[22] Sharples, M. (2000) ‘The Design of Personal Mobile Technologies for LifelongLearning’ in Computers and Education 34:177–93. Online, available at www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu (accessed 28 February 2009).
[23] Sharples, M., Taylor , J. and Vavoula, G. (2005) ‘Towards a Theory of Mobile Learning’ in Proceedings of MLearn Conference
2005.Onlinne available
in Perspective on Distance Education: Continuous learning and
Distance Higher Education, UNESCO.
[29] Vision 2020. Online, available at www.wawasan2020.com/vision/p2.html (accessed 5 March 2009).
[30] Open University Malaysia. Online, available at www.oum.edu.my/portal/index.php?op=view&m=36&page=317 (accessed 1 January 2009).
[31] Yamat, H., Ismail, A and Alias, A. (2007) English Language Skills
For Continuous learning: A Question of Acquisition or Learning?
in Proceedings of International Conference on Continuous learning, Bangi: Faculty of Education,University Kebangsaan Malaysia Press.
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2012
ISSN 2229-5518
[32] D.W.Kritt, L.T.Winegr(Eds.),Education and technology, critical perspective, possible futures, Lexington Books, Plymouth(2007), pp.49-72.
[33] Innovations in Education and Teaching International,
42 (2) (2005), pp. 111–121.
[34] BenMoussa, C. (2003). Workers on the move: New opportunities through mobile commerce.
In Presented at the Stockholm mobility roundtable, May 22–23.
[35] J. Attewell, C. Savill-Smith (Eds.), Mobile learning anytime anywhere, Learning and Skills Development Agency, London (2004), pp. 35–42.
[36] Computers and Education, 50 (1) (2008), pp. 77–90.
[37] Educational Technology and Society, 11 (3) (2008), pp 153–180.
[38] Mr.Paduri Veerabhadram, Dr Pieter Conradie, Prof. M.de.Beer, Research paper is accepted for publication of Academic Tool Kit Framework Design Integrating Mobile Device fromInternational Journal of Advanced Technology& Engineering Research(IJATER) Volume 2 Issue 2, July 2012 ISSN 2250-3536.
[39] http://www.teachertechnologies.com/2010/04/some-thoughts-on- the-7-current-trends-in-ict-and-education-gary-putland/.
[40] http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001. [41] http://youtube.com/watch?v=nJ0nlh5FU5A&feature=related.
IJSER © 2012 http://www.ijser.org