EDUCATIONAL PARADOX:

The hidden obstacles to the integration of mobile phones in

the language classroom

Karen WoodmanQueensland University of Technology

Brisbane, AustraliaKaren.woodman@qut.edu.au

BACKGROUND

Facebook & telecollaboration

Why telecollaboration?

Why Facebook?

Facebook, social networking and educational

research

Familiarity and access

MOBILE PHONES IN THE CLASSROOM?

The purpose of this study was to examine the responses to

specific questions regarding the perceptions of the use of

mobile phones in the classroom by language teachers enrolled

in Masters of Education programs in Australia and Greece,

who were from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds

During the period of the study, both groups of students

were enrolled in courses which were specifically focussed on

the use of technology for language teaching.

METHODA Facebook page was specially created for the project,

Within the page, a specific discussion group called “Scenario Discussions”

was created.

Weekly Scenario Questions [SQ] were posted to stimulate discussion on

issues in the use of technology for teaching languages

Due to privacy concerns, access to both the Facebook page and the specific

“Scenario Discussion” group within the Facebook page were controlled by the

authors (who were also the course instructors)

All participants had 24/7 access to the site, and they were therefore able to

participate at their convenience.

The study ran for approx. three months, which included the academic

semesters of both institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants in the larger study included nineteen (19) pre- and in-service teachers studying

in Masters of Education in Australia and Greece, and their two (2) academic lecturers.

Twelve (12) of the students were studying in Greece, and seven (7) were studying at the

Australian university.

While all of the participants from Greece were ethnically Greek, the ‘Australian’ group

included two students from China, one student from Malaysia, one student from the

Philippines, one student for Korea, one student from Saudi Arabia, and one Australian

student . In total, there were five (5) male participants and sixteen (16) female participants.

Of this larger cohort, six (6) participants contributed to the discussions about the use of

mobile phones.

They were from Australia (1), the Philippines (1), South Korea (1), and Greece (2). All were

female.

ANALYSIS

Data in the larger study was analyzed in two ways: • Overall tendencies were observed in terms of number of

participants, number and types of postings, number and types of postings/participant, etc.

• ‘Target’ postings – or those which triggered responses from participants – were identified and classified into four main categories: discussion questions, online questionnaires, resources, and other.

In the study reported here, postings were further explored

in terms of content relating to teacher perceptions of the use

of mobile phones in the classrooms.

THE QUESTIONS

The discussion questions which were the focus of this study

included:• “Here’s a new challenge for you: create a language teaching task or activity that

could be done with the mobile phones available to your students (e.g., in your teaching context)”

• “Thanks for everyone who has commented on the use of mobile phones. We know that some schools don’t currently allow student to use them in class. However, mobile phones are a technology that is one of the most democratic (e.g., most students have them), perhaps we as teachers should be thinking about how best to make sure of this access – either in –class OR for homework or practice outside of class. For example, think about how your students use their mobile phones – could they learn vocab by texting? Practicing speaking using skype?download grammar program apps?”

• “Can you (or anyone else) think of an actual task/activity that could involve students smsing each other (e.g., icebreaker questions where they need to ‘find someone who’ by sms in English only?”

RESULTSQuestion Type Student

initiatedInstructor initiated

Number of respondents

Create a language teaching task or activity that you could do with the mobile phones available to your students (e.g., in your teaching context)

Discussion question

X 7

How could we make use of (mobile access) – either in class or for homework outside of class

Discussion question

X 1

In your country or teaching context, in your opinion, what is access to CMC or other technologies for (1) schools, (2) your students, (3) other groups? Consider access in terms of access to the internet via computers, mobile technologies, internet cafes, etc. How could you use these different types of access for your teaching and learning for in-class work and/or extracurricular work? How could you use social networking for teaching language?

Discussion question

X 4

THE EDUCATION PARADOX

There were seven responses to the question: “Here’s a

new challenge for you: create a language teaching task or

activity that could be done with the mobile phones

available to your students (e.g., in your teaching

context)”, which made it the fourth highest response rate

by DQ in the larger study.

However, the response pattern was quite different from

other items.

IPADS VS SMART PHONE

Rather than responding to the question as requested (e.g., coming up with ideas for

ideas for using mobile phones), the majority of postings (n=5) related to other issues

with the use of mobile phones in the classroom. Most indicated there would be

problems using mobile phones in the classroom, including institutional restrictions,

age-related limitations, access, limited technologies, personal and privacy concerns.

These responses suggest that:

(1) the topic was of interest to many teachers, so they had an opinion of sufficient

strength that they were willing to participate in the conversation, but

(2) arguably also demonstrates a level of resistance to the content of the DQ (e.g.,

the request to suggest teaching activities). The latter behaviour could reflect an

unwillingness to engage in hypothetical activities (e.g., trying to think of teaching

ideas that they could not, in reality, actually use in their teaching contexts).

TO M-LEARN OR NOT TO

The main reason cited by teachers for not using mobile phones for

teaching was institutional restrictions on the use of phones in the

classroom. • KH states “mobile phones are probably not an age-appropriate CALL

device for my teaching context [in Australia]. Our students are not allowed to use mobile phones during school hours.”

Such restrictions were also cited by teachers from • The Philipines: “in our school mobile phones are not allowed in the

classroom for regular classes” [LQ]• South Korea: “only two or three students in a class have a cell phone and

they are only allowed to use mobiel [sic] phones with their parents or in the emergency situation” [SK]

• Greece: “In our school, normally forbidden to use mobile in classrooms” [EP]

TO M-LEARN OR NOTAnother related issue for most of the participants was restricted access to mobile phones

in the classroom.

SK notes that “only two or three students in a class have a cell phone and they are only

allowed to use mobiel [sic] phones with their parents or in the emergency situation”

[South Korea].

Both KH from Australia and LQ from the Philippines agree that phones are not allowed in

the classroom, and in fact may need to be left in the office.• KH: Our students are not allowed to use mobile phones during school hours. They have to

leave them at the office when they arrive and pick them up before they leave. [Australia]• LQ: In our school mobile phones are not allowed in the classroom for regular classes [The

Philippines]

A similar restriction is cited for Greek schools, although as EP humourously notes, • in our school, normally forbidden [sic] to use mobile in classrooms. But just because we are

Greeks, we ignore that. So you can see on facebook photos from the classroom with the teacher, etc. Mobile phones are strictly prohibited only during the final examinations in June. Only then the students must leave them at the office when they arrive and pick them up before they leave. [Greece]

AGE AND M-LEARNING

Age-related restrictions• KH states “mobile phones are probably not an age-

appropriate CALL device for my teaching context [with primary students]”,

• SK agrees, noting “it would be possible for middle school or high school students but not for primary school students in Korea”.

THE ADMIN GAP

Limited technology

In general, there was little evidence for a digital divide as a reason

for not using mobile phones in this group of respondents. Most

teachers indicated their students did have mobile phones, although

AG believed “kids usually have old devices which only support text

messages and voice calls” [Greece].

These responses are consistent with the literature in mLearning

which has argued, in part, for the use of mobile phones for teaching

and learning because of the widespread access in both developed

PERCEPTIONS AND REALITY

Other issues raised included privacy issues raised by KH, who

states• I believe teachers have a responsibility to consider the social

and ethical implications of encouraging younger students to use mobile phones. One example is privacy issues related to exchanging phone numbers with the class, and ensuring that they know not to pass those phone numbers on to anyone outside the class. Another would be responsible use of their classmates phone numbers, like appropriate times of day to phone or text and appropriate conversations. [Australia]

A SMART PHONE BY ANY OTHER NAME..PLD?

“I am not sure that mobile phones can really help education. I have a lot of reservations about this issue....” [CM, Greece].

CM’s more general concerns are probably representative of many

teachers, who do not see mobile phones (even smart phones) in the

same light as computers (or tablets) for educational purposes.

This general unease should be of interest to mLearning advocates

since such non-specific ambiguity around mLearning may translate

into lack of interest (or passive resistance) in incorporating the

technology into the classroom

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

In an attempt to encourage participants to explore the topic of

the use of mobile phones in the classroom despite the general

negative reception of the first question, a follow-up

comment/question was posted by one of the instructors:• Discussion Question 2: Thanks for everyone who has commented on the

use of mobile phones. We know that some schools don’t currently allow student to use them in class. However, mobile phones are a technology that is one of the most democratic (e.g., most students have them), perhaps we as teachers should be thinking about how best to make sure of this access – either in –class OR for homework or practice outside of class. For example, think about how your students use their mobile phones – could they learn vocab by texting? Practicing speaking using skype?download grammar program apps?

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

There was only one response to this posting, by SK, who reflected on her

own learning experiences with mobile learning rather then directly

responding to the question. Based on her realization about her own

experience, she suggested about a possible activity for her students. • SK: I remember that I used to play English word games on my mobile phone. It was

pretty fund and helpful to remeber [sic] vocab. Also I guess if we can ask them to send text messages only in English, it would help them improve their writing skills especially in EFL context. Since I came to AU, I had to use only English to send text massage [sic] and I think it was helpful for me to improve simple daily English writing skills. [South Korea]

Interesting, SK was also one of the few students to make suggestions

earlier as well about possible extracurricular learning opportunities for

her students in South Korea.

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Results suggest that real, but often invisible, barriers exist in the use

of mobile phones in the classroom in terms of actual administrative

restrictions on the use of mobile phones in the classrooms, the types of

phones available to students of different ages, and lack of familiarity

with educational activities using phones, in a number of countries,

including Australia, Greece, South Korea and the Philippines. In

addition, there appears to be a general perception amongst classroom

teachers that mobile phones are not for ‘educational’ purposes.

Given the potential for increasing access to internet resources

through use of mobile and smart phones in areas where computer

access may be restricted, the results of this study suggest that more

research is necessary to identify administrative and individual factors

which may restrict use of mLearning in different countries and teaching

contexts, and a recognition that addressing these issues may not be

easy.

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Key strategies may include emphasizing the positive

benefits of increasing student access to internet

resources via smart phones, helping teachers develop

classroom management strategies to minimize ‘bad

smart phone’ behaviours, and support teachers to

identify appropriate, useful and relevant teaching

activities using mobile phones in the classroom and

for extracurricular learning.