Abstract

This chapter describes a study that investigated the informal learning practices of enthusiastic mobile device owners. Informal learning is far more widespread than is often realized. Livingston (2000) pointed out that Canadian adults spend an average of fifteen hours per week on informal learning activities, more than they spend on formal learning activities. The motivation for these learning efforts generally comes from the individual, not from some outside force such as a school, university, or workplace. Therefore, in the absence of an externally imposed learning framework, informal learners will use whatever techniques, resources, and tools best suit their learning needs and personal preferences. As ownership of mobile technologies becomes increasingly widespread in the western world, it is likely that learners who have access to this technology will use it to support their informal learning efforts. This chapter presents the findings of a study into the various and innovative ways in which PDA and Smartphone users exploit mobile device functionality in their informal learning activities. The findings suggested that mobile device users deploy the mobile, connective, and collaborative capabilities of their devices in a variety of informal learning contexts, and in quite innovative ways. Trends emerged, such as the increasing importance of podcasting and audio and the use of built-in GPS, which may have implications for future studies. Informal learners identified learning activities that could be enhanced by the involvement of mobile technology, and developed methods and techniques that helped them achieve their learning goals.

Introduction

According to Tough (1979), informal learning is a deliberate effort to gain new knowledge or skills or obtain improved insights or understandings. Livingston (2000) defined informal learning as any activity that involved learning which occurred outside the formal curricula of an educational institution. Livingston went on to make a clear distinction between explicit informal learning and tacit informal learning, which is incorporated into other social or ad hoc activities. Both forms of learning result in the acquisition of new knowledge or skills; however, only the explicit informal learning project is motivated by some immediate problem or need as defined in Tough’s definition of informal learning.

Vavoula, Scanlon, Lonsdale, Sharples, and Jones (2005) developed the classification of informal learning by separating out the goals of learning from the processes of learning as illustrated in Figure 1.

If both the goals and processes of learning are either explicitly defined by the learner in advance (intentional informal learning) or selected at the point at which the learning opportunity presents itself (unintentional informal learning), then the tools used to support the learning will also be self-directed. As technology advances, so does the range of potential learning tools.

This chapter reports on the results of a study to investigate the informal learning practices of people who owned mobile devices (PDAs or smartphones). Specifically, we asked the question, “Do mobile device owners use their devices to support their informal learning projects, and if so, how?”

Smartphones are primarily communication devices, and many PDAs now offer several communication protocols such as GPRS and/or WiFi. This connectivity supports synchronous communication using voice, voice over IP (VOIP) or instant messaging as well as asynchronous communication via email, weblogs, web forums, wikis, and virtual learning environments. In recent years researchers have investigated the potential of mobile handheld devices to support collaborative learning, devising educational scenarios that make use of their collaborative, interactive, and mobile capabilities. PDAs have been introduced into schools, both inside the classroom (DiGiano et al. 2003) and outside the classroom in support of fieldwork (Chen, Kao, and Sheu 2003). Research has also been conducted in the wider learning sphere, with the use of handhelds as interactive museum guidebooks (Hsi 2003) and as tools to support medical students on hospital placements (Smørdal and Gregory 2003). Roschelle (2003) identified two forms of collaborative participation: “the normal social participation in classroom discussion (for example) and the new informatic participation among connected devices” (p.262). He discovered that in the classroom setting, where the learners were in the same physical space, the normal face-to-face social interaction was supplemented by the wireless interaction between the connected devices. In this context, mobile devices added a new social dimension of participation that was not otherwise available. Given the growing evidence of support for mobile collaboration in more formal learning contexts, this study also asked, “Do informal learners make use of the connectivity afforded by their mobile devices to engage in collaborative learning?”

Vavoula (2004) highlighted some of the difficulties inherent in researching informal learning; it can be intentional or unintentional and people may even be unaware that any learning has taken place. There is also the practical problem of locating a pool of mobile device users who not only engage in mobile informal learning, but who are also willing to provide information about their activities.

PDA and Smartphone enthusiasts were targeted as the community most likely to be using their devices in informal learning and participants were recruited from the active community of web forum users. Web forums are Internet-based, asynchronous discussion groups that are aimed at people who share a specific interest; in this case, mobile devices. Messages were posted in the forums inviting members to participate in a web survey on informal learning with mobile devices. This approach was successful, generating over 200 responses of which over 100 described informal learning with mobile devices.

This chapter describes the methods used in the study and discusses the results, locating them in the context of the wider literature on informal learning. It explores key issues, such as participation in collaborative informal learning that emerged from the findings and outlines research directions arising from the study.

Method

In order to obtain insights into ways in which experienced users use mobile devices to support informal learning, this research needed to plug into existing networks and communities of mobile device users. A method was required that would capture information about participants’ informal learning practices and experiences. PDAs and Smartphones are mobile devices and their users may be located anywhere in the world, so a web-based survey method was chosen. This gave access to a wide pool of participants without requiring them to be in any specific geographic location.

Surveys use structured questions to obtain self-reported data from participants. Although surveys are best suited to multiple-choice, quantitative measurements, some of the questions could be adapted to request open-ended, diary-type responses to unearth details of informal learning experiences. By circulating the questionnaire via the Web, additional advantages would accrue. It could be accessed from anywhere in the world, at any time of day, regardless of time-zones, and it could be publicized via email and the Internet.

In order to identify the preferences and informal learning episodes of experienced mobile device users, we needed a group of users with some level of experience in using their mobile device. Internet-based web forums were selected as the best place in which to find them. There is an active Internet-based community of PDA and Smartphone users who participate in a variety of user forums. Membership is free and asynchronous discussion threads allow participants to seek help and discuss a wide variety of device-related issues. Three businesses were also contacted and agreed to circulate an email to employees with a business PDA or Smartphone, inviting them to participate in the research.

The web survey was published over a period of four weeks in summer. During this time, over 200 responses were returned of which over 150 completed all the questions without omission. When asked whether they used their mobile device to support their informal learning, 53 per cent said that they did and provided details. The questionnaire distinguished between informal learning in general and informal learning for which a mobile device was used in some way. There was no great difference in the occurrence of informal learning between PDA users and Smartphone users. However, PDA users were significantly more likely to use their mobile device in support of their informal learning with 61 per cent of PDA users using their mobile device compared to 31 per cent of Smartphone users (X²₍₃₎ = 19.26, p<0.001).

The responses were classified using a functional framework devised by Patten, Arnedillo Sanchez, and Tangney (2006). This functional framework was designed as a tool with which to analyse handheld learning applications and evaluate their pedagogical underpinning. It therefore seemed reasonable to use this framework to see whether the informal learning activities reported by PDA and Smartphone users fall into the same categories as the mobile learning activities designed by educators.

According to this framework mobile learning applications can be sub-divided into seven categories:

1. Collaborative applications that encourage knowledge sharing, making use of the learner’s physical location and mobility.
2. Location aware applications that contextualize information, allowing learners to interact directly with their environment; for example, collecting environmental data linked to geographical context or accessing contextually relevant reference material.
3. Data collection applications that use the handheld device’s ability to record data in the form of text, image, video, and audio.
4. Referential applications that use dictionaries, translators and e-books to deliver content when and where it is needed.
5. Administrative applications that employ the typical scheduling, information storage, and other calendar functions available on mobile devices.
6. Interactive applications that use both the input and output capabilities of mobile devices, allowing the learner to input information and obtain some form of feedback which aids the learning process.
7. Microworld applications model real world domains to enable learners to use practice in a constrained version of the learning scenario. This category was not found in the informal learning results.

Figure 2 groups the informal learning activities described by the survey participants into categories based on the Patten et al. (2006) functional framework.

Discussion

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that this population of mobile device users use their devices to support a wide range of informal learning activities, both intentional and unintentional. The portability, storage capacity, computing power, and convenience of mobile devices emerged as determining factors in learners’ decisions to use them to support informal learning activities. The fact that people generally carried their devices around with them meant that they were “on hand” to support serendipitous learning opportunities as well as planned mobile learning activities.

The decision to survey expert mobile device users bypassed many of the device usability issues that characterized previous studies (Waycott 2004), (Smørdal and Gregory 2003), (Commarford 2004). For example, the survey participants did not use any one method of data entry (thumbpad, soft keypad, letter recognition, external keyboard) in preference to the others. Instead, participants adapted to the data entry method that worked best for them, with 64 per cent of respondents reporting that they found it “quite easy” or “very easy” on a five-point Likert scale to enter data into their device. When asked how easy they found it to read from the screen, 95 per cent responded “quite easy” or “very easy.” Participants adapted to the mobile interface, and evolved ways to integrate the power, storage, and connectivity offered by their PDAs and smartphones with their informal learning processes.

A more surprising finding was the extent to which some participants adapted their devices to suit their learning needs, writing new applications or tailoring existing ones, and adapted how they learned to suit the functionality available with their devices. These adaptations seem to be a step beyond the simple process of appropriation of PDAs as workplace and learning tools as described by Waycott (2004). Waycott defined appropriation as the integration of a new technology into the user’s activities, and her analysis showed that the process of adapting these new tools to every day practice was a two way procedure. Prior expectations and personal preferences shaped the ways that users encorporated the technology into their activities, but the tools also change the user’s activities. For example, in Waycott’s studies participants who were touch-typists coped with the usability constraints of the PDA by using it with a foldout keyboard or as an adjunct to their desktop computer. This adaptation made it easier for them to enter text into the PDA and enabled them to fit the use of the PDA into their every-day preferred practice. In this study some participants went to great lengths to tailor their use of their mobile device to fulfil their learning goals. The participant who combined text and audio to support his language learning invested a considerable amount of time and effort in adapting the notes application to support his language learning needs. The participants who downloaded material in advance of planned visits had taken the explicit decision to use their mobile device as a learning resource in a mobile context.

The Patten et al. (2006) functional framework was helpful in classifying the responses, but some branches of the framework were difficult to map onto the reported informal learning activities, and some of the activities seemed to fit in more than one branch of the framework. This may be because informal learners have the freedom to explore the learning potential of their devices unconstrained by formal learning goals, or it could be because the survey sample of enthusiastic and successful mobile device users had already overcome technical and usability problems that sometimes inhibit learners in formal mobile learning contexts.

Collaboration emerged as a key theme, although one that was relatively unrecognized as such by the participants. The functional framework defines collaborative applications as those that encourage knowledge sharing. However, some of the data collection, referential and location aware activities described by the informal learners also involved knowledge sharing. This meant that there was some overlap between the categories, with certain learning activities having both an “individual” and a “collaborative” element. The functional framework may need to be adapted to suit the range of informal learning activities evident in the data.

Information sharing and knowledge construction through contributions to web forums and wikis were often described as forms of collaborative learning, with 17 per cent of participants using their mobile device to post and read messages in asynchronous forums or conferences. Other popular ways of sharing information using mobile devices included infrared beam (41 per cent) and bluetooth (33 per cent). Participation in forums and wikis as well as the more diary-like activity of blogging is gaining popularity. As GPRS connection costs fall, as more phones offer WiFi, and as WiFi hotspots become more common, future research into mobile learning needs to take account of the role of mobile technology in supporting collaborative and constructivist learning over a wider geographical and social context.

Location aware activities seemed relatively under-represented in the data. However, more mobile devices are coming onto the market with GPS capabilities, and it is likely that location awareness will play a greater role in informal learning as learners adopt and adapt their mobile device functions to suit their informal learning needs in the future.

Enthusiasm for using mobile devices came across in many of the text responses. The following example is typical of both the content and the length of many of the descriptions of informal learning with mobile devices: “Researching further about geography or science topics I’ve read about at online sites (Amazon Bore surfing; parasitic creatures). Learning about obscure and/or specific details and terms such as the exact term for a castrated male ‘cow’ (bullock)… could be classified as ‘research related to settling a bet’! Learning new language uses such as urban slang, web chat acronyms, etc. Learning about technology (pdastreet.com forums, MS Windows program shortcuts and how-tos, etc.).” The participants in this survey were selected because they were keen mobile device users, so this finding may not be reflected among less enthusiastic members of the current mobile device using population. However as mobile connected technology becomes increasingly ubiquitous, it is likely that growing numbers of mobile device owners will employ their devices as learning tools.

References

CHEN, Y., T. KAO, and J. SHEU. 2003. A mobile learning system for scaffolding bird watching learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 19 (3):347-59.

COMMARFORD, P. M. 2004. An investigation of text throughput speeds associated with pocket PC input method editors. International Journal of Human-computer Interaction 17 (3):293-309.

DIGIANO, C., L. YARNALL, C. PATTON, J. ROSCHELLE, D. TATAR, and M. MANLEY. 2003. Conceptual tools for planning for the wireless classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 19 (3):284-97.

HSI, H. 2003. A study of user experiences mediated by nomadic web content in a museum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 19 (3):308-19.

LIVINGSTON, D. 2000. Exploring the icebergs of adult learning: Findings of the first Canadian survey of informal learning practices. http://tortoise.oise.utoronto.ca/~dlivingstone/icebergs/ (accessed November 10, 2006).

PATTEN, B., I. ARNEDILLO SANCHEZ, and B. TANGNEY. 2006. Designing collaborative, constructionist and contextual applications for handheld devices. Computers & Education 46 (3):294-308.

ROSCHELLE. 2003. Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 12 (3):260-72.

SMØRDAL, O., and J. GREGORY. 2003. Personal Digital Assistants in medical education and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 19:320-29.

TOUGH, A. 1979. The adult’s learning projects. 2nd ed. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

VAVOULA, G. 2004. KLeOS: A knowledge and learning organisation system in support of lifelong learning. PhD diss., University of Birmingham.

VAVOULA, G., E. SCANLON, P. LONSDALE, M. SHARPLES, and A. JONES. 2005. Report on empirical work with mobile learning and literature on mobile learning in science (No. D33.2).

WAYCOTT, J. 2004. The appropriation of PDAs as learning and workplace tools: An activity theory perspective. PhD diss., Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.