Internet Learning Volume 4, Number 2, Fall 2015 | Page 35

Internet Learning
form the basis of a more formal and reflective
cognitive process on that topic. Imagine
forum discussions supplemented each week
by student reporting and impressions of
events, documentaries and the like. There
exists a whole new level of dynamism that
would be hard to match with a laptop or
desktop computer. Being less formal, it also
adds to the social interaction among students
as they respond to tweets about the topic and
otherwise network with each other. This
idea also works in reverse, meaning that the
instructor can tweet on an upcoming topic as
the resident expert, which would improve the
teaching, social and cognitive presence of the
instructor all at once. Microblogging can add
an element of continual discourse, however
brief, outside of formally submitted and
graded evaluations that are currently sparse
in traditional or eLearning environments.
Another major benefit of mobile
learning is that it can occur in very small
increments. Students can leverage short
expanses of down time like an unexpected
wait at a doctor’s office to learn. Given that
mobile devices are often carried for other
reasons, prior planning isn’t required.
Students can decide spontaneously to learn
because the mood struck or opportunity
knocked. Mobile learning should result in
increases in new learning as students increase
the total amount of time spent on learning
and learning activities like thinking and
analysis because they are no longer tethered
to a formal class or study space and time.
Keeping social constructivist theory
with a networking component in mind,
cognitive processes can take a number
of forms. For example, using a flipped
approach, students are able review the course
materials and submit questions or topics
for discussion, which the instructor can
choose from based on the course objectives
for that week (University of Washington,
2015). Drawing from the technological
options available to “harden” the pedagogy
(Anderson & Dron, 2011, p. 81), the course
materials could include written, audio or
audio video components that are instructorgenerated,
or from materials developed by
experts in the field that already exist on the
Internet. The proposed questions or topics
can be submitted by tweets on Twitter, and
the discussion can be held synchronously
via Skype, or asynchronously via Facebook
or YouTube. In another flipped example,
students can review the course materials and
take a quiz early in the week with weaknesses
forming the basis of the next discussion
(Smith, 2013). Technologically, the quiz
can be administered via Google Forms
in a written format or with the questions
provided by the instructor in a YouTube
video. In this particular instance, students
could provide their answers by emailing the
link to a locked YouTube video back to the
instructor. Another option is to administer
the quiz via YouTube, but have the students
provide their answers using Polaris Office
5 or Google Docs via email. Still another
option is to email students a word document
with the question and have them use Polaris
Office 5 or Google Docs to edit the document
to include their answers and email it back.
More options exist that can be selected as
required.
Imagine hands-on projects captured
by video or group projects supported by six or
more underlying means of communication
for research, coordination, application and
submission. In short, the strength of the
baseline mLearning pedagogy is in its ability
to be individually tailored to particular
disciplines and pedagogical needs. Unlike
the traditional classroom that isn’t well set up
to leverage the Internet to its fullest potential
and the eLearning LMS that is limited by its
underlying technology, the limitation factors
here are related to the ability of the instructor
to envision the possibilities.
34