“… the concept of mobile education or mobile learning is still emerging and still unclear. How it is eventually conceptualized will determine perceptions and expectations, and will determine its evolution and future. There are different stakeholders and factors at work in this process of conceptualising mobile education and the outcome is uncertain.”
–Traxler, J. (2009)
Topic #2
How do mobile technologies influence instructional design choices? Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
INSTRUCTIONS:
- Read through a set of the existing responses below. Use the Thumbs Up tool to recommend any within your set that you believe are exceptionally valuable, or that you strongly agree with. Use the Thumbs Down tool only if, in your opinion, the response does not add value to the discussion.
- If you have something new and valuable to add, use the Comment (“Leave a Reply”) field at the bottom of this post to contribute your original thoughts, or click on Reply to any existing Comment to contribute to that thread.
Sesame Street is fascinating in how it has engaged children in an educational environment for so long. The show understood from its inception that children have a very limited attention span. As a result, short and engaging sections with quick transitions became the structure of the show. A format that was relatively predictable and allowed the viewers to look forward to upcoming segments was maintained. Early in my career, one of my principals pointed to the Sesame Street method and advocated for our classrooms to follow a similar model. I absolutely think he was correct, and my best lessons roll with this model and engage students for an entire block.
In this context, mobile technologies haven’t really changed instructional design choices, but they have enabled new ways of carrying them out. The instructor role has remained relatively consistent with this viewpoint, though there is certainly more to manage. Mobile technology can enhance and engage, but can also be a barrier to human interaction. When our classes engage in Harkness Discussions, mobile devices are placed away to better facilitate face-to-face engagement. Apps and Google do not replace the value of KNOWING things and sharing meaningfully with each other. This remains significant in addition to the importance of technology in the classroom.
What IS changed regarding instructional design and the role of the educator is the need to demonstrate the importance of both, the value of both.
Hi Sacree, I appreciate the comparison to Sesame Street! What a fun and unique comparison. It’s insightful to see how effective educational methods remain consistent, even as mobile technologies evolve. Balancing tech integration with meaningful human interaction is crucial for modern instructional design. I love how you emphasize both technology and traditional engagement which I feel like is the future of making technology meaningful and sustainable in an educational context!
One of the significant advantages of mobile technologies is their potential to support learners in the dynamic adaptability of instructional design. The ability to change colours, fonts, and layouts makes these technologies highly adaptable, catering to the diverse needs of students, particularly those who require personalized adjustments to suit their learning preferences.
Mobile technologies also offer the unique benefit of bringing devices and content to remote or out-of-desk experiences. For instance, an environmental science teacher can model and share information about a type of plant right next to where it is growing. Similarly, I’ve had students bring their devices and research questions directly to a problem they encounter, such as during a computer repair situation. This mobility has significantly streamlined and accelerated the learning process for students.
However, the rapid advancements in mobile technologies also necessitate teachers to update and reflect on their curriculum to remain relevant continually. Utilizing mobile technologies creates opportunities and challenges that did not exist before. One example is providing notes that students can access and review at their convenience, enhancing their learning experience.
Hi Joel,
From the inclusive education lens, I definitely agree with the potential to adapt and cater to diverse learner needs. Being able to change colours, and fonts, and provide mobile accommodations for students in this climate of teacher and EA shortages, and overcrowded classrooms having a device to provide text-to-speech or vice versa, allows for more students to utilize accommodations needed for success.
From the Education technologist lens, I see firsthand what happens when teachers are resistant to updating their practice and utilizing any new technology let alone mobile ones. Some are so anti-tech, that they wear their “I’m old school” excuse like a badge of honour, which can be very tricky to work with. Online learning forced many educators to learn and adapt to using more tech but that resistance is still deeply embedded which is sometimes interfering with inclusion.
Mobile technologies have both unlocked the capacity for effective teaching, but also lazy teaching. What I find fascinating with technology is that it is often built around with the objective of optimizing and increasing efficiency. This means that we often build technology to serve us humans in ways that focuses on completing a menial task repeatedly, effectively, and with as minimal errors as possible.
Technology thus has both equipped the hardworking teacher with the tools and means to be able to aggregate data to track and identify how teaching can impact students, how learning potential can be maximized, and the ability to make choices that help differentiate learning for all. Tools such as Khan Academy, Quizizz, Google Classrooms, Padlet, and many more, help optimize learning in a way that is effective. However, that efficacy does still depend on the teacher’s intentions.
What I have realized that is my subjective bias of believing in how technology will revolutionize education, is the issue of the human factor of being ethical. Making ethical choices to optimize efficiency comes at a cost, when that efficiency is often subconsciously geared towards selfish gains. I recognize that teachers continue to feel the burden and pressure of mounting issues such as time schedule changes, curriculum updates, bureaucratic paperwork that serves very little clear purpose to being an effective teacher in the classroom. But when teachers take technology and only focuses on efficiency for oneself, and put the focus of improving learning and self-efficacy in students as a secondary goal, then we run into the issue of how mobile technologies can negatively impact classrooms when teachers forget the implicit skill and importance of motivating students to learn.
And that hones into ultimately how education is changing, in which instructional design is shifting towards a greater focus for building the teacher/instructor’s capacity towards purpose-seeking, towards finding ways to motivate students to learn, and ultimately away from being a source of factual knowledge for regurgitation. Teachers will need to be skillful and be able to apply knowledge, as well as build the same applied skills in their students.
I think mobile technologies will influence classrooms and teachers as much (or as little) as they allowed to. The limiting factor is not likely to be technical but more so cultural; schools are often very conservative organizations (from a practice, not political, perspective). Negative consequences of mobile are frequently addressed by a doubling down on established methods: essentially, ban phones and pretend they don’t exist. While this an easy answer I doubt most here would agree its the best. The “back in my day we didn’t need phones” argument just sounds more dated as time goes on.
My own experiences have been to use phones for logistical benefits: recording notes, documenting work, checking details, calculations, etc. However, during a lot of active classroom activities I will ask students to avoid using computers or phones. Usually this is because I want them to wrestle with something; the intellectual engagement is the point, and looking something up online can shortcut that process. A few examples of things I’ve done that seemed effective but would be short-circuited with free use of mobile tech:
– Coming up with a definition of what science is – We had some good debate about this as part of a course introduction; had students gone online and grabbed dictionary definitions it would have been far less effective.
– Giving groups an unknown object (an electrical transformer) and asking them to develop theories of what it could be and how they would test it – A Google image search would quickly give an answer, but teach nothing about scientific method.
– Finding the speed of the school elevator using short rulers and a stop watch – This was to develop an understanding of experimental uncertainty and error propagation; looking up elevator speeds or using phone apps to get the answer would again miss the point.
I also feel that a flat ban on technology fails to teach students about the proper use of it. I used to work in finance and security concerns were such that even having a phone on a desk charging was enough to get someone a reprimand from management. Learning the etiquette and rules on when you can and can’t pull out a phone need to be learned. So while I had plenty of times that I forbade students from using technology, I was generally much more accepting of it than the school would have liked me to be. That was the deal I had with my students; you can generally use your phone intelligently for reasonable purposes. but if I ask for them away I expected that to be followed.
It seems too many people (present company excluded) are painting this as a very binary issue: one group feels phones are just pointless distractions and tools for bullying, the other is that they are synonymous with progressive education. Both sides have some degree of merit but also oversimplify things. Finding a compromise is hard but will likely have the maximum overall benefit. This question of how, when and why to use technology is really why I signed up for the MET program in the first place, to get some meaningful perspectives and ponder the question in detail.
Getting learners curious about the world around us, like elevator speed (good one!!), is a great way to apply critical and creative thinking skills to sift through a problem. Assuming the digital culture of one’s institution is supportive, could you tech be used to corroborate one’s findings? ‘How’ different students are able to accomplish this task will depend on their existing relationship with technology. I envision an ongoing (human) student development strategy using (AI generated) computer prompts to create a cooperative battle over the course of a semester to determine how individuals apply Educational Technology affordances to learning challenges and opportunities.
Hi Devon,
Thank you for your post.
I consistently am at my students to put away their phones when they don’t need them. However, I am never in a position where I say, phones will never be allowed in my classroom. It is actually more of a pain when students don’t have a phone or their phone is dead because they can’t participate in the group mobile activities (ie. Kahoot, Aha Slides, etc). I think we need to have a good balance, however, I have not figured out what that is.
If you have any suggestions, let me know!
Jazz
In the corporate training space, I view mobile technologies under the same umbrella as most emerging areas of innovation in that they influence instructional design if the needs analysis can identify that this is appropriate medium to incorporate into the learning environment. There is a lot to like about mobile technologies for both the learner and the educator, such as self-directed learning, personalization of content and interaction. Depending on how one views the situation, one of the challenges/opportunities in my context is often that employees view learning as something they do off the side of their desk. The volume of the work in their day-to-day makes it difficult to find a time for synchronous sessions and an unfortunate reality is that not everyone is able to participate in every learning opportunity. This is where I can see mobile technology influencing my instructional design choice to reach employees through a medium that is accessible to them. It was mentioned in a previous week about the need for mobile phones as a part of multi-factor authentication. While it’s tedious, one opportunity it has created is that employees have smartphones and designing mobile friendly educational content is an untapped medium.
I still view mobile technology in learning contexts as another avenue to enhance learning, but it does not remove the responsibility of determining if it the appropriate way to deliver content.
Mobile technologies influence instructional design choices in my adult ESL classroom because it I don’t integrate those affordances, I automatically will lose student interest. I use Kahoot, Zoom, or ThoughtExchange, to name a few, on a regular basis and all of those services required students to have personalized access to mobile devices. Living in rural BC, the biggest issue we have consistently is wifi connectivity throughout the college and the city. Even when not connected, however, students are able to work offline, take photos, and record vocal interactions thus serving to collect artifacts of their day-to-day experiences in a small Canadian town. Since they share these items with friends and family back in their home counties, there is further incentive to include mobile devices and hometown alliances into the online classroom. Conversely, however, it is also important to know when mobile phones are detracting from student learning, such as with cheating and gaming. It would be an injustice to student attention economy and learning, however, to remove mobile devices from the classroom. Having said that, I work with adults who are fairly self regulated. My answer may change completely if I started working with tween or teenagers!
The idea of welcoming a group of students into a lecture hall and asking them to put away their mobile devices is (or will become) an obsolete learning environment.
Not only is it difficult (impossible?) to keep students’ engaged in this type of setting while passively lecturing, but with our attention spans much, much shorter than the length of a typical lecture, there is opportunity to rethink the delivery of materials and activities using mobile technologies.
Why is it so easy to scroll through and get sucked into watching YouTube Shorts or Instagram Reels, but it feels daunting and dare I say boring to sit down and read an entire textbook chapter or watch an hour (or more) long lecture?
In my professional context, while classes are still scheduled in ‘lecture blocks’, I am exploring the use of short videos and more ‘bite sized information’ that can be viewed asynchronously. The videos are accessible by students on their mobile devices, as laptops and tablets are the devices most prevalent amongst my students. I have also designed activities that incorporate the use of mobile devices including polls / survey / word clouds which leverage the fact that several students are already on their devices while ‘in class’ – whether in person or online.
How have mobile technologies influenced the delivery of materials or activities in your contexts?
Hi Shannon,
When it comes to the role of the teacher, I think the way we approach a lesson is to either say no phones or use them the whole time. When students have to flip-flop back and forth, it becomes an issue because they open their device and automatically go to another app… and stay on it for an extended length of time.
Something I have noticed in my class is that with the amount of students with headphones and phones, some students choose to watch YouTube videos independently instead of watching it as a class. I find that when students do this, they actually get more out of the video because they can pause it when they need to and write notes or even watch it screen-in-screen instead of the students solely looking at their phones and not watching the video.
Additionally, I have utilized the usage of the QRCode Chrome Extension. This allows me to have students scan a QR Code and it will bring them to any website I have on my screen. This way, students do not need to go through a bunch of loopholes to get to where the teacher needs them to go. They just scan and they are there. QR Codes have been a thing for years, but I think the more we utilize them, the more we will have engagements in our classrooms.
Hope this all makes sense,
Jazz
It can be hard to include mobile technologies in the instructional design phase prior to the start of class, it becomes almost an equitable issue. Questions that need to be asked, are what type of technology does the student have access to? Do they always have access or does the device need to be shared? Do they have an internet connection? Will they be willing to use their own data for assignments? Things like this need to be taken into consideration, and demographics evaluated as part of the instructional design.
Another thing that needs to be taken into account is student technology literacy. Many students, often known as digital natives, are incredibly skilled in using mobile technology. The challenge is that some of them may not have computer literacy skills. For example, a student may be required to write a paper, which they will most likely prefer to write on a computer of some kind with a keyboard, as opposed to a mobile phone or tablet. The problem is that some students have moved away from computers towards mobile phones, and many of them have not developed basic computer skills, such as operating Microsoft Word. Device literacy, whether on a laptop, or a Chromebook must be taken into consideration as well within the instructional design stage
I do not think mobile technologies have fundamentally altered the role role of teacher/instructor. They have certainly increased the ability to communicate at any given time to an instructor and altered some ways in which we engage with material/assignments/or curriculum. However, on the whole it is still the teacher’s job to pass on knowledge and skills to their students. How this function occurs has certainly changed, but I am not convinced the function itself has altered. To start, teachers now include tech skills within learning as how to navigate new technology is a part of becoming functioning adult. Second, technology allows a greater repertoire of learning scenarios. Therefore, instructional design choices have drastically changed. Even whether or not to include technology in a lesson has now become an intentional choice in most North American classrooms. Furthermore, why you are using or not using tech, and how that implementation occurs are instructional design choices affect by personal pedagogy, resources, time, school culture, district policies and more. Mobile technology both simplifies and complicates different aspects of teaching and design.
How do mobile technologies affect instructional design choices?
When looking at eLearning instructional design, there are several considerations to look at. First, you have to consider what type of device students will complete the course on, including desktop/laptop, or tablet/smartphone or both. In the latter, the course content must be able to adapt to the smaller screen sizes and orientation (flipping lanscape to portait or vice versa); however, the good news is that authoring tools such as captivate or storyline have built-in features where the content automatically adapts to any screen size and orientation. Second is assessment design. Because it is more difficult to type sentences and short answers on your smartphone vs desktop/laptop, asessments on smartphones should be about fewer words like multiple choice, drag & drop or someting action based vs. short answer reponses. Last is taking into consideration that smartphone/tablet users use thier device not only for school but for personal use, which means they generally have shorter attention spans. As such, the instructional design should take this into account and deliver courses that are short and interactive vs. long and non interactive (i.e. eLearning course is like a PowerPoint).
Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
Classrooms, particularly high school and middle schools classes, have another member in the room: the mobile device. This has and will continue to pose a challenge for teachers in terms of classroom management, and instructional design to create more engaging content. One solution is that if you can’t beat them, join them. Mobile devices are frequently used as a learning tool in the classroom; however, for many students struggling with impulse control, the need for checking social media and connecting digitally with friends will be stronger than the desire to engage with content. That being said, mobile devices have many affordances and learning opportunities that are unique and enrich students’ learning. There are many positives to mobile learning such as instant feedback and a larger wealth of resources. Nevertheless, mobile technologies have forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor and how they manage their classroom and classroom behaviour.
How do mobile technologies affect instructional design choices? Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
If mobile technologies are becoming an everyday tool in learning and because of that it must be a consideration in instructional design. Without this consideration there could be negative impacts on learning. One of these considerations would be that when using mobile devices learners have access to materials anywhere anytime, if there is too much information or media the cognitive load for students could be too high. It has been shown that the human working memory can handle only a very limited number of interacting elements , thus, poorly designed learning elements and instructional strategies is prone to overload the working memory of learners.
Other things that need to be considered when designing would be breaking up learning into small chunks of time, this is because mobile learners tend to be using their device in between tasks and not necessarily sitting down for extended times like you would with a laptop or desktop. Breaking the information presentation into smaller chunks allows leraners to work on them with the time they have using their phones.
As for the role of the teacher, I think this role should always be evolving and growing based on the education and innovation the continues to be present in schools. Instructional design is always changing with new products, application and innovations and it continues to be the role of the instructor to help create learning environments for all students regardless of the technology.
Hi Meagan,
Your point about breaking learning into smaller, more digestible chunks of time is a practical approach, especially for mobile learners who tend to use their devices at shorter intervals. This fits perfectly with my own experience teaching about passing English proficiency tests. I have always tried to emphasize to my students the importance of using fragmented time to study. It is not only reduces the learning pressure on students, but also facilitates the development of good study habits and promotes gradual improvement of skills.
However, at the same time I have noticed that the challenges faced by senior age students in adopting mobile devices are enormous. So in an era of rapid technological advances, instructors must adapt and use innovative approaches to create effective learning environments. Regardless of the changing educational landscape, they continue to play a critical role in guiding and supporting students. The need for inclusivity in mobile learning design and the importance of providing support for those who may be less familiar with electronics.
Hi Meagan and Sinsi, bite-sized learning is a new concept for me actually, and I think it is perfectly applied here as you mentioned. One concern I have that is directly related to mobile learning for students of all ages is the amount of distraction it potentially has, given it is on a mobile device after all. When I log into websites to complete tasks, I am often distracted by notifications that require my immediate attention, and forget my train of thoughts on my previous task. I think breaking learning into smaller chunks is a great way to potentially mitigate this problem in all areas of learning on an mobile device. Thank you for sharing.
I felt both of your points were spot on with my level of teaching (Grades 1 through 4). The smaller, bite-sized steps have been key in avoiding overload. However, there can easily be an overload of information with notifications.
If this is a bring-your-own-device (BYOD) classroom, this can be difficult, but I have noticed the “Focus” or “Do Not Disturb” mode can help. Certain variations of these modes can also shut off sound that would need to be allowed if the mobile activity required it.
If the school provides mobile devices to the class, certain filters can be set up to block notifications.
Going from these technical suggestions and back to what was discussed above, building in bite-sized steps within a zone of what the student’s development may seem to be if it were approximated is a strong way to allow the student to construct knowledge.
I think mobility has affected ID choices, but not always for the better. Mobile devices and the apps they enable have a particular affordance for ever shorter content. In education we’ve told ourselves that each successive generation has a shorter attention span, and that we have to design educational experiences with this in mind. But is it true? People want short, dynamic content *when using their mobile devices* (although I have seen people watch feature length movies on a phone). But I think it’s an error to assume that this means that the same people want short, condensed content all the time, on every device.
The BBC ran a story entitled “Busting the attention span myth” a few years ago: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-38896790
Hi Andrew,
I think essentially the importance is giving users the choice to choose what they prefer. For example, on LinkedIn Learning, some courses are 1-2 hours long, but some of them contain short videos that vary from few minutes to 10 minutes and more. Some might prefer to watch the videos one by one at different times to digest the content more easily, but others can also decide to watch everything all at once.
I am not sure what is meant by Instructional Design here. If we are talking about the content of the academic course then, as a teacher of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), I have no choice but to deal with vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, speaking, listening, writing, and reading. They are the obligatory components.
I don’t think my role as a teacher changed that much despite the fashionable term of a facilitator. My international students have to use English actively to be a success. Whether I am an instructor or a facilitator in the process, doesn’t really matter.
But the available learning tools and materials are so diverse these days in comparison with how we learned a foreign language many years ago. I am particularly thankful for free audio and video resources that allow people to improve their language skills individually.
I am currently using Duolingo, and I would recommend this app to anyone who prefers to study a foreign language on their own. A brilliant tool for sure!
Mobile technology has not yet reached the point that it is drastically changing the way education happens in public schools. I think the main reason why is the preference in education for assignments to be written, the format mobile devices are weakest in. Even this reply is far easier to type on a desktop computer than on a mobile device, yet who can deny the use of text for search-ability?
Classrooms that favour alternative forms of assessment, like video or audio responses, are more likely to adapt to the mobile context more easily. Yet are video assignments practical in most classroom settings, with 35 students all talking into their phones at once? Education that embraces mobile technology still pushes the comfort zone of many teachers.
Outside of primary and secondary education, mobile has far more acceptance, and can help lead the way for adopting new models. Perhaps new platforms will automatically transcribe video responses for easier searching, or new strategies in search will make that unnecessary. Either way, many students will need to start learning mobile strategies before they leave school so they are prepared for the future.
Hi all,
Mobility is the ability to access whatever content you need whenever you need to. Therefore, I believe that instructional designers should keep in mind the following when creating content and design for the learning environment they are about to serve.
There actually are some limitations on mobile devices such as the battery, storage, display size or even data usage. Therefore, the app that you are about to design needs to be efficient in content, graphics or other multimedia elements used and responsive to any display size. Some people usually use the mobility feature of their learning platform when they need to check something quickly anywhere they are, so the briefness and ease of access should be a priority. For example, I prefer to use my laptop when I am studying for MET. The reason I would check Canvas mobile version is when I want to check my grades. I don’t like to keep looking for them and I need to have them easily accessible.
Hi Noor,
You make an excellent point about responsiveness and display size. Layout of content plays a critical role in learning and usability, but it’s tricky when you have to think about what the experience will be on multiple devices all at different sizes.
I use Brightspace in my day to day and designing course homepages is forever a challenge. My ideal layout of widgets for a desktop view does not translate well to a mobile because of how they stack. On desktop, we use an F pattern design but with that same layout on mobile, my 2nd most important widget gets buried, so I have to break some design best practices to create a okay experience for all devices.
I love that mobile devices make learning more accessible, but it certainly adds another factor when thinking about the presentation of content.
Screen size is a significant issue. One problem that I am experiencing in the MET program is that most readings are only available as a PDF file, instead of as an ePUB. This means that the page layout is fixed, and is unreadable on devices smaller than a full tablet. While I appreciate not having to pay for the print textbooks, I would love it even more if I could do more of my reading “on the go.”
This blog format works well in most situations, since webpage fonts can be increased in size if necessary. For individuals with below average vision, this can make a big difference to the speed and comfort that we can read.
Hi Noor,
I totally agree with your first statement that we should be able to access whatever content we need when we need it using our mobile devices. One thing that I want to mention about this, is the importance of having the option to search and filter content accurately. Having the option to add tags is a good way to filter content especially when the database is large, but the system also needs be able to accurately find the keyword that the user is searching with in all the content and not only based on the titles. Sometimes, I noticed that some apps do not do this well and end up present too much information that irrelevant.
I think mobile technology has greatly influenced instructional design by allowing learners to access educational content anytime, anywhere, leading to a shift toward more learner-centred and self-paced learning. I believe instructional design focuses on creating interactive, multimedia content optimized for mobile devices, and incorporating tech tools, such as apps, that support more self-directed learning. In terms of the role of teachers, I think mobile technologies have certainly altered it, but have not replaced it. Despite learners now having access to a vast array of educational resources, they still require guidance and support from their teachers. Teachers now play a more facilitative role, offering personalized feedback, coaching, and support in navigating the information available to learners, rather than being the primary source of information.
I would like to add that a teacher’s role in digital learning environments is heavily centered around the teacher being a proficient designer of effective learning environments/experiences. Today, a teacher is not required to be as experienced in the subject matter for example as in the principles of design and selecting and incorporating digital media to create meaningful and worthwhile learning experiences. An educator is now a designer, facilitator, mentor, and assessor.
I believe mobile technologies drive instructional design toward more student-centred and personalized approaches. The role of the teacher/instructor is forever altered by mobile technologies as well. The view of teachers as the “gatekeepers of knowledge” is outdated because students are engaging digital tools not only in school but also outside of formal classrooms in increasingly sophisticated means. Mobile technologies provide ubiquitous learning with unlimited information; thus, teachers’ role shift from gatekeepers toward guides or facilitators in student learning. Moreover, with more mobile technologies involved, I found that the definition of teachers’ responsibilities changed. The fixed working hours seem less important because students or parents can access teachers anytime via mobiles. More and more people assuming this 24-hour accessibility is normal in mobile culture puts extra pressure on teachers. Moreover, the instructors must critically and carefully choose appropriate content from the sea of digital knowledge and mobile technologies and ensure those choices are effective for student learning.
Personally, technology has not changed my instructional design as my introduction to teaching was already during a time of technology. For example, utilizing videos, mobile games, creating video content, utilizing green screen, etc., had already been included in my teaching early on. Through interactions with fellow colleagues, many have noted that their roles have become heavier. They say this because technology felt like it suddenly “piled” on them. They went from a “no phones allowed in class” to a sudden model of “how do we let them use mobile phones to learn in class?” This conversation led me to feel that education was much of a teacher-centre approach where learning was based on the teacher’s capacity and what they brought to the table. However, we are now moving into a student – centred approach where we question what do the students bring to the learning and what can we do to include their learning preferences in the learning? This requires a lot of reflection and professional development on the part of the teacher, to realize what they lack and develop from that point rather than, as this week’s content mentions, Peer Effects, of continuing professional development that focuses on an area already constantly practiced and comfortable for the professional.
Hi Rika. A lot of my colleagues have also share this shift in conversations at schools when it comes to phone use. At my current school, it is disheartening that strategies have to be used to quell phone use or permanently end it because of outside-of-classroom circumstances. We have a string of group shenanigans (vandalism, burning garbage bins, bear spray group incidents etc.) that were mostly orchestrated with phones. Although many of us know students can be creative if they are truly committed to doing something, staff had to consider school-wide policies on phone usage for next year’s use.
Hi Rika, I agree with your post. In my experience, where mobile technologies were concerned, we often resorted to what the teachers were comfortable with rather than what the students were capable of. It brings back the conversations about teacher training, finding the time and resources, etc.
Thank you for bringing up some important points. I agree with a lot of the ideas you brought up. Especially teaching younger students, a lot has stayed the same in designing my lessons, as you’ve mentioned. However, I notice the difference in students’ familiarity with technology, especially mobile educational technologies such as tablet apps. Teachers need to shift focus and teach crucial skills in appropriately using these technologies in the classrooms to enhance their knowledge as facilitators.
Undoubtedly, mobile technologies have greatly affected and prompted online learning. Since I have covered the advantages of mobile technologies in previous weeks of discussion. My discussion today is a little critical about the future of education in mobile context.
Some online learning platforms offer courses that are a one-size-fits-all combo. What that means is online courses can be viewed by different groups of learners, and the one-way communication and course delivery method may not fully consider the diversity of all learners. On top of that, asynchronous online courses do not provide timely feedback, or in some cases, no direct feedback from teachers at all. Worse still, some profit-driven education institutions bear the mindset that online courses can be sold and used repetitively. Well, in fact, course content needs to stay current by constantly revising and updating the course content. Similar to how Prof. Vogt would revise the course content when needed.
I am not worried about mobile technologies replacing educational practitioners. I am worried about whether mobile technologies are granting great access to learners and teachers, or somehow limiting them within their screens, in their homes, and at fragmented times.
A shift in thinking about instructional design becomes critical when students access a course through a mobile device, especially a phone. Navigational, responsiveness, accessibility, and practicality come to the forefront. Testing the design on the phone cannot be overemphasized—limited real estate adds many restrictions, e.g., the pixel dimensions and image orientations. The size, case, condensedness, and font style can optimize or degrade legibility and accuracy in reading. Interactiveness crossover is not always a reality, i.e., H5P drag and drop must match the floating words and recipient container. Activities like forums provide a foundation, but typing can be challenging without optimizing the keyboard or giving other options for submitting an audio, video, or captured penned text. And then, there is always the consideration of students’ device age, literacy, and connectivity. Thus, design for learning goes beyond attractiveness to functionality and optimizing human performance.
Reference
Sawyer, B., Dobres, J., Chahine, N., & Reimer, B. (2017). The cost of cool: Typographic style legibility in reading at a glance [Research Article]. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1541931213601698
Very informative post, Elizabeth – thank you! I think that mobile learning has opened a whole new dimension of accessibility considerations that were not present in face-to-face learning (although there are accessibility considerations there too). The good thing about technology is that it provides many ways of improving user experience if we are mindful of it. That’s why you’re right about saying that testing during the design process is essential, and I would say it is a never-ending process as new technologies that allow us to improve user experience emerge, as well as our understanding of potential issues.
As mentioned in other posts, mobile technology has changed our ability to access information (when away from our computers). In a sense, mobile tech has semi-automated how we retrieve information. But I wonder if this will eventually not only alter how we teach or modify curriculum, but introduce or antiquate core courses altogether. I’m not sure to what extent these topics exist today in the K-12 curriculum, but perhaps we will see more explicit education in topics like communication, emotional intelligence, creativity, mental health/psychology, relationship-building, and other soft skills that cannot be replaced by technology.
Good point Aaron. The educator cannot offer ubiquitous and limitless knowledge like a mobile, we will either become instructional designers and curriculum developers or teach social and core courses and focus on the well-being of students (physically and mentally). These courses would be valuable in addition to the academic performance of the students.
How do mobile technologies influence instructional design choices? Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
Many instructional design choices made by an instructor are based on the teacher being the expert in the subject matter. That they have all the answers. The shift to looking at mobile technologies is like this course, where the teacher may well be the expert in the subject matter, but that we ‘mine’ the collective intelligence and allow students to be curators of their own learning. This takes a drastic shift in theory, and will forever change the teacher/learner relationship. But it needs to happen. Eduardo touched on the concept of hybrid teaching, the shift in roles of teacher and learner, and the concept of potentially “leading from behind” where the teacher helps to guide a class to a goal, and provides support in thought processes, asking questions but doesn’t always explicitly say “you shall complete this worksheet”. This instructional design has already begun in the movements of place-based and problem-based learning, the concepts of low floor, high ceiling questions that allow learning to be accessible to everyone, and the idea that mobile technology can support the differentiation that students need. How great is it that we are on the cusp of change in the education system and a shift in instructional design and teacher roles in learning.
This may be very well what recent teacher degree courses are focused on. That is, we have a goal in the curriculum that we want the students of a particular grade to reach, but how can we do it in ways that were aren’t just “filling their brains.” Rather, allowing them to problem solve, trial and error, and build knowledge toward that goal. But like this week’s content mentions, that we are five years behind in theory. I feel that we are even more behind in the school boards to actually put such a theory into action. Recently, a document had been created in Ontario for Anti-Black Racism Pedagogy, but racism has been a known systemic barrier for decades. This give you a picture of how behind the boards are. We also have a new STEM curriculum that will be rolling out this year. This is great, it is inquiry-based. BUT.. where will thee funding come from to support such a curriculum? It usually feels like we take one step forward and two steps backwards.
Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor? Certainly, as expressed by many in this forum, but technology has also altered the definition of the teacher/instructor task. I think one of the roles of the teacher now is to teach how to use mobile technology appropriately in the classroom, regardless of the discipline being taught. The teacher must also encourage an ethical debate concerning accessibility to communication 24 hours a day. As an exemple, my students use their phones to ask me questions. “Hello Sir, what is the date of the exam again?”,”I don’t understand the assignment well, I need an explanation” or “My mother would like you to call her”. Do you receive this type of message from your students? I have 120 students who spontaneously, with their phone, will send me a message to ask me a question, sometime relevant, sometime not, at any time of the day or night. Their parents also have this accessibility: “I don’t understand my child’s result!” Logically, since it is assumed that the mobile device is always at hand, if an answer does not arrive during the day, some send an email to the school principal and other a text message to their child to tell the teacher to look at their messages. I think that the question of the full time accessibility of teachers, or other workers, is one of mobile culture, but also of mobile education, because it directly affects the definition of the teacher’s task and, by extension, student learning. In this way, what mobile technologie skills have to be taught irrelevant of the discipline : the Netiquette – Internet/Email/Social Media etiquette.
Sebastien, you ask a very important question about the ‘work day’ of a teacher and the expectations. But also hand in hand a couple of things I’d like to address. The privacy concerns and code of conduct of a teacher ‘texting’ a student privately on a personal device. The fact that teachers are using their own personal devices and data plans to connect and essentially do their job these days including having to download apps to their phones to check student progress (Freshgrade and other portfolio applications). To me there is a need to define boundaries in a school environment about mobile use in education in regards to protecting the instructors and ensuring safety and respect.
Hi Sebastien, I would love to chime in on your conversation about access to communication 24 hours a day. I get a lot of emails after work hours, especially on weekends. I one time had a parent asking for me to call her on a Saturday morning regarding her Childs test mark. I chose to respond on Monday morning as I cannot be expected to have a conversation with a parent on a weekend unless immediately urgent. This parent then emailed my principal letting her know that I did not respond and how she was disappointed in my late reply. Fortunately, my principal agreed with my choice and was able to help back me up to the parent. After that situation, I started sending a letter home at the beginning of the year letting parents/students know when my open office hours would be (aka best time to email/call). I chose to make an hour before school and an hour after school an open time for communication. Although I felt this was a strict choice, it really helped me be able to go home and wind down after work.
As many in this discussion have noted, the emergence of mobile technologies in an educational context will cause a shift in the role of the teacher as the “all-knowing” to more of a facilitator of student-paced learning and curator of the technologies that are integrated. I do ponder whether we will start to see educators begin to shift to the developer side of mobile technologies, improving the experience and instructional methods that the different applications capitalize on to teach learners.
Additionally, I do think that an essential role that educators need to continue to fill when working with mobile technologies is how to utilize critical thinking skills to navigate the sea of digital knowledge and mobile technologies to evaluate whether something actually is effective for learning. Without the capacity to monitor, control and reflect on our thinking, no amount of mobile technology will be sufficient to augment our learning, especially if we cannot recognize mobile technologies that are not beneficial or teach false information.
Good observations, Braden. I think this relates to why many of us choose to do the MET program, as it is becoming more essential to understand the relationships between learning and technology and how to properly assess it and apply it to improve learning. For those of us who are engaging in this adventure I believe that, as you mention, our roles as teachers/curators of content will also begin to incorporate the roles of designers/developers. However, those who are not engaging in learning about educational technology will need assistance from someone specialized in this field. This is what I have experienced in my MET journey, as I was a teacher for 9 years and, as I took the program, I begin to engage more in the designer aspect of teaching/learning in the pandemic era. Now I have left the teaching position and work as a learning technology specialist assisting teachers who need edtech support.
This is a very thought-provoking question. I would agree that, if mobile technologies are used in a learning experience, then the role of the teacher/instructor will change. One reason is that mobile technologies make possible new approaches to learning which transforms the role of students and, therefore, teachers. Students might have more agency, flexibility, and personalization, which means that the learning experience is delivered differently. The teacher is who delivers/designs the learning experience, so this means that methodologies and activities would need to change. We’re already seen how, in mobile learning settings, the instructor is no longer necessarily a real-time expositor but more of a content curator and learning experience designer. In other words, to accommodate the learning needs and expectations that students have in the modern mobile learning era, teachers will have to change traditional roles to different degrees depending on the specific context. I can imagine that in hybrid settings, traditional elements of teaching will still be useful and present, but we might see a more noticeable transformation of the teacher role in asynchronous mobile learning environments.
Mobile technologies – as used currently – are mainly another way to differentiate learning. That is, to provide students another form of learning to supplement their learning. Until an education system fundamentally changes to be solely mobile-based, it will continue to be just that. As such, the role of the educator has not fundamentally changed. Perhaps if an educational system (private would be the first to do this would be my prediction) were to go fully mobile, then the role of the educator would have to fundamentally shift to reflect this.
I think most instructional design will concentrate on augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) immersive flipped courses in the future. Instead of being lectured in class and completing homework outside the classroom, students would pre-learn before class and then engage in experiential classes. Students will access these peer-learning communities (related to social constructivism theory) anywhere with their devices. A science scenario example would be that students could virtually perform medical procedures by taking on the various roles of attendants in the operating room: surgeons, anesthesiologists, scrub techs, circulating techs, and observers. Engineering students may be able to experience their bridge designs and see how the structures would stand up under various loads, weather, and environmental conditions pre-programmed into the app. Assessments will be authentic and take place in the AR/VR space. Successful instructors will be adept at student engagement in virtual spaces, have heightened observational skills, and current practitioner experience will be vital. New industry-specific technologies (example- new operating equipment) will be updated into AR/VR courses and instructors will spend considerable professional development hours training each year. Digital assistants will be able to monitor student discussions/chats (think Siri) and alert instructors to potential scaffolding opportunities. Class recordings will be available to students until the end of courses for review to support integration into existing cognitive schemas or developing new schemas and universal design for learning (UDL) will be the standard. Currently, AR/VR technology is not developed enough to blur the lines of reality, but the time will come- soon.
What do you think ‘soon’ is? I am having a hard time seeing the public education system shifting to a model like this. I thought the COVID-19 pandemic would have accelerated e-learning within my school system but it appears it has not. I fear the perception of the education system from students to teachers to parents to administrators is very reluctant to change the status quo.
I think 10 years is soon, and I was thinking about higher education. I agree that flipped learning may not be appropriate for the K-12 public education system, as instructional design is also related to age and cognitive development. I believe AR and VR still have a smaller place in K-12 classrooms.
Mobile technologies influence instructional design choices by opening up the comfort zone (in all the right and wrong ways). It’s clear from other posters here that there is a double-edged sword aspect to using mobile technology. Students know how to use the technology; however, translating this use from something entertaining to pedagogical. The teacher’s position moves from being an agent of information to one that facilitates. The device itself is the vehicle of information. The key is making sure that students know how and are willing to engage with the device to find that information.
Instructional design has definitely been impacted by mobile technology and I think the days of a ‘teacher centered’ learning are forever gone which has both positive and negative ramifications. The positive being that it is a badly needed change in how curriculum is delivered to students, we have been operating within an antiquated system for far too long and technology has forced many in education to implement technology even when they were not ready or particularly proficient. The negative aspects relate to how we share information I think and retain it, we are losing much of our ability to pass on stories through interactions which impacts our society as more people interact online versus in person, students can access large amounts of information rapidly but how much do they retain? I think the challenge moving forward will be to figure out how to use instructional design in a way that not only maximizes our access to information and the pace at which we can consume it but also find a way that maximizes the human potential through instructional design.
Mobile technologies have altered the teacher-student relationship in that it has completed the obsoletion of direct teaching. The teacher cannot hold themselves as a “keeper of knowledge” because students can find much more information and much faster with just a few taps on their phone. As a social studies teacher, I bring this up with my students at the start of the year. There is literally no reason anymore to have any kind of names or dates memorized, because there is no situation where you wouldn’t be able to simply look up that fact you need as a historian or writer. As someone who went to high-school at the very beginning of the smart phone era, where we had iPhones and iPods but teaching methods hadn’t caught up yet, I remember clearly sitting through classes that could’ve been replaced with a google search. Instead, emphasis is on critical thinking and analyzing these moments of the past, where names and dates are used for context and the sequencing of events. The focus on skill-building is a useful one for an education system in which every student has all of the facts in the world in their pockets, because this information can also be overwhelming, and we all know about “fake news.” Students have the power to learn pretty much anything in the world whenever they want, and the teacher’s job is now to help them navigate through the information and interpret these facts themselves with critical thinking.
I think any specialized body of knowledge will need an experienced community of practitioners who offer to serve as its stewards. This role might include, for example, peer review of new contributions, development of foundational theories, upholding professional standards, and the supervision of the transition to the next cohort, basically teaching novices. None of this necessarily implies a gate-keeper or “sage-on-the-stage” mentality but it does imply that for a domain of knowledge to have coherence and continuity, certain structural elements like curricula, theories of teaching and learning, protocols for recognizing and rewarding the attainment of knowledge and so on will always have to be in place. Despite the potential and advantages of mobile learning (micro-learning, micro-credentialing, customization, convenience), teachers will have these basic functions to perform although it might be that algorithms or AI take on more of these responsibilities. It is that loss of human direction and engagement that worries me most.
I personally think that mobile technologies influence instructional design in a positive manner. Thanks to the increased accessibility provided by mobile technology, as well as the potential for more hands-on responses by students, instructional design has the ability to further integrate student interaction into lesson plans. Having the ability to allow students to contribute in real-time and in a fully accessible manner opens up the classroom to a larger audience with a more diverse response being potentially offered. While there is of course the possibility of distraction or disconnect between the lesson at hand and the students willingness to participate in a mobile-centric fashion, the potential for increased participation and motivation is tangible (see: any classroom that integrates games such as cahoots or the like tends to have a higher amount of student interaction for their duration of the game). I think the introduction of mobile technology has shifted the role of teacher or instructor, specifically in the area of class-wide discussion or group participation. Instead of being a separate entity that simply poses the initial questions and then monitors the discussion or activities at hand, mobile integration can help shift the role of instructor to that of moderator or even active participant, rather than a separate entity. It allows students and teachers to integrate their discussions, rather than have them separated for scrutiny.
Hi Cody, you make a valid point about increased participation and motivation. Mobile tech in the classroom can powerfully catalyze classroom learning, but with respect to distraction and interference, for example, nomophobia in teens and young adults, it can also be a real problem. If obsessive mobile use is serious enough to be a prevalent anxiety disorder in teens, it’s pedagogic role needs to be looked at very carefully. I think the potential for focused learning often isn’t realized because there is so much more content available that is more (addictively?) interesting than whatever the instructor is trying to teach. This isn’t the quite the same challenge with adult learners but for me keeping a class focused on the topic is my biggest challenge with in-class mobile use.
I agree, Gary nomophobia is real! Additionally I believe there needs to be explicit teaching and instruction around how students can mobilize learning through devices, and when and when not to use one. I think instinct for teachers is to say ‘no devices,’ but maybe, it’s about teaching learners how to use them in an educational setting from a young age. When students only engage with tools in a passive, consuming type of way, they take for granted the power of the tool in their hand.
In terms of how mobile technology informs instructional design choices, now we ask if what we are building is mobile friendly? Is the design responsive? Does it load quickly on mobile devices? Is a mobile friendly website enough, or should I be considering creating a mobile app version of our LMS site? This last question is a very real question for me right now with the https://storytogo.ca/classroom site, as BuddyBoss has created a way to transform WordPress and LearnDash powered sites into a native mobile learning app : https://www.buddyboss.com/learndash-app/ If you have an opinion on whether this is worthwhile or not, I’d love to hear it.
As for how mobile technologies have altered the role of the teacher/instructor, I will speak specifically to myself here, as the way we all teach is very individual and I don’t think I am the norm. For me, delivering what I teach in a mobile way has forced me to be better organized with my teaching materials in advance of the course for the Term, transforming my role in the ‘classroom’ to be more of a guide and a facilitator while I am teaching. It has also given me much more freedom to teach, while I practice my own craft in the real world, rather than having to compartmentalise those two worlds and giving up one in order to focus on the other.
I apologize if my thoughts circle-back to points already mentioned, but the more I learn about the affordances of mobile technologies, the more I consider how the breakdown of eLearning ‘walls’ within higher education (mostly pertaining to learning management systems) have not only altered modes of delivery, but also content. Structure is undeniably linked to content, and it seems to me that increased use of mobile technologies, at least in higher education, allow for critical re-assessment of course content/syllabi. Some disciplines are more impacted by others, of course, but the shift toward instructors shifting their lectures to podcasts, for example, allow lectures to be more flexible, accessible, and engaging in terms of instructor-student and student-student engagement. Shifting lectures to podcasts, even in a completely F2F course, then allows instructors to spend synchronous time in the development of learning activities that promote connected learning, and self-assessment, using a variety of ed tech tools. Overall, I think the leveraging of mobile technologies has translated into instructional design that shifts away from summative assessments toward formative assessments.
I think the most fundamental paradigm shift that has been ushered in by the evolution of mobile technologies is the outdated view of the teacher as the “gatekeeper of knowledge”. Gone are the days where the instructor is the sole source of information. Mobile technologies have afforded us ubiquitous access to unlimited information, and as such, teachers have become facilitators and guides in student learning. This shift has allowed room for educators to focus on developing higher level social, emotional and thinking skills, which in years past took a back seat to disseminating content knowledge.
There are many who are still holding on to the “gatekeeper of knowledge” title. I agree with you that it has changed instructional design choices but it has yet to be fully adopted. I’m still unclear if this is a small town thing. I still see many classrooms with a zero tolerance for mobile use, full stop. The change is beginning to happen thanks in part by inclusion. Many of the reading and writing tools that can be used are becoming prescribed tools for students that learn in different ways or need additional supports like translation, voice to text or text narration. These begin to normalize mobile use in learning and change the way teachers share information and assess students.
I don’t think that is a small town thing, rather a certain educator thing. I think some educators struggle with the need to control and fear that that they cannot control. And for some there is an unfortunate notion that controlling things is a part of their role.
Hi, thank you for your insightful post. I agree with you that mobile technologies helped learners access unlimited sources of information and shifted the role of educators. The educator’s role is more than just teaching and delivering knowledge; but also a mentor to help learners develop their critical thinking and build their beliefs and value. With the help of rapidly growing mobile technology advancement, it is an excellent TA to help education become effective instead of replacing the role of instructors.
And within this vein of ‘gatekeepers’ in education, I would add that mobile education technologies have done much to expose the ‘gatekeeping’ of LMS’s…the walls of LMS being obstructionist for some time now, the increase in mobile technologies have only worked to increase awareness of the limitations of many, many sub-part learning management systems. So, we’re facing a shift in educators’ roles, but also a critical reassessment of the modes of delivery that eLearning has more often than not relied up on the past.
Exactly what I’ve found. While I still create and develop all the content, when the course is in session, my role shifts to that of a facilitator and dare I say instigator of their learning, encouraging the students to experiment, create, share, and engage.
With access to mobile technology, learning has become individualized and differentiated in many ways and has influenced instructional design choices. One of the influences is the implementation of the Universal Designing for Learning framework where teachers must provide multiple means of representing information.
Providing multiple means of representation ensures that that the various learning preferences in a classroom are accommodated by allowing different ways to absorb information because every learner conceptualizes differently. Since students prefer to learn in specific ways, the educator must account for these by broadening their means of representation (display, auditory, visual, etc) to include and engage all learners.
For example:
Auditory: provide apps such as ASL with Care Bears, for students who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Visual: provide visual information in the form of pictures and words (subtitles). Especially for the student who is hard of hearing and has ADHD
Mobile technology gives students a sense of autonomy in their own learning guided by the teacher.
Hi, thanks for your post. I like how you gave specific examples of each learning accommodation as it helps to understand the expanse of technologies with regards individual learning needs. I believe that learning design is important to dismantling barriers and increasing equitable learning outcomes for all students. The Designing for Learning framework allows educators to accommodate various learning needs and design ways to support their students. This has undoubtedly created the ability of individualized learning. By changing the environment of learning one is able to better access and engage in materials for them. This ultimately supports differences while still allowing for autonomy in their learning.
Hi Analesa:
Reading your post reminds me of how we are more able to support children with different abilities. For example, technology has made it easier to implement Picture Exchange Communication that historically required teachers or support workers to tediously cut out each of the icons and stick a velcroe on it which takes hours depending on the number of new and old words we are creating for the student. Whereas its a click of a button on an iPad or other device. Other ways of differentiating would be the availability of audiobooks for slower readers or non-readers, so that they can still participate in discussion. This reminds me of The New London Group’s “New Language”proposal (1996). That is, there are multimodal ways in presenting content that have different effects to the message being delivered.
As some posts below already mentioned that technology is used to supplement teachers’ and instructors’ lessons. I would like to branch off and and suggest that there is a wider set of resources that teachers and instructors can use. I’ve taken an associate certificate program at BCIT and now MET at UBC, both of these programs do not use textbooks! In high school and in undergraduate programs, I was required to use these textbooks to study; however, all of the high school textbooks are out of date and the undergrad textbooks are ridiculously expensive. With the help of mobile technologies, learning resources can be more current and there is a wider variety that could be used to supplement the lesson or the program.
With the widespread use of mobile technology, a paradigm shift in mobile education is taking place. Mobile technology has been shown to increase students’ engagement and offers educators a variety of tools and flexibility to bestow knowledge. Moreover, learning is becoming personalized, whether speaking about free lessons on platforms like Khan Academy or Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs). From K-12 and beyond, mobile education has become increasingly available and effective. While I certainly hope mobile education never replaces “the teacher”, I certainly see the roles shifting from lecturer to facilitator and more inclusive classroom environments where students learn at their own pace alongside a variety of mobile affluence.
At the risk of my own job, I am OK with the teacher, as we know it, becoming obsolete one day as long as we have a good handle of the social, emotional, adaptive and sustained engagement pieces of this puzzle solved. Any of these technological advancements usually create new types of jobs so it isn’t employment that I think we should be worried about but training and retraining.
…and as Wenshang Jiang points out below, mobile learning is not as “nutritious or sustaining” in its current form and we are a long way from the point where teachers are redundant.
How do mobile technologies influence instructional design choices? Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
The rapid development of mobile technologies has pushed the instructors to consider selecting materials and learning tasks more suitable for use on mobile devices. Just take MET program as an example, most of the reading materials required are available online, and the virtual communication tools allow us to conduct group work regardless of where we are. However, I don’t think it has forever altered t
However, I don’t think it has forever altered the role of educators. The role of an educator is to facilitate the learning experience for the learners so they can acquire knowledge and skills, and this fundamental principle of teaching does not change with the method or approach chose to deliver instructions. Rather than altering, mobile technology expand the role of educators to facilitators and learners, so education is no longer one-way spoon-fed.
Hi Trista. I like that you have brought the MET program as an example. I am thinking of Canvas and how operating on it using the mobile app suffices for the most part. Honestly, I sometimes think that the Canvas app is easier to navigate than the desktop version, with some minor limitations such as scrolling or searching for a certain word. But yes, I agree with you that it has not altered the role of educators but rather expand it. Whether I use my mobile or my laptop to navigate the MET discussions and assignments, it does not change the fact that the professor is usually summpned for feedback when needed. I always tell my students that if they are not participating often or interacting for feedback in class, they are better off watching Youtube videos or attend recorded classes. So, the roles of teachers have expanded with more tasks that allow for more flexibility, innovation, and personalization, but we never know. Maybe in the future, teacherless courses will be the norm, and teacher-supported courses will be the exception.
Mobile technology provided an alternative for educators to supplement their teaching instead of replacing it. As mentioned before, the positive attributes of mobile technology learning are that it provides bite-sized, engaging, interactive, content for learners. However, the negative attribute of mobile technology is just as obvious; content designed for mobile technology rarely leaves lasting impressions and usually does not inspire deeper engagement and critical examination of the content. In my opinion, the role of mobile technology in relationsh to other educational content is similar to the relationship between fast-food/snacks to a home-made meal. They are nice to have occasionally, but they are not as nutritious or sustaining as a home-made meal. It will not (and should not) be the main method of learning. I also do not think about that mobile technology will fundamentally change the role of educator forever. If we think about it, the role of educator/instructor has existed for thousands for thousands of years and it is surprisingly resilient to external changes. While new technologies and invents emerged throughout the ages, the role educator/instructor did not change all that much. They are still the providers and facilitators of knowledge and guides for learning activities. New inventions and technologies provided more tools for educators/instructors to use, but did not replace their role.
Completely agree, Wenshang. I do not think the role of the teacher/instructor will ever be replaced. It will certainly change over time as it has throughout history but there will always be a need for someone to play the role of a support figure in a learning environment. Mobile technologies, much like you mentioned, are there to supplement the learning experience. I see them more as a gateway into further exploration and engagement but not the primary vehicle for learning. The way I envision the classroom of the future, I still see a teacher/instructor at the helm but rather than being the primary source of knowledge they are merely another resource, in terms of knowledge, motivation, and support, to compliment the learning environment. In this classroom, mobile technologies are yet another tool to used to enrich the learning experience.
You are right! Teaching strategies involve self-directed learning, experiential, collaboration, interactive, and authentic learning, and many more which are all guided by the teacher.
Well said Wenshang. Mobile technology is just a tool like chalk and a blackboard. The technology can influence the pedagogy, but ultimately it is the educator who dictates its usage within the context of the lesson. I do wonder with advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) whether or not it will influence the role of the educator in the future. We may get to a place where the educator oversees a technology that provides a more personalized lesson to the learner. Analesa points to teaching strategies that involve self-directed learning, experiential, and collaboration that could one day be prompted by AI. Whether or not that AI experience could also include interactive and authentic learning is another story.
To answer this question, I would have to say that in my opinion, the learning experience is directly correlated with the mobile technology being used and whether the educational material was in fact designed for that particular technology or not. In other words, mobile technologies require their own set of design and development principles. Learners using mobile technologies expect bite-sized, interactive, highly visual, and engaging content and products. Knowing these characteristics/requirements, will help the designer employ the proper pedagogical approaches and creative techniques when designing educational materials for them.
I completely agree with this. I think in the same way that we use models to implement educational technologies in a curriculum (i.e. SAMR and SECTIONS model) we need to use similar models to implement mobile technology in education. It will not be effective if we simply try and put an online curriculum onto a mobile device. As you said, certain considerations must be made that involve adapting and re-designing certain aspects of a curriculum that work for mobile education. I appreciate your outline of what mobile learners expect: “bite-sized, interactive, highly visual, and engaging content and products”. You kind of have to analyze how people/learners already use their mobile devices for non-academic purposes and adapt accordingly.
Hi Saeid and Jasmine,
A fascinating conversation.
I was particularly struck by “…mobile technologies require their own set of design and development principles.” (Saeid), followed by “…It will not be effective if we simply try and put an online curriculum onto a mobile device.” (Jasmine)
The conversation reminded me of TWO things:
1) Eight years ago, when I started my first job in EdTech, the school I worked for was going through the process of replacing a legacy Learning Management System. As you might imagine, there were challenges. One phrase I’ll never forget from that time is “You can’t just digitize your paper and call that an online course.” and it seems like this basic sentiment continues to be true with the emergence of each (categorically different) kind of technology.
2) This also makes me reflect on another phrase I hear frequently, which is something along the lines of “Technology should not determine teaching.” and although I understand the sentiment behind it, I’ve come to believe that it’s an oversimplification and therefore somewhat inaccurate. My thoughts are these – each technology has parameters for the kinds of things it can do and therefore clearly these parameters MUST be taken into consideration when designing/delivering learning. However, this does not mean that (as a teacher/designer) you should not be using a student-centered approach that (at least in early design phase) ignores those parameters in lieu of what would be the best learning experience given no/few restrictions. But alas, ultimately, we are usually constrained by certain realities of context and technologies.
In short – I agree with both these perspectives and think the design process needs to cycle between considerations of the affordances/restrictions of (mobile) tech and the learning outcomes and students – and as Jasmine alludes to, the way mobile technologies are used for non-academic purposes offers great insights into untapped potentialities. It makes me think that instructional design and teaching is going to become increasingly experimental, and we will have to be bold to resist “digitizing paper”, to instead harness the affordances of constantly shifting opportunities mobile technologies offer.
Mobile Technologies influence instructional design choices because instructors often know that there are several technological tools, for example Microsoft Office (Word, Powerpoint, etc.), that can best deliver a lesson for visual learners. According to Baek and Guo (2019), there are six principles for guiding the pedagogical, content design, and choice of mobile technology for instruction: (1) Develop a simple and intuitive interface design, (2) integrate interactive multimedia, (3) build short, modular lessons and activities, (4) design activities which are engaging and entertaining, (5) design content that is contextual, relevant, and valuable to the learner, and (6) just-in-time delivery (Baek & Guo, 2019, p. 6). It is important for instructors to know that all learners have different styles of learning, so a professor may choose to instruct using games and activities through Kahoot then note taking because it may be how the students in this class learn best. It is also valuable for an instructional designer to conduct some Educational Action Research to analyze and identify what Mobile Technologies are more effective and efficient for certain lesson types. I believe that emerging Mobile Technologies and hearing from multiple learners’ voices also influences instructional design choices. What are your thoughts on the six principles mentioned above? What other factors do you think influence instructional design choices besides Mobile Technologies?
Baek, E., & Guo, Q. (2019). Instructional Design Principles for Mobile Learning. In Y. (. Zhang, & D. Cristol (Eds.), Handbook of Mobile Teaching and Learning (pp. 1-22). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_111-1
Hi Miguel, I think another factor that ID must consider is interactivity between classmates and instructor. Online and mobile learning is often criticized for not providing a way for learners to connect with others. We know that people enjoy face-to-face learning and that learning is a social activity. ID need to remember this as well. I can’t imagine that the MET program would be any good if I didn’t have an opportunity to share my thoughts and ideas with classmates, have opportunity to connect with my professors, and have the chance to work with other professionals on projects. These activities play a pivotal role in cementing my learning.
Despite the fact that mobile technology is increasingly viewed as ‘an extension of self’ it is still A TOOL, and HOW and WHEN we choose to use it matters. These are choices instructors and designers must address explicitly and can be built-into learning contexts in a variety of ways. For example, the demographic I design learning for right now is typically busy professionals, balancing fulltime jobs, family, etc. with school. For them, it’s important to design for efficiency and accessibility but also to remind them to take breaks and take care of themselves. I’m reminded of SOUL in ETEC 511, and how there was one day scheduled per week where we were encouraged to take a guilt-free break from the course. This was an important lesson for me to learn because, yes I COULD have planned regular breaks for myself during ANY MET course…but would I actually do it if I hadn’t seen it modeled explicitly? Would I know that it’s “okay”? Maybe – maybe not.
We’ve talked a lot of about establishing healthy boundaries with technology and I can’t help but think that, perhaps like a martial arts teacher handing a student their first sword, we have a responsibility to be more explicit about teaching certain elements of respect and discipline when it comes to these powerful digital tools we wield.
I believe that mobile technologies significantly affect instructional design choices. Understanding what mobile devices users will be accessing the educational product with is essential when developing it. Font size, resolution, the size of drag and drop items, visual complexity, and user input are just a few variables that significantly alter how products are developed. For example, when developing mobile learning programs, designers must continuously streamline material as much as possible to achieve the greatest feedback speed for users. People using mobile technology expect applications or products to be responsive. Mobile learners are likely to lose interest and abandon the lesson if the content consumes too much time loading. For this same reason, graphics often must be cropped and compressed. Designers also need to consider the medium they are using. Mobile technology users are easily distracted; mobile technology is used mainly for multi-tasking, and users can quickly be frequently interrupted or distracted. When designing this needs to be taken into account, the material should be designed in an interactive way that holds users’ attention; however, we also must consider that users might leave and come back at a later time; therefore, the design must allow the material to be easily accessible and allow users to jump back in at any time. This is why we often see mobile lessons designed in small time chunks that learners can access at any time and from anywhere. Finally, depending on the mobile technology being used, we must consider how mobile interactions occur in different mobile environments. For example, clicking a website link on a computer is easy, but it is much more difficult to click a website link or copy and paste a website link on a relatively small size mobile phone screen with your finger. There are many more universal design principles for mobile learning. The paper below is almost ten years old; however, many of the same principles hold true today.
Elias, T. (2011). Universal instructional design principles for mobile learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 143. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i2.965
Hi Graham. I totally agree with the points you have mentioned. the layout, font size, graphics, loading speed, and entertainment elements are key components of instructional design via mobiles. We, as users, operate on our mobile phones to respond and interact with so many communities and platforms, so distraction is inevitable, and all designers can do is to incorporate features that encourage commitment and grit. With the abundance of FREE mobile technologies, it is easier than ever to give up a course or lose interest. So, there must be learning aids to sustain the attention of the user. In short, I believe the design will be super convenient and highly customized so that the user feels he is taking partnership is the learning design and the technology is not disruptive to his valued routine. Thanks for sharing the source.
Many teachers are not willing to encourage the use of mobile applications in their instructional design choices because some apps are not user friendly. There are some may use it as a tool to improve the learning experience of students, but others are intimated by the technology, the headache it comes with learning it and traditional mindsets of sticking with outdated resources. To encourage educators to use mobile technologies to influence their intructional design choices, they need to be built better – some are great and most aren’t.
This resistance is also beyond the way the software is designed. The hardware of a desktop provides a more tactile experience of having the keyboard and large screen real estate. Mobile tech companies are on the way to solving this issue – some technologies overcame the screen size as being a constraint with AR/VR tech. But the need for the tactile experience is being ignored.
Those utlising mobile technologies to influence instructional design choices are utilizing the strength of being mobile to improve activities in thier classrooms ( such as labs, field trips, assemesments etc)
The audience for this discussion forum is a skewed demographic of education professionals. We are a self selected group of individuals who are interested in and/or excited by technology in education. In my experience, that does not represent the majority. For mobile technology to truly have a deep and lasting impact on education there needs to be investment at all levels to ensure that:
1. All educators are incentivized and given the opportunities to become proficient in educational and mobile technologies.
2. Ensure all educators and students have equitable access to the tools and resources required to be successful when using mobile learning technologies
I would not take these as a given.
Design for web-based learning was easier (in a manner) before mobile learning tipped the scales for distribution and ease of use. A 1600-page, responsive, and web-accessible ebook is lighter by far than that hard copy. Narrative descriptions for tech math, for example, were crowded, linear, with multiple tables and graphs required to express change, and accompanied by complex assessments with pop-up calculators and fill-in-the-blank interactions designed to perform skill-and-drill exercises. Extra spacing and different interactions could have been included, but weren’t engineering students Googling the problems and solutions anyway?
Mobile learning demands simpler design architecture even for complex problems. Problem solving, critical thinking, and learning are not exactly linear. We jump back and forth between the present problem to solve and pre-requisite knowledge, so why instructionally design a linear process? Thinking and reflection can be reimagined with new learning architectures using technologies designed for mobile delivery. Smaller screens are great for branching simulations where instruction can be narrowed down to the simplest learning objective with a narrative description of a concept, or a short video, a slider object for graph manipulation to express an increase or decrease, and decision points that drive learning to mastery or back to an earlier point with additional hints and feedback to help make different decisions. Concept checks and call outs and decision points have been in textbooks for a long time, but being immersed in a book is not the same as an immersive mobile learning experience that affords text-to-speech inputs, audio glossary definition, priming information, experience points, and a way to compete with peers by sharing results.
As a previous instructional designer, I created many online eLearning and training. In fact, I created training for pilots who needed access to training offline. Using mobile technologies, one must design for their audience. Ensuring pilots had the ability to download and access their training offline, was one of my responsibilities. Therefore, as technologies continue to develop, it is crucial to ensure the content is always accessible and usable to the learners/audience. The tools are there, with the right LMS and the right SCORM package, training can be downloaded online to be accessed later offline.
I agree Emma! I think that instructional design activities that can be enhanced through mobile technologies can include mixed reality. In the classroom setting, we can allow learners to practice skills virtually (eg. during science experiments) before doing the experiment themselves. Or maybe the mixed reality practice activity could help learners practice the first step of the experiment, scaffolding for further experimentation or creating new hypotheses.
The ubiquity of mobile devices, and the vast and growing ecosystem of associated apps will certainly introduce both new challenges and new opportunities for educators and instructional designers in the context of the technology involved and its particular utility for solving educational challenges, (e.g. “How can I use that new app, Blurbl, that everyone’s talking about, in my classroom?”), I think that mobile technology’s most immediate impact on instructional design will be by forcing educators to revisit and reconsider the social factors of learning — peer-to-peer learning, informal learning, collaborative learning, crowdsourced knowledge, constructivism, etc.
The most influential and popular apps of our time — think Twitter, Facebook, TikTok — are not inherently about the technology that underpins them, nor the sophistication of the gadgets we use to access them. Twitter could probably run just fine on your first smartphone, and there’s nothing particularly revolutionary about posting a few sentences to the world. Indeed, blogs existed well before Twitter decided that limiting the size of posts would improve them. What these apps did do was recognize our social nature and our desire to connect, and by giving us new ways to do this across time and space they changed the nature of what we mean by “social”.
This, in turn, created new expectations for technology, and this unsurprisingly includes educational technologies. Comfortable users of mobile social technologies expect to be connected to others, expect to collaborate or consult, expect to have access to the world and all that’s in it, and expect their education to be compatible with this. Instructional design will find itself irrelevant if it fails to understand and incorporate these new social norms into its praxis.
Mobile technologies improve teaching/learning and engage students in their learning process. For instance, wireless technology, mobile learning platform and mobile devices can provide students with new contents and facilitate information access anywhere and anytime before coming to the classroom. This allows more time and opportunities for students to connect, communicate, collaborate and construct their learning in class time, rather than simply processing new information during the class time. Also, technologies can allow new ways to assess student performance, real-time and provide personalized education. Teachers are not simply content/skill delivers, rather they should be motivators/facilitators/leaders who inspire students with curiosity, motivate discussions and encourage critical thinking to solve challenges.
Mobile devices are not only a communication tool for us to go to an online course, but also can be exploited into a practicing platform for a specific course. For example, in the course of Interaction Design towards undergraduate students, I employed the smartphone to design a practicing stage in which students were required to complete an App proposal design through team work. In practice, the students used their smart phones to carry out the developing process of concept making, user investigation, function definition, framework design, interaction design and presentation. I have to say the smartphone is a practicing platform that perfectly meets the needs of the course. I believe that mobile devices can be exploited into many uses in different courses. This will completely change the course deliveries.
Mobile technologies have influenced my instructional design, altered my role as a teacher, and made me a better educator. I currently teach music at two elementary schools, concert bands at one, and K to 7 music at the other. My instruction for concert band has not changed because we are still playing instruments. However, at my other school, because of logistics, and needs of the school, I lost my music room for the year; which means I am teaching by cart. Grades 5, 6, and 7 use Chromebooks extensively. My current instructional design has definitely been influenced by the Google environment.
At first, I thought it was a constraint because I couldn’t teach recorder, ukulele, and guitar anymore. The constraint of having to move to a mobile platform has allowed me to be able to go more in depth with the content I want: music theory, music history, and music composition. There seems to have been freedom in this “constraint.” Doing any sort of academic work in my music room a challenge because they would have to bring down their materials, duo-tangs, I had to provide photocopies, and if they wanted to dive deeper into a topic, it had to go through me. Now, through their Chromebooks and Google Classroom their assignments are posted, as are materials, and other things needed. I recently did a unit on the instruments of the orchestra, and my grade seven students were easily able to do their own research, listen to different pieces of music, and do their own inquiry into their instrument of choice, which concluded in a presentation infant of the class. The use of these technologies allowed me to more efficiently assess work, give feedback, and give any other type of support that was needed.
I also feel that mobile technologies have forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor. If I did that instrument project just a year ago, I would be the only giver of that knowledge in the room, and if I didn’t know, I would be the one searching for that knowledge. Now, I feel that I don’t have to be a human encyclopedia, because the student access to all that knowledge instantly. What I find is that I am now teaching my students how to develop ideas, make connections, help them understand concepts, thinking skills, and how to communicate.
I am excited for the future because this switch to the use of mobile technologies has made me a better in class instructor, and I am looking forward to further improvement.
I agree, Mark, that mobile technologies are opening up a huge range of opportunities for Music students. Research and support are just a small part of that. Over the past few years I have been trying out online composition platforms with my students, such as Soundtrap, Isle of Tune, Incredibox, Chrome Music Lab, and so on. They don’t need instruments, or a band room, to be musicians these days, and that’s exciting! Have you checked out the Midnight Music website? I have learned so much from all the material that is shared there, for free!
A way I have noticed mobile technology influencing my instructional design choices is the methods in which I distribute activities, project guides, videos, lecture slides/notes, the daily agenda, study notes, etc… it’s all done on google classroom, which is something I generally use on my PC, but I am acutely aware that many of my students access all of this information from their phones. Even if they choose to create a non-digital artifact (always an option) they will still access the activity/project guide on their mobile device anywhere they may be in the school, community, or home. Many of my students live in the country and have daily bus rides of over an hour – this is when they do a lot of their school work. The point is, mobile technologies allows the entire contents of my class to be accessible at all times to students and I can’t imagine never not doing this… I can only imagine that my physical classroom becomes more and more meshed with online, mobile tech over time.
Accessibility is such a big part of this. I also think that with the prevalence of mobile technology, more of my interactions with my students are starting to appear online as well. My school district uses Microsoft Teams, and as the year progressed, I noticed that more of my students are starting to mention me online and ask for help or instructions. Most of this is on my mobile device, which allows me to type a quick response and get them the help they needed. I’m wondering if you are finding this as well?
Mobile technologies support the way the role of teacher/instructor has been changing since the mid-20th century. From early childhood to school-age to adult education, the idea of a teacher as a facilitator has moved from the fringes of education to the mainstream. Mobile technology supports this role transition but it didn’t launch it. Mobile technology is a tool and we will use it to accomplish whatever goals we set. If we want our learners to be passive, we’ll use it for that, although that doesn’t seem to be the way education is trending. If we want mobile technology to support accessible, learner-centred, diverse learning contexts then we will use it to do that.
Mobile technology does specifically influence instructional design choices, however, because virtual learning, mobile or not, is not face-to-face learning and the differences in these environments need to be accommodated.
How do mobile technologies influence instructional design choices? Have mobile technologies forever altered the role of the teacher/instructor?
As with so many things in education, I feel the answer is “Yes and No” and “It depends”.
Has mobile tech forever altered the role of teacher? Yes, but it depends on who the teacher is. Many teachers are still minimal users of technology. Their use is basic and minimal. However, new teachers and many experienced teachers use technology effectively and often. Their use is proactive and rich. At this point in time, with DL taking on such a large role in education, I think many teachers who are tech users are looking at this moment in time as possibly a watershed moment. A moment when the model of delivery is primed for a big shake-up that’s been coming for a while. I think at this point in time many educators are taking a hard look at what “teacher” could be. At least that’s my hope.
How do mobile technologies influence instructional design choices? Well, I think there are many factors that influence a teacher’s instructional design choices, other than the mobile tech itself. Factors such as; the teacher’s attitude towards personal growth, risk tolerance, the supports around the teacher, the school culture and access to tools. I think these factors combine with the mobile learning tools available to the teacher, and how they are used, resulting in new learning experiences.
I think a question that is often overlooked is “what is my purpose/intent for incorporating mobile learning into my teaching?” What is gained by having students do mobile learning?
Are you wanting students to be learning while outside of the classroom? Why? What is being gained? Possibly the teacher wants students to be connected while in a situational learning context, such as watching an instructional video while on a nature walk. Or perhaps the intent is for students to respond to a poll in a classroom? Or perhaps students are making a video while moving through different parts of the school? Or perhaps students are being asked to document activities in the community after school or on weekends?
If we go back to the question of “what can education be?”, we can start experimenting with how mobile devices help open up what learning could be. And then we start to look at what mobile learning tools out there are of value and where the gaps are that need to be filled in with new tools that will allow for “what could be”.
Instructional design choices are only as good as the tools available. So, let’s make some new tools that allow for new learning experiences.
I agree with you Toby. One thing that emergency teaching identified were the inequality gaps found in low income and rural areas. With the pandemic, it is very difficult to ignore this issues. Different tools are needs in order to level the playing field for students regardless of their background. A different message must also be addressed to government in how they intend to resolve inequality among students in a digital classroom environment.
Mobile technologies have sometimes allowed me to continue giving small group demos while keeping other student learning in another area. For example, while giving on floor demos on pieces of machinery, I often only have 5-6 students watch at a time. They need to see what I’m doing, and sometimes I only have enough safety gear for those students. Thanks to the help of a local college, other students can practice virtual welding in the next room during my demos. I know there safe, and I can focus on the small group I’m working with. Mobile technologies have sometimes allowed me to manage my classroom/shop in a safer manner.
Hi Michael,
I think this is a good example of using technology to facilitate learning, but I wonder if this is an example of “mobile learning”? Could these students just as easily be watching the videos on the classroom on a laptop or desktop computer? What is the mobile part of this example?
Hi, Toby.
“We use this broader connotation of “mobile” to refer to all “mobile and wireless” means of connectivity in traditional and emerging contexts.” This was the definition given near the start of our course. This is a emerging technology (virtual welders) being used to represent a traditional process (electrical welding processes). The machine connects through blue tooth to a screen showing students if they are staying within the parameters set. I thought this fit within the definition of mobile for our course, but I could totally be wrong. I have a habit of always trying to relate my teachable to the content in the course. Perhaps I should take a different approach from time to time.
Mobile technologies come in handy in many ways for learning opportunities but not always. I find that whenever I have my secondary science students work in the lab they usually never have a desire or need to use a mobile device unless for taking an occasional picture of something interesting. The same also seems to bare true to many other hands on activities at school. My lesson planning always has technology in mind to further the learning but it usually never takes the front seat of my focus, to keep students engaged and interested in the learning objectives. In some cases, depending on mobile technology too much in the classroom and using it repeatedly for assignments can get less enthusiasm from students as they don’t get enough diversity to peak curiosity.
Mobile Technologies are influencing the choices of instructional designers. With mobile technologies like AR/VR, instructional designers have greater flexibility in providing the simulated environment in which the learners can interact. Also, the use of Artificial Intelligence and machine learning will help designers to understand the learner’s needs and interests as it will optimize the content for the learner. The plugins and extensions integrated in LMS and content management systems will provide additional support and functionality to users. The learning analytics will help instructional designers to get the insight into the overall performance and understand the difficulty level of the learner. With mobile design being responsive, the instructors will be able to integrate the features which will help learners to socially interact, collaborate and provide accessible learning for MOOC courses.
Loveleen,
Thank you for this post. I was looking at the prompt through the lens of teacher as instructional designer, but of course, there is the lens of what tech companies can now make, based on the new tools and capabilities available to them. I like how you pointed out new functionalities that can be incorporated into LMS that open up new possibilities. And of course, with AI and AR and 5G, tech companies will be able to design learning opportunities that were not possible before.
Hi Toby,
Thanks for the response. I think the teachers as instructional designers need to be trained by the companies which are coming up with innovative and emerging technologies for education. Even if these tech companies are evolving the functionality of CMS by integrating the technologies, the teachers still shy away from using them while designing their content as many a times they are not comfortable with the change which the technology brings.
Loveleen, the sooner these instructional design choices happen the better. I think everyone who teaches is looking for needed changes with the delivery of emergency teaching, especially at the post – secondary level.
Yes, definitely Brittany. It will help educators as well as learners. However, the full potential of these technologies and their use will only be possible if the education community, whether teachers, students or subject matter experts are trained on how these technologies can help them in the instructional design and learning outcome.
Hi Loveleen, you are absolutely right. I definitely see AR/VR as very likely choices to where online learning will develop. Especially in terms of ‘real-world’ ‘hands-on’ problems. Many kinesthetic learners want to learn by doing, which is what AR/VR will give them the ability to do!
As our next generation is growing up with mobile devices as the everyday norm, I think as educators, we have a responsibility to teach them on how to better use these as learning tools. Students’ attitude towards learning is also changing as a result. The emergence of mobile access trains our kids to demand for fast access of information, the use of social media trains them to demand for more collaboration and communication amongst peers, they are more demanding of real-time or immediate feedback, they are more demanding of personalized learning, and also the gamification of learning.
The challenge for educators is to change the teaching approach so that they can better accommodate for the new generation of learners with different learning needs. Children are no longer satisfied with just sitting in the classroom to listen to the teacher teacher. They are more curious than ever, and they want to be involved in the process of finding information, and discussing information, rather than just being the silent receiver. They want to know how that information can relate to the real world. I think this is even more obvious with younger children. My 5-year old daughter enjoys watching educational videos on YouTube kids to learn about sea creatures, and even history and greek mythology. However when she gets to kindergarten, she enjoys having the space to talk about it with her friends.
I think the problem with this is that there’s starting to be a lot more fake news and “click-bait” videos. My grade 7-8 students are also very into learning their passions via youtube or twitch or discord, but often times they would discover a community that, while funny, are not congruent with real life. An specific example of this would be reddit. There are so many wonderful subreddits around with lots of information and support on all kind of hobbies, but a group of students discovered r/wallstreetbets due to the amount of media attention that it received. The result was a lot of mimicking the content that would be considered to be funny on the subreddit, but was highly inappropriate at school. We have programs that talk about digital citizenship and how to determine whether content is good or not, but the speed that the internet is growing and the amount of content available worries me.
Different levels of education have been influenced differently by mobile technologies, as has the role of the teacher at each level. In all cases, teachers are no longer the fountains of knowledge, but are facilitators, helping students learn how to learn. With primary school students, the teacher’s role has not been altered to a great degree, as young students still need to learn basic academic and behavioural skills, most of which are best learned in a fairly traditional classroom setting. But as students get older, mobile technologies play more and more of a part in their education, and they gain greater independence. The traditional lecture-style of teaching has become a thing of the past and the teacher’s role is to advise and direct students in their learning.
Mobile technologies have come to influence instructional design to a much greater degree over the past year. With students learning from home, teachers have needed to be ever-cognisant of how their content will be received best by learners at home. These learners are using a variety of hardware, both mobile and non-mobile, they have a range of technological skills, perseverance, support, and so on. So instructional design has to try to take these factors into account, in order to reach all learners. At the same time, mobile technologies open up a world of applications that can support learning, which also affects the way teachers think about instructional design.
I believe the roles aren’t what’s changing but the approach is changing. For example, instead of educators taking an instructionist approach (guided by rigour and measurement with a specific goal in mind), there’s a shift towards a constructionist approach (learners are directly involved in the designing and the learning process). Educators will still provide guidelines but students are taking up a bigger role in their own education. As a result, students will be able to problem-solve, reflect, and represent their learning in different ways in an environment where it’s safe to do so.
I’ve taught at a PBL (Project-Based Learning) school before, where students were involved in “Project Weeks”. This takes place about twice a year and it’s a cross-curricular program where students have the flexibility to create whatever they want within the guidelines and objectives that were set for them. What some of these students produced and created at the end of the week was quite amazing and I was also noticing students showing skills I had no idea they had. They brought devices and tools they had at home for their projects and had built something that was in their own interests and more relevant to them. They also had the chance to build collaboration, teamwork, and conflict resolution skills.
Even though students are more involved with the learning process, they still need instructions, assessments, and support and that’s what teachers have always done for students. The increasing use of mobile technologies is opening up more opportunities for students to take ownership and learn to be accountable for their own learning. So then the question is, how do we create an environment for students to explore and learn these skills?
Mobile technology can influence instructional design choices in many ways:
1. Student preference of OS – your students have a preferences to what they use. Iphone users will stick to apps that are more friendly to Apple products. Andriod users will likely stick to apps that are more friendly to Google software. The instructor is stuck in the middle to find a friendly balance.
2. Syncing data to your audience – an ELS class will use mobile data differently vs a Math class, or Chemistry class. If you are recording on your mobile device or your students are recording on their devices, some apps are more friendlier vs others.
3. Who is in charge – the idea is that mobile technology is suppose to provide more freedom to the user. Depending on the classroom task, the roles of teacher centred vs student centred may become interchangeable.
4. Location – the student is not landlocked in the classroom. Students may be required to conduct their learning through an LMS, or conduct assignments completely outside of the learning environment all together. It is very difficult to monitor if the student is on task until you receive their assignment. Other conditions may require students to meet at a certain time accessing the online environment through the use of app like WebEx, Zoom, or Skype. It on guarantee that all students will be able to show up.
5. GB space – not every mobile device is equal in power. Limitations may require assignments to be set at restrictive guidelines in order for data to be transferred from the student to the instructor.
6. LMS capability – not all LMS types are mobile friendly. Instructors may be required to move out of the LMS completely in order to use a platform that is more mobile friendly to reach their students.
7. Bandwidth – if the area you live in has poor bandwidth, the classroom activities and interactions may be cut into half or less. This circumstance is completely out of the control of the instructor and students but can have huge implications concerning if it makes or breaks the instructional design strategy.
These are just a few examples I have encountered. I know many more exist. I am just brainstorming at the moment. Please feel free to add or expand on one of more of the areas I listed. It would be very helpful if anyone could discuss how they resolved any of these barriers/ obstacles/ challenges to instructional design. Success stories are good to hear as well.
The role of a teacher continues to be mentorship. No matter how intelligent AI becomes, children need to be nurtured, cared for, and loved before they are willing to engage in learning, a task that involves risk taking and allowing oneself to be vulnerable; only a human can provide these things. Intrinsically, among many other factors, we are motivated by a desire to be accepted by those we admire; we thrive with positive role models because we need to see what is possible ahead. I cannot imagine a child admiring an AI entity. Our curriculum is also currently looking at the role of empathy and kindness in education. We are seeing these virtues as solutions to problems like climate change. Teachers continue to be guides and facilitators that bring relevance to the curriculum, even if we may no longer be the main information transmitters. Though there is an uncountable number of instructional videos, communities, and informational pages on the web that children can learn from, we must remember that ubiquitous access to knowledge does not lead to learning. There are ineffective teachers out there who only show videos as lessons and I know they’re out there because their students complain loudly about it.
Many have mentioned assessment, that feedback will become faster with Big Data, learning analytics, and AI. Maybe these entities will replace us when it comes to assessment, but maybe not. Research show that teachers continue to be best at evaluating their students, out performing any standardized test. This suggests that there is something more to assessment than cold numbers, and that students’ abilities may fluctuate greatly depending on what it is they are doing and who it is that they are doing it with. We must also remember that assessment takes place every second in our work day and is not limited to a test, a paper, or a project. In a class discussion, in a tutorial, how many times have we asked students a key question that unlocked everything for them and that question was just based on what we just heard or saw on their faces? Each child responds based on their experience and on their perception of their learning environment, and the number of different experiences and learning environments is infinite. Can we code an entity to account for all of these things?
Digital assessment tools can be great in a lot of ways because they can quickly mark and analyze data, and help teachers understand the results, but there are certain things that it cannot do, at least at this point in time. One digital assessment my school gives for math at the beginning of each year is called the MIPI and there is a deep divide in our staff whether we should be giving it digitally or with paper and pencil. The argument by some is that paper and pencil allows the teacher to see who is reversing their digits, and what was their thinking process, where others (usually in higher grades) are in favour of the digital version because it is faster and it is automatically scored. There is definitely a place for learning analytics and digital assessments, but there are also many instances where teachers need to be able to see their students in action to gain a better understanding of their process and skills.
I agree that teachers will always be needed, particularly by young students, to facilitate their learning, and provide all those other things you mentioned. Over the past year we have seen a huge increase in children’s mental health issues, brought on by all the challenges of COVID-19. Much of this stems from children having to stay at home, and not having the learning and social supports provided by their teachers and schools. Your statement, “ubiquitous access to knowledge does not lead to learning” is important to bear in mind during this time of transformation in education.
Wendy and Ying,
Your posts immediately made me question, “Who is scaffolding educational technology use to children?” I don’t know that anyone is in an intentional way. Parents likely model and scaffold tech use for communication and entertainment, maybe work. The pandemic has meant children, families, and teachers learned how mobile (and stationary) technology can be used for instruction on the fly. But is anyone truly scaffolding learning via mobile technology?
Kindergarten readiness is a major issue for 4- and 5-year-olds in preschools and daycares, but the skills under that umbrella have almost nothing to do with digital literacy.
Scaffolding mobile learning would likely mean developmentally appropriate considerations of the pros and cons of the device/delivery method, how to save/review data, mental and physical health practices specific to online learning lifestyles, reality vs. fiction/representations, privacy, and online social etiquette.
Hi Lyndsay,
The answer is probably both parents and teachers. If a child never encounters a digital device between formal schooling, I think they are at a great disadvantage. We see more technology being integrated into classrooms and I have seen kindergarten classes use iPads to record digital journals. I think soon, digital literacy may very well be integrated into kindergarten classes one way or another. Not exposing children to digital devices is like not teaching them the alphabet before kindergarten. What do you think? Do you think there is a certain age before which we should avoid exposing children to mobile devices?
I agree, Ying, that the responsibility should be shared between parents and teachers, as kindergarten readiness currently is. I also think you’re right that young children need to be prepared to have mobile technology, and technology in general, in their learning environments. Anecdotally, the preschoolers I currently work with tend to be most comfortable using technology passively (to watch, see, or hear) but not actively.
That brings me to your last question. I think mobile technology has a place in early childhood programs for children over the age of two. A lot of brain development occurs during the first two years of life and studies have found screens may negatively impact brain development. Additionally, babies and toddlers do not learn language or social skills from a person who isn’t with them (i.e. they won’t learn communication skills from a television or radio), and these skills are massively important for that age group. On a related note, babies aren’t born with an understanding of representation vs. reality (ex. the lion on the tv isn’t a real lion) so any programming involving technology use would need to consider the child’s grasp of reality/fiction. I honestly can’t think of a piece of mobile technology that would be developmentally appropriate in an educational setting under the age of two beyond Siri allowing an educator to play a piece of music on-demand and screen-free.
However, for children aged 3 and older, I think mobile technology has a place in quality programming. It can be used, and I’ve seen it done well, to document learning, make learning moments visible to children and parents/caregivers, and create digital content children are used to consuming. Each of those outcomes has a slew of benefits for the child. Additionally, concerns regarding screens at this age have more to do with preventing the child from practicing skills they would otherwise be practicing if they were not on the screen. As long as the technology was open-ended, child-centred, and supported real-life experiences (bonus if it encourages physical activity!) then it would certainly enrich programming for this age group.
I’d love to hear your and others’ thoughts on this question!
Last week for our first day back to school we had limited technology to use at our school once it was dispersed out to all of the classes. My class is fortunate to have 10 iPads specifically for our class. I still wanted to get Chromebooks because I feel like they are easier to navigate through Google Classroom, Google Slides, and Google Docs, but I couldn’t get my hands on any, so we just stuck with the iPads. It seemed to be trickier logging into the classroom, finding the work to complete, maneuvering through the prompts, etc… however it was possible, just different than a laptop. I noticed that my students didn’t seem to mind using an iPad over a Chromebook. Students seem much more adaptable in that sense. They didn’t seem bothered by having to type their writing activity for the day on an iPad either. I simply think they were just happy to have some sort of technology at their fingertips.
Hello Kylie,
You are so lucky. We are not going back to school until August. There is no budget for schools (private or public) to provide them with devices such as iPad or computers. There might be laptops available for students but every class takes turn borrowing them from the library. I work at a private school. All of the students have a cellphone to socialize with, which I am sure these days have been used for educational purposes too. Unfortunately, students from public schools are not that lucky. Many classes have been put on hold because several students do not have a cellphone; even if they do they do not have an internet connection.
As for writing, some of the students are happy. Others, not so much. I have told them that since the quarantine has been extended, then we might have an online exam. Therefore, I introduced typing in Chinese characters. Some of the students were very excited because that meant that they would no longer need their weekly handwriting exercise. I should not be saying this, but I think I got lucky too because some handwriting is just illegible. Others were kind of upset because they are used to writing on paper and just send me a picture via email of their homework. I just started doing this for this past week, I am not sure how it will turn out.
Hi Kylie,
It’s interesting that your students find the Chromebooks easier to use. My kids are quite young, Grade 2/3 so we usually have iPads in the classroom which they are able to use with ease. I wanted to experiment with the laptops and see if they would be able to adapt to using them fairly quickly. During our first lesson the kids learned how to log into a site called EPIC for reading. And let me tell you, it was CHAOS! It was much more challenging for them to navigate compared to the iPad and I felt very overwhelmed as I tried to make my way around the classroom. A lot of students struggled with the keyboard and how to use the mouse. To be honest, I haven’t tried using them again since then, but I would like to give it another shot once we are back in the classroom.
One of my coworkers commented that kids (teenagers) were pros at using computers when playing computer games. However, when it came to using the computer for school they we not in their comfort zone. I am pretty sure that if I needed to learn how to play video games on a computer, they might be surprised on how lost I might be. My hands might not be as agile and I might not remember all the commands.
Hi Silvia,
I have noticed the same thing. High school students can easily take time to figure out and master a game on a computer, but when it comes to school, they don’t have the same interest in problem-saving. If I ask students to download their Google Doc to their desktop, so that it can be uploaded to their Moodle site, they shut down. I find video games much more difficult to figure out, but students have a willingness to try. Do you think this comes from a fear of failure in school settings? In a video game, students do have any real consequence with repeatedly trying. Perhaps there is an underlying unwillingness to fail in front of their peers and teacher because they are focused on grades?
I realize that it might be a stretch, but I see it often in math games vs. word problems. One results in trying, and the other causes shutdowns before they finish reading the question.
It is interesting how capable students are doing something they enjoy versus school work! I find a lot of my students prefer the simple tasks (creating a doc or slides show) over using FlipGrid, Google My Map activity over technology-based activities that they actually have to spend some time to figure it or watch my Screencastify explaining it! But if they were at school face-to-face they would be more into the technology activities over a journal entry, but I would be there to explain step by step.
Hello Kristin,
Video games are entertaining and relaxing compared to school work. It is fun so they are willing to learn all the different moves or commands to succeed. Maybe you are right, they are afraid of failure. With video games, there is always do-over. Can students do that with grades too? I think if students knew that there were do-over opportunities, maybe they would not take school work as seriously as they should. Grades is their “reward”, what if school work was not graded would that take some pressure off their shoulders?
Hi Ravneet,
At our school, iPads are for the primary students and Chromebooks are for the intermediate students for that exact reason. Younger children seem to be able to navigate the iPads more intuitively than Chromebooks. I know a teacher at my school teaching grade 2/3 and she had them on Chromebooks, but scaffolded every step. Logging in is a huge learning curve for that age, so that is about all they do the first time and they move step by step and have to put their hands on their head when they are done… very structured, but this way it is a bit more feasible to use Chromebooks with the younger aged children.
The increased role and use of portable electronic devices in education has most definitely already influenced instructional design choices and will continue to do so. We are already seeing course designers, educators and ed. tech. companies develop learning material that display optimally on mobile devices alongside the more traditional personal computer set up as demand has increased for this type of content thanks to the proliferation of mobile phones worldwide. Because mobile devices offer students a convenient and accessible way to connect with their formal and increasingly informal learning environments from virtually anywhere, we can expect to see more students taking up their mobile phones as primary learning devices. This will fundamentally affect other factors of instructional design too such as how we structure feedback in the way we teach. Students will increasingly look for instantaneous feedback when they work on assignments or tasks similar to how they receive instantaneous feedback whenever they access anything on their mobile phones. This has already begun with the instantaneous feedback we give when students complete online quizzes for example. The culture of using a mobile phone brings with it an idea that for every action, the reaction will take place just as fast. How we gain feedback from our classes regarding learning will continue to evolve too. Already we make use of applications like Kahoot! in classes as a gamified way to not only allow students to test their own knowledge (gaining feedback for themselves) using their mobile phones or tablets as clickers but to also give valuable feedback to the educator to allow them time to address issues in content covered before a high stakes test.
Hi Carla,
I didn’t think about this aspect of instructional design but you made a valid point. Mobile phones coupled with computing technologies allow students instant access to information. As for feedback, I believe that educational technology companies are seriously looking into it. The past decade has witnessed the progressive integration of AI in testing across multiple subjects. For example, in language testing now more companies are moving toward using AI instead of using human raters. Though instantaneous feedback is not quite possible right now, students are able to receive their score within a few days.
As for educators, I think many of them will choose to give audio feedback in the future. If studemts are using their mobile phones as their primary learning device, audio feedback is more convenient and it helps to build a connection between the teacher and students.
Hi Pascaline, I think you are right when you mention that audio feedback will become not only more convenient but also more in demand in how mobile technologies are used for learning. This trend has already become apparent in mobile communication channels- where most communication is shifting to voice notes as opposed to typed messages so that begs the question- why not use audio to the same effect in our learning spaces? It seems like we can take a page out of more popular mobile technologies and apply them in our trade. The LMS used by my institution has voice notes programmed into the customized mobile app available to students but it’s not available on the website version of the LMS. I actually don’t even know whether I would be able to see audio files on the website version if I student sent one using their phones.
Hi Carla and Pascaline,
This is an interesting topic that I didn’t think about before the pandemic. Since I have been connecting with students on a more 1:1 basis, I am finding that I have been providing feedback and guidance using audio methods instead of text. The feedback from the students is that they appreciate the personalized touch and like the interactive whiteboard, where I walk them through the steps of the problem. In the past, I would use screenshots and text but found that I was frequently repeating myself. Recently, having the ability to interact with both audio and visual methods have allowed more interest and have inspired me to continue by these means. Cisco’s Annual Internet Report forecasted that by this year, 2020, about 80% of the internet’s traffic would be video, I believe that education should consider this trend and adapt to fit the needs of the students.
Hi Carla,
Your post made me remember some of my practicum days when my cooperating teachers would encourage me to have a back up lesson on the days that I was using technology. At first I would have a back up plan but I quickly realized that for the most part technology is reliable and if there is an issue it is usually user error. The ability to rely on technology means that I don’t plan a back up lesson and if something doesn’t work I have the skills to wing it now 😛
Mobile technologies have made it easier for instructors to design exercises and assignments that require group work. Students now have so many options for communication and collaboration, from simple group chat apps to discuss their project to full-on collaborative tools that can be accessed from any device, like Google Docs.
The easy accessibility of mobile tech makes it easy for students to check in with their group mates while they’re out and about and also makes it easier for us to quickly jot down ideas whenever we get them by simply popping into a shared document to record our thoughts.
Hi Anne, I completely agree. I sometimes forget about the time where I had to do group work without Google Docs. Without having the ability to write, read, review, and stay in contact with my peer group the whole time. With that being said, I sometimes wonder, if collaboration was easier in person. The brainstorming phase of group projects now seem to require zoom calls and digital whiteboards. However, prior to technology, I think better bonds may be formed when teams have the ability and privilege to work together in person, especially during the initial group meetings.
I remember a conversation I had with our school principal when we came back on campus after the coronavirus online class section. He said, “maybe the biggest mistakes a lot of teachers made during the online class time was that they tried to keep teaching the way they did in the classroom.” All of us have to adapt to emerging situations, so of course, so does the instructional design of classes.
Mostly from what I have seen now, the application of technology in classes are mainly focused on using technology to finish assignments and projects. For example, filming drama skits with smartphones, editing, using powerpoints to do presentations, or students are given a link or a video from the teacher to watch. Most of the students are not having fun learning with technologies. Because the assignments from teachers that involve technologies didn’t help the students realize how they can utilize their mobile devices to learn or further their studies.
And yes, I also agree that we should teach the students HOW to learn instead of WHAT to learn. And if we want to include mobile technologies into this process, then we need to show the students HOW to use them instead of us just using them as a way of presenting the information.
Interestingly, your post reminded me of a staff room conversation I had with my colleagues. Among them, there were MET alumni :
Teacher: Do you guys get to learn a whole bunch of new technologies and become really tech-savvy?
MET alumnus: Not at all… the profs suppose that we know everything. They suppose that we are familiar with all the new technologies and take it for granted that we can use them all already …
Sounds funny, but true! Throughout my MET journey, I was never taught to use any piece of technology, but I have been exposed to tons. Thanks to the freedom and space for imagination and creativity offered by the learning activities designed by my profs, I learn from collaborating with my peers and my own independent research. I guess this is the difference between K-12 and postgraduate education? Maybe, with mobile technologies allowing students instant access to information and opportunities for collaboration, things will change, especially with the older grades.
Constructivism says students who take control of their own learning self-regulate by directing their own efforts to acquire knowledge and skill rather than relying on teachers (Zimmerman, 1989, p. 329). I believe there is value in letting students find their own connections, ask their own questions, and use their own preferred mediums for communication. My question is: at what age do kids start to develop the ability to self-regulate?
References
Zimmerman, B.A. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-0663.81.3.329
Powerful argument. I believe we should teach kids the ability of self-regulation as young as toddlers, and one of the most important environments of teaching that is at home. The key to self-regulate learning is to facilitate students to find their own learning project and object, instead of chasing “right answers.” Giving more credit to how students (from k-12 to postsecondary) develop during the process, rather than a fixed and quantified “result.” This is what Jane argued about HOW to learn should be the focus. Using mobile technologies as “tools” to deliver subject matters, I believe, indeed limits its potentials of leading students to explore the unknown and develop problem-solving skills. However, like what Jane and Ceci have reflected, teachers need to be guided to explore the adventures of solving technical problems and learning how to make the most of these technologies progressively.
The teacher is no longer the holder of knowledge as technology has grown and become widespread and further, devices in the classroom are becoming commonplace. Traditional lecture will soon be a thing of the past.
Here is an inspiring TED talk on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6vVXmwYvgs
But, that video is 5 years old now and as David Vogt said (1), ” mobile education is changing so quickly, content even a couple of years old may be out of date.”
So, looking to the future, maybe a better question is what can teachers do that technology cannot?
I think a large focus for teachers will be the personal skills: empathy, motivation, observational synthesis.
1. https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec523/2020/04/28/week-4-mobile-education-review/#respond
Hi Adrian,
This is something I often wonder moving forward. What can we (teachers) continue to offer that technology cannot? I agree with what you have said about “empathy, motivation, observational synthesis”. These are skills that would be challenging to teach with technology as they involve explicit explanations of emotion alongside real life situations. Not only do students need to understand what these skills are but also witness and be involved in situations where they are at play. As a Grade Two teacher I have felt through this odd pandemic time that primary aged teachers may always be fundamental due to safety and human connection. But yet as I dive further into this thought I wonder how or when there could be technology (even in the form of robots) that takes over that need. It is interesting to think about and I think as Educators we will play a roll in this transition in Education and what it will look like in the next decades.
Hi Lindsay, to think in a few years how VR and AR will be the top way of teaching. Will we need teachers? I hope so. I think teachers hold the human connection as you stated. We have feelings, we know how to support students needs when they are injured or hurt. We teach social emotional lessons where computers cannot understand feelings…yet. It will be a different story when AI’s start feeling and understanding how humans think.
In keeping with who holds the knowledge, a reading assigned in another course by Tapscott (2009) called Grown Up Digital comes to mind. Here, he describes 8 characteristics of young people which includes being natural collaborators that enjoy conversation, not lecture. They also scrutinize things more, and consider innovation as high importance. These characteristics indicate a changing relationship between traditional knowledge-holders and learners. With more knowledge readily available, the focus may now be shifting to how to interpret and analyse that knowledge, as well as how to collaborate towards common goals. Media and internet literacy are taking a higher importance in my teaching in the age of mobile. Let’s hope we all keep our teaching jobs! I’m pretty sure we’re a long ways from being automated.
Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw-Hill.
What you’ve mentioned is reflected in the shift in BCs curriculum from focusing on content to the core competencies. Teachers are providing learning spaces to develop communication, thinking, and personal and social awareness over the top-down delivery of content. The access to information that technology can instantly provide supports the idea of this shift.
You are right in that the teacher is no longer the sole disseminator of knowledge. Students have computers in their pockets that they can use to look up any random piece of information they need. What the teachers need to do is teach the students ‘how to learn’ and guide them in how to critically analyze, understand and apply the data that they are accessing. When doing assignments or projects, my students will look up the information they need and copy it into their project, but when asked actual comprehension and analysis questions as a follow up, they show little to no understanding other than parroting back what they copied. It is like being in an ocean and not knowing how to swim… if students have access to all the data but don’t know how to sort and apply it, they ‘drown’. There will always be a need for teachers to be facilitators to learn the necessary learning skills.
When I consider what technology tools I use in the classroom, I tend to look for tools that I can use with ease across multiple platforms. Not just for myself, but for my students. I want my students to also have the ease of accessing the tools from desktop, laptop and mobile device. A hindrance is a tool that is restricted to laptop use.
Many educators have been slowly moving towards being more of a facilitator of learning in the classroom and away from just lecturing at the front of the room. If you have already made this move as an educator, then I don’t think your role will change too much with mobile technology. I think mobile technology will still require educators to take the role of facilitator.
As David has consistently emphasized within this course, there’s a difference between technology that works on a mobile device, and technology that is designed to work well on a mobile device (or designed first and foremost with mobile in mind). As we move away from computer labs and roaming computer carts into the age of BYOD, that necessity to work seamlessly on any and every device will be of utmost importance, and will likely be the determining factor in which technologies we adopt. It sounds like this consideration has already been part of your practice for a while. For me, it’s something I will need to consider more in the future for sure.
I would say that mobile technologies have greatly changed instructional design choices. With the ubiquity of mobile devices such as laptops, smartphones and tablets coupled with wireless internet connection, people now have instantaneous access to information. Yes, it does displace the teacher as the sole provider of knowledge. This phenomenon comes at a cost though. With access to a wide variety of information, students often find it hard to find credible and trustworthy data. Teachers have the primary role today of imparting critical thinking skills to their students to help them sort the good and reliable sources of information from the less reliable if not fake ones. The role of the teacher has transitioned from being the sole provide of knowledge to someone who imparts and instills higher order thinking skills to students in order to navigate this new world of constant flow of information, data and news. Therefore instructional design choices ought to be centered on creating the type of learning environment that will support and sustain developing and hone these specific 21st century skills and competences.
Another point that I would like to add is the concept of learning on the go. With easy access to information and course materials, students nowadays can study anywhere at anytime. Many professionals are going back to university either to consolidate their expertise in a specific field or change career. These people are most likely to study and write assignments in between meetings or while traveling on a plane or train on a business trip. Teachers will have to think of the circumstances in which these people are studying. When designing course material, they need to create files that can be easily downloaded. Submitting and uploading assignments should be simplified and made super easy. Additionally, educators have to think how to disseminate knowledge both in an appealing and effective way. What would work best with their students? A PPT presentation with voice over or a video or reading materials followed by discussion questions? It also implies that the teacher will have to be more tech-savvy. They will probably have to create new course materials using different software programs and have to keep in touch with the latest innovations in educational technologies.
Hi Pascaline! I really like your point about the role of teachers in helping students develop critical thinking skills to identify credible information. Just because students have access to information from their devices, doesn’t mean they have the skills to discern real and false information. I think teachers will play a critical role in helping students learn how to find credible resources and understand biases. I’m not sure if students at all age groups are proficient at finding the right information. With so many different learning resources, teachers can also help students figure out how to search for what they are looking for more effectively and find resources that match their learning style.
Hi Pascaline,
I completely agree with you: “The role of the teacher has transitioned from being the sole provider of knowledge to someone who imparts and instills higher order thinking skills to students in order to navigate this new world of constant flow of information, data and news”. Critical thinking skills should be part of all lessons. Therefore, the teacher’s role is shifted, and the focus is more on teaching competencies and skills rather than knowledge. As a teacher coach, I see a lot of teachers that struggle with this shift. I try to explain that the student will always have access to their mobile devices as source of information if they need it, but they will not have access to someone who can teach them how to think critically about the information that they consume or to collaborate and communicate efficiently with their future co-workers and colleagues. Therefore, the teacher provides context, becomes a partner in learning and a coach that asks questions that will further the students’ learning (Prensky).
Marc Prensky – What is the role of the teacher in today’s world?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MpzcjhY_wI
While I do believe that teacher roles will change, and that there will be an increased emphasis on the need to impart and instill higher order thinking skills, I also believe that the knowledge brought into the classroom by teachers will still be quite valuable. Teachers have always been in the business of teaching students how to learn in addition to imparting specific knowledge to them. Sure that aspect of teaching may increase somewhat, but it’s nothing new – we’re just working with new tools as we do it. While I think that teachers will step back a bit and recognize that they are no longer the sole source of knowledge for students, they still need to be a reliable source, and in many ways they are still the most efficient form of content delivery. Even though my students could go online and watch videos about solving quadratic equations (including ones I’ve made personally), I believe many will still prefer attending my classes (where I cover the same materials in person) and ask questions in a real-time manner simply not possible with mobile technology (and still won’t be possible many years down the road).
Hi James, I think you make a very valid point here- I think students still look to educators for confirmation of what knowledge is valid (and they might continue to do so as the amount of unreliable information and fake news seems to be increasing). They might look up videos etc. regarding info on a topic or how to solve particular problems but often you will see that they will bring that work back to a teacher to check whether it is correct or ask questions about why things have been done the way it has. Whether we recognize it or not, many students look to teachers to also model their own behavior and adopt similar attitudes towards learning material based on their teacher’s experiences which ultimately impacts how they learn that material. How many of us won’t admit to liking certain subjects more at school just because we felt like we had an extraordinary teacher that was passionate about the subject they taught us? Those experiences end up shaping our students and some might eventually even pursue careers in those fields because of amazing teacher experiences.
Maybe months ago I would have said that mobile technology has its influence on instructional design. It facilitates information and it is at the tips of our hands. It has its pros and cons. I think that some students do not take advantage of the device that they have and have not realized the potential that this tool has. Most of us use it for socializing and entertainment. It is difficult to let go because we sometimes are used to the way we do things and change is difficult. The use of mobile technology is not just to search for information but incorporate mobile technology into our teaching. If students can see how mobile technology can be used in different ways, maybe they will realize its potential.
With the current pandemic situation, hasn’t this been an example of mobile technology influences instructional design? In my case, I had to step up because there were no other options. The use of online moodle, google class, Zoom, you name it. Instructors have become designers or maybe I should say UX testers on how these educational platforms work. We are adapting our teaching to their design as best as we can since those are the tools that are available now.
I like how you mention students realizing the potential of mobile technology. Working with high school students I have noticed a transition as they get older, in grade 9 most students had a mobile device but they often preferred doing research using a laptop, my older students prefer using their mobile device to search information during a lesson or to complete an assignment. I do agree that for the most part, students use their mobile devices for socializing and entertainment and occasionally learning. During this time of remote learning many of my students only have a mobile device to complete assignments with, there are forced to learn how to use their device but I wouldn’t say that fully understand its potential. It’s something for me to think about when planning for next year, how can I teach students to use their mobile device as an educational tool, especially when remote learning.
Originally Posted by osummers on 28 Jan 2019
As a middle school instructor, I feel as though the rise in accessibility of mobile devices is a two edge-sword at the moment. In many ways incorporating them into a learning environment benefits our learning community because they provide students with access to so many useful tools. On the other hand, mobile technologies can also provide a lot of social distractions, since many adolescences tend to be more interested in what Jake told Sally last night at the dance than concepts related to math and science, or whatever subject they are currently engaged in. Despite the downside, I think that much of this behaviour is related to the novelty of mobile devices and could dissipate once students are more familiar with using the technology in an educational setting. It also, then, becomes the role of the teacher and parents to inform and guide students on acceptable uses of mobile technology in (and out) of school.
This line caught my attention, “Despite the downside, I think that much of this behaviour is related to the novelty of mobile devices and could dissipate once students are more familiar with using the technology in an educational setting”. I am not as optimistic that the distractions caused by mobile technology will dissipate with time and the proper guidance as I feel teachers are not only competing with chronic texting and FarmVille they are constantly competing with increasingly sophisticated ad campaigns by marketing firms targeting young adults on Snap-chat, Instagram and, an old favorite, YouTube.
Here is a link to a study by the University of Texas at Austin published recently in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research found that a smartphone can sap attention even when it’s not being used, even if the phone is on silent — or even when powered off and tucked away.
The Mere Presence of Your Smartphone Reduces Brain Power, Study Shows – https://news.utexas.edu/2017/06/26/the-mere-presence-of-your-smartphone-reduces-brain-power/
Thank you for sharing this interesting study on the impact of the presence of smartphone on cognitive processes. It caught my attention as I had never looked at this through this angle. This study is conducted with post-secondary students and is limited to smartphone use or the presence of a smartphone. I agree with Osummers’ that the use of mobile devices is a two edge-sword, even more so inn K-12 education. Yes, it can be a distraction, but with effective class management techniques and clear boundaries mobile devices can become a great teaching and learning tool. Learning also must occur in an environment that fosters good digital citizenship skills. In their meta-analysis on the effects of mobile devices on k-12 students’ achievement, Tingir and al (2017) suggest that the use of mobile devices for educational purposes yield higher achievement scores than traditional teaching.
Tingir, S., Cavlazoglu, B., Caliskan, O., Koklu, O., & Intepe-Tingir, S. (2017). Effects of mobile devices on K-12 students’ achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(4), 355-369. doi:10.1111/jcal.12184
Originally Posted by Abraham Kang on 24 Sep 2018
One of the biggest factors in instructional design choices that have changed because of mobile technologies is the access to information. For the most part, students no longer need to be told that “the only way to do A is by doing B”. The instant access to information has shifted the paradigm to focus more on creation and innovation as opposed to reiteration. Students are now taught HOW to learn as opposed to WHAT to learn. Guidelines are set, methods are taught, and techniques are utilized. Now, students have opportunities to use what they learn to create something more. A great example of this is the new K – 12 BC curriculum. Big ideas and core competencies are the main focus. Teachers share their knowledge, and encourage students to couple this knowledge with access to information to build and create new knowledge. Mobile technologies – specifically, access to information – has forever altered the role of the instructor. No longer can educators fully be the sage on the stage, but rather, the guide on the side.
The abundance of knowledge the Internet provides is incredible, and mobile phones are an invaluable pathway to that knowledge. Mobile technologies grant us access to information at our fingertips 24 hours a day. I have to say that this has forever altered the role of the teacher. This has ended an era when students follow or replicate what the teacher says or does. Teachers are no longer dispensers of “knowledge”. “No longer can educators fully be the sage on the stage, but rather, the guide on the side.” This is well said, and I’d like to add that teachers nowadays are designers of learning environments that cultivate inquiry and facilitate personal development.
Originally Posted by etower on 3 Feb 2019
I fear that as teachers who have been educated a particular way and have educated others in a particular way during our professional career that it is difficult to get out of the traditional mindset when designing. It is my sincere hope that there will be a great deal of creative experiments (like the maker movement, like flipped classrooms etc.) that help us to really rethink and reimagine our design. While mobile devices are great supportive tools for new ways of doing things if we keep designing in old ways with new tools they won’t in themselves create change. I know so many teachers that use mobile devices as better agendas or better libraries or better media players but haven’t at all shifted any of their other teaching methodologies. They use mobile devices with apps like Twitter to share updates with parents or students rather than using e-mail or paper notices, but they don’t take it a step further to use Twitter for educational purposes or to shift their design. The tools have made new design options easier to take and make but what really needs to change is our thinking and our understandings of the way things “should” be done.
I agree with this fear of “teachers being educated in a particular way and have educated others in a particular way.. makes it difficult to get out of the traditional mindset”.
As we moved into remote learning, the learning curve required for teachers to not only teach online but access platforms they have never used, take videos, upload pictures, documents etc.. was an incredibly challenging time for many. There was a large disparity between generations of teachers, some who are incredibly used to posting videos online due to social media, or may have accessed online teaching platforms before the remote learning period began.
I guess my idea is that it took a huge shift in our world, caused by health concerns for some to be pushed to using more mobile technology as they moved forward. This is not always a terrible thing but I do believe it can be incredibly challenging to break past a traditional mindset when many teachers have seen it work successfully for years. As I teach my parents how to access google drive and share pictures with their friends, I can see how frustrating it can be and they often want to give up because it is so difficult to learn these new skills. When there is a lack of time, resources and training it seems it can become an unreasonable expectation for teachers to change.
Originally Posted by Brian Haas on 22 Jan 2019
This question is posed in a very technological determinist kind of way. Is it the technology that changes how things are done? Or, is it social/cultural/economic/scientific shifts that change the way we do things and the technology is simply a manifestation of those changes? As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. For the past few decades there has been a pedagogical shift away from old style instruction. Constructivist, constructionist and project-based learning theories have become more and more the norm, and the old “sage on the stage” has in many ways become “the guide on the side”. Mobile technologies help facilitate these changes on a scale and scope previously impossible. In that way certainly educators are in some ways having their hands forced to change the way they do things. The saturation of mobile devices (including things such as cell phones, tablets, laptops etc..) in the school system, and more importantly in the lives of students necessitates design changes to instruction styles, else teachers and educational systems as a whole risk being “out of touch” with reality. These devices provide educational opportunities that 5 or 10 years ago would have been unthinkable. Think of things like augmented reality and virtual reality. It is now possible to give students authentic situated learning experiences within the confines of a classroom. They can explore space, the ocean, a high-tech engineering facility and interact with these realities in transformative ways. So, has technology altered the role of a teacher, I guess so, but so has our shift in pedagogical theory and our social and cultural growth.
Originally Posted by Katie Cowen on 21 Jan 2019
We are moving away from teacher-centred instruction to a more student-centred instruction model most likely because the capabilities of technology far outweigh the capabilities of the teacher/instructor. Teachers are no longer considered the source of information they once were, as mobile technologies have now taken over that role. Teachers still provide students with educational experiences and opportunities that are not as legitimate with technology such as face-to-face social interaction, hands-on activities and emotional support. So to answer the question, yes, the role of the teacher has shifted significantly since the adoption and implementation of mobile technologies. I believe the instructional design choices have been affected as teachers now have to think about the impact technology is having on their students and consider that using technologies can help achieve educational learning outcomes in possibly a more efficient and effective way. It seems that teachers can be better designers now in their practice because of the significant amount of resources out there and the fact that technologies, specifically mobile technologies, are becoming more and more ubiquitous.
I think educators are now facilitators of learning instead of being relied upon as the source of information. When students stump me with a question, I’m not afraid to say “Let’s explore through Google to find out!” Mobile technologies have had a huge influence on instructional design choices but what’s important to remember is that the educator should still be the one driving the design through mobile technology and not the other way around where the technology is the driver. Educators need to filter through which technologies will be most beneficial to their learners and use their expertise to determine how to best use the technology to support their lessons and not let the technology be the focus of the lesson.
Originally Posted on Galina Culpechina on 31 Jan 2019
Instructional Design choices are definitely affected by mobile technologies. Mobile means “on the move”. Learning “on the move” is different from a classroom setting. Nowadays, if designers want to design engaging learning experiences, they need to think about the limitations and capabilities of the technologies involved. Mobile devices have a completely different screen resolution from a desktop. Forcing a user to continuously zoom in or out of our content can make them feel frustrated, and we do not want such user experience. When using a smartphone or a tablet, learners may encounter a problem with the internet connection. The designer’s job is to take this into account. We also need to design taking into consideration human clumsiness and make buttons and hotspots big enough to be easily touched. Removing unnecessary navigation will help learners too. When images and other graphic elements are used, designers have to make sure that images maintain their quality after resizing. If different file types are used in the courses, we need to remember that not all mobile devices support all file types. As the storage capacity of some devices may be quite restricted, we need to pay attention to file/video sizes. What is most important, we need to design learning in short chunks/”learning nuggets” and always ask for user feedback. As for the role of teachers, it is changing. More and more teachers are less focused on lectures now, they are encouraging dialogue, interact more with students. They are becoming communicators, collaborators/partners, facilitators, guides.
Originally Posted by rstpierre on 29 Jan 2019
A recurring theme in this discussion is that assessing factual information is not longer relevant in a 21st century reality where Google can provide the answer for us in seconds. While I certainly do not disagree that pushing students to reach further up Bloom’s taxonomy (i.e. analysis, synthesis) and assessing these processes create better thinkers, I cannot quite accept the idea that knowledge of factual information is no longer valued. Do higher-order mental processes not have “simpler” knowledge as their foundations? Mathematics serves as a good example here where rote learning of multiplication tables will facilitate the solution of more complex problems. Googling facts on a need-to-know basis may help one to retain it in future (as any exposure would tend to), but I believe that the building of knowledge in any field inherently requires learning “facts” to develop competency. We cannot skip this part and just ask our phones whenever we are stuck.
A few weeks ago, I had a debate about rote memorization with some of my classmates in another module. Though I’m against relying completely on rote memorization to excel at school, it can also see its usefulness in some situations. Rote memorization has been used for decades in education. When used appropriately and for the right reason/purpose, I believe it can boost students’ confidence with subject content e.g math, history and sciences.. Memorization has become an anathema to learning for many teachers. We all learned the alphabet and the multiplication tables by rote memorization. While we motivate students to tap into higher thinking skills, they need to rely on knowledge, facts, data, or information in their brains to combine it into something new. Therefore, effective knowledge acquisition has to come first which can be done through rote memorization.
Nonetheless, if we are asking students questions whose answers can be googled, we are doing them a disservice. We should aim to challenge them and push them out of their comfort zone. We ought to provide them the opportunities to use the information, fact and data that they have acquired. Only then will they be able to process, analyse, strategise and synthesize information to develop and hone critical thinking skills and problem-solving skills.
I think with the advancement of technology this is becoming a common conversation, especially amongst educators. I think one of the biggest issues is trying to figure out what needs to be remembered and what we can rely on technology for. The needs will most likely change depending on career choices. For instance, someone who is constantly making change for people may need to calculate quickly in their head, but someone who’s job does not require those math skills may depend more on technology. I know we cannot start making those determinations in elementary school, there is definitley certain content that students need to memorize, but what that means right now I am not too sure.