Draft+2

= **Challenges facing the uptake and implementation of effective MLearning.** = Melinda Garcia, Callan Moroney and Susan Walsh **Introduction﻿** Technological developments in recent decades have offered immense possibilities for the education sector. Advances in mobile technology have given rise to Mobile Learning, commonly referred to as MLearning, which employs wireless devices such as mobile phones, laptops and tablet computers to deliver ubiquitous content and learning support (Leung & Chang 2003; Muyinda 2007) in both formal and informal learning contexts. MLearning acknowledges that learning “flows across locations, times, topics and technologies" (Sharples et al 2007, p4) and can be accessible from anywhere network coverage exists (Johnson et al 2011). Mobile technology is a rapidly developing sector; some estimates project “mobile internet usage will overtake desktop usage before 2015" (O'Dell 2011). This, coupled with changes in learner expectations where "audiences increasingly expect information and experiences on demand, where and whenever they are” (Burnett et al, 2011), signifies a market that will continue to grow for education providers. Progressively, educators are acknowledging that "the world is dynamic ... learning will move more and more outside of the classroom and into the learner's environments, both real and virtual and the MLearning is well positioned to champion these innovations" (Muyinda 2007, p.102). Despite the wealth of supporting literature and popular opinion positioning MLearning as a innovative pedagogical approach in education, key obstacles remain and must be considered by any educator hoping to employ MLearning as part of their program.

Three key challenges have been considered for the purposes of this report, selected for their relevance to the authors’ own professional practices (secondary teaching, medical training and arts education). At the conclusion a wider list of obstacles is presented. Whilst not exhaustive, this should provide a broad perspective for the reader to consider.

**Change Management** Change management is a broad term that encompasses the need for a structured approach in transitioning from an existing paradigm into a more desired one. Change, and the management of that change is a significant obstacle facing MLearning. This section will explore the idea of change management and MLearning within a secondary educational context, but are ideas that can be applied across other areas. Perhaps the most significant aspect of change in terms of MLearning is the need to change pre-existing and prevailing notions about pedagogy and best teaching practice. Many teachers are cynical about the efficacy of MLearning, questioning the “possibility of retaining the essence of the learning content” at the same time as integrating new pedagogies such as the use of MLearning (Bhati et al 2009, p.7).

Aside from teacher beliefs, teacher training is a major aspect of the change management that needs to be addressed. Convincing teachers that MLearning is a sound pedagogical tool is one thing, equipping teachers with the knowledge and skills to achieve effective MLearning is entirely another. There is currently a lack of teacher training, or more accurately, a lack of teacher re-training in the field of MLearning. Teachers lack the confidence and knowledge to use MLearning in their practice (Cobcroft et al 2006, p. 24).

Teachers and educators are also faced with the burning question of ‘who is responsible?’ In many instances teachers are left with the challenge of managing the administration of online tools, as well as balancing the content and pedagogical knowledge (Bhati et al 2009, P.6). Teachers are required to produce content, as well as maintain the various devices, technologies and tools required for effective MLearning (Burnett et al 2011).

Change, and how best to implement change management is one of the most significant obstacles facing the uptake of MLearning.

Inadequate technology as an obstacle to MLearning is a reoccurring theme amongst academic literature. This can be further divided into problems with the provider and user of the technology, both will be explored in the following section. The provider of the network and IT infrastructure restricts the reality of being able to utilize MLearning to its potential. Unreliable network coverage and bandwidth constraints that impair uploading/downloading speeds negatively impact on MLearning. (Bhati et al 2009; Burnett et al 2011; Mason & Rennie 2008). As stated by Bhati et al (2009), “Technical problems such as bandwidth may appear to be addressed until a new tool requiring yet more bandwidth is introduced” (p. 6).
 * Inadequate technology**

The tools themselves may not be supportive of MLearning as most hardware devices are designed and marketed for recreational, corporate or retail use and not specifically for education. Mobile phones for example differ greatly in their design and function according to their manufacturer. They vary in their storage capacities; have limited battery life and smaller screens and keyboards which impact on the learning experience as content is reduced to smaller fragments. (Bhati et al 2009; Kulkulska-Hulme 2007). The users of technology face the challenge of keeping up to date with the latest technologies and grasping a thorough understanding of their fullest potential.

In the context of medical training lack of understanding about electromagnetic interference (EMI) between mobile phones and medical equipment has led to many hospitals banning usage of mobile phones. There is a lack of real evidence to support this ban and general consensus that it is safe to use mobile phones at a distance greater than one meter from equipment. (Nolan 2011, Mattei et al 2008). Using mobile phones to enhance medical training has the potential to improve patient care and this benefit should encourage usage of this technology.

New technology developing at a frenetic speed will overcome the obstacle of inadequate technology in MLearning. (Bhati et al 2009, Muyinda 2007)

Sources of funding to support MLearning programs are a key challenge for all professional areas of practice. With innovations in technology come additional expenditure for education providers, both monetary and in terms of human resources: costs of developing new content for mobile devices, costs of publishing to, or licensing the use of, different platforms, as well as analytics and evaluation (Burnett et al 2011). For those with learners who don’t have the required devices, there are "high costs of procuring, installing and maintaining new technologies" (Bhati et al 2009 p.7). Costs associated with training and developing staff to produce effective MLearning resources or programs should also be factored in, as more organisations take production in-house to reduce costs. Sustainable business models offer one means for supporting MLearning initiatives. Museums can employ ‘Freemium’ models, where free content is supported by paid premium content, facilitated by logins or in-app purchases. Sponsorship from the corporate sector and paid advertising are also potential sources of funding subject to compatibility with organisation goals and consideration of the learner audience. Micro-donations offer a smaller scale of contribution available to wider audiences seen to great effect during the Haiti Relief Campaign in 2010 (Burnett et al 2011).
 * Funding**

**Conclusion** This is an overview of the multitude of the obstacles that face that successful and effective uptake of MLearning in a variety of industries, a review of relevant literature, as well as some possible solutions or suggestions. Other obstacles include security/privacy concerns, content development and content management. The issues explored in this report outline what the authors perceive as the key obstacles facing MLearning today. **REFERENCE LIST**  Bhati, N., Mercer, S., Rankin, K., Thomas, B. 2009. ‘Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of tools for online pedagogy’, //International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning,// Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 5-19.     Burnett, A., Cherry, R., Proctor, N., Samis, P. 2011. ‘Getting on (not under) the mobile 2.0 bus: emerging issues in the mobile business model’, //Museums and the Web: Proceedings//, //March 31 2011//, viewed 27 April 2011, <[|__http://conference.archimuse.com/mw2011/papers/getting_on_not_under_the_mobile_20_bus__]>.     Cobcroft, R., Towers, S., Smith, J. & Bruns, A. 2006, ‘Mobile learning in review: opportunities and challenges for learners, teachers, and institutions’, //Proceedings Online Learning and Teaching (OLT) Conference 2006,// pp. 21-30.    <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. 2011. //The 2011 Horizon Report//. The New Media Consortium, Austin, Texas. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Kukulska-Hulme, A. 2007, ‘Mobile usability in educational contexts: what have we learnt?’ //International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning//, Vol. 8, No. 2, viewed 25 April 2011, <http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/356/879>. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Leung, C. & Chan, Y. 2003, //‘//Mobile learning: a new paradigm in electronic learning’, //Proceedings of the The 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies,// viewed 29 April 2011 <[|__http://matheasy.webstarts.com/uploads/Mobile_Learning_A_New_Paradigm_in_Electronic_Learning.pdf__]>. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Mason, R. & Rennie, F. 2008, //E-learning and social networking handbook: R\resources for higher education//. Routledge, New York. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Mattei, E., Losterzo, R., Triventi, M., & Marchetta, E. 2008. 'Electromagnetic interference to infusion pumps. Update 2008 from GSM mobile phones', //Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society//. 20-25 August, pp. 4503-4506. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Muyinda, P.B. 2007, ‘Mlearning: pedagogical, technical and organisational hypes and realities’, //Emerald.// Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 97-104. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Nolan, T. 2011, 'A smarter way to practise', //British Medical Journal. V//ol. 342, issue 22, p.1124. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">O'Dell, J. 2011. ‘New study shows the mobile web will rule by 2015 [STATS]’, //Mashable,// viewed 19 April 2011 <[|__http://mashable.com/2010/04/13/mobile-web-stats/__]>. <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: 150%; margin-left: 36pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -36pt;">Sharples, M., Sánchez, I. A., Milrad, M. & Vavoula, G. 2007. //Mobile learning: small devices, big Issues,// Nottingham: Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence, Mobile Learning Initiative.