Internet Learning Volume 4, Number 2, Fall 2015 | Page 31

Internet Learning
LMS-less mLearning provides the
opportunity to push the technology from
the forefront of the class like in is in eLearning
to the background. It allows instructors
and students to connect and engage “justin-time
and just-in-place” (Cruz-Flores &
López-Morteo, 2010), in ways that make the
underlying technology largely invisible. This
helps keep the orientation of the classroom
design on the learning theory and pedagogy
rather than on the technology. Technology
provides options for the application of the
learning theory in the pedagogy, which is
described by Anderson and Dron (2011)
as a “hardening” of the pedagogy (p. 81).
Undeniably, those options are rightly
taken into consideration in the pedagogy
(Anderson & Dron, 2011), but technology
shouldn’t dictate it. Perhaps the best way
to describe it is that the technology should
be so invisible to the student that it is taken
for granted. An eLearning student today
might describe the eLearning classroom as
being computer based or online. The goal
of mLearning should be to have students
describe it as person-to-person with
adding that contact is facilitated through
smartphones or other mobile technology
only as an afterthought.
If the real estate mantra is “location,
location, location” then the mLearning
mantra for LMS-less classrooms is “options,
options, options”. There are so many options
on how an instructor can leverage technology
in an LMS-less mLearning classroom to create
new learning that it is nearly overwhelming.
For example, at least 16 well-known options
exist for students to read an ebook associated
to an mLearning classroom. A few of the
most popular reader apps are Kindle, Nook
and Google Play Books. Google Play Books is
probably the most universal since it isn’t tied
to a device like a Kindle or a Nook. To use
this technology in an mLearning classroom,
an instructor only needs to ensure that the
course text(s) are available on multiple apps.
The student chooses which one to use.
A Conceptual Baseline Pedagogy for
mLearning
Anderson and Dron (2011) explain
three generations of distance learning
pedagogies as a “dance” between technology
and pedagogy (p. 81). Although theory is
well-represented in the article, it is strangely
absent from this dance. Imagine instead a
dance between theory and pedagogy where
technology cuts in. Theory provides strategic
direction, whereby pedagogy applies those
ideas and technology provides options for
access and learning.
How students access knowledge
determines the classroom type. For example,
traditional learning, eLearning, mLearning
and hybrid classes are types of learning
whereby knowledge is accessed in a more
formal, facilitated setting. They are different
than a library, which is also an access point
for knowledge, but it isn’t a formal one--
meaning that the transfer of knowledge
isn’t facilitated by an instructor. Identifying
how students will access the classroom
environment is important because it impacts
the application of the learning theory in the
pedagogy (please see Figure 1).
A pedagogy includes the presentation
of content, instructional assets, cognitive
processes for the student, and evaluation of
the learning achieved (Nish, n.d.). mLearning
pedagogy is no different. Pedagogies
associated to traditional classrooms are
content-driven and instructor-centered
(Anderson & Dron, 2011) and pedagogies
associated to eLearning classrooms are LMSdriven
and instructor-guided (Anderson &
Dron, 2011). In an mLearning classroom,
the pedagogy is Internet-driven and
socially-centered. Content is identified by
the instructor and available to the student
30