Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 625–640 | Cite as

A model driven framework to address challenges in a mobile learning environment

  • Ferial Khaddage
  • Rhonda Christensen
  • Wing Lai
  • Gerald Knezek
  • Cathie Norris
  • Elliot Soloway


In this paper a review of the pedagogical, technological, policy and research challenges and concepts underlying mobile learning is presented, followed by a brief description of categories of implementations. A model Mobile learning framework and dynamic criteria for mobile learning implementations are proposed, along with a case study of one site that is used to illustrate how the proposed model can be applied. Implementation challenges including pedagogical challenges, technological challenges, policy challenges, and research challenges are described. These align well with the themes of EduSummIT 2013 that hosted the dialogue resulting in this paper.


Mobile learning Implementation types Framework Challenges 


  1. Aderinoye, R. A., Ojokheta, K.O., Olojede, A. A. (2007). Integrating mobile learning into nomadic education programmes in Nigeria: Issues and perspectives. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2).
  2. Ali, A., Ouda, A., & Capretz, L. (2012). A conceptual framework for measuring the quality aspects of m-learning. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Learning Technology, 14(4), 31–34.Google Scholar
  3. Ally, M. (2013). Mobile learning: From research to practice to impact education. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(2).
  4. Boulos, M. N., Wheeler, S., Tavares, C., & Jones, R. (2011). How smartphones are changing the face of mobile and participatory healthcare: an overview, with example from eCAALYX. Biomedical Engineering Online, 10(1), 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, M. (2014). Los Angeles school district to shift away from Apple’s iPad to Windows, Chromebook.
  6. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 411–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2008). Self-report measures and findings for information technology attitudes and competencies. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook for information technology in primary and secondary education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2014). The technology proficiency self-assessment questionnaire (TPSA): Evolution of a self-efficacy measure for technology integration. In T. Brinda, N. Reynolds & R. Romeike (Eds.) Proceedings of KEYCIT 2014 – Key Competencies in Informatics and ICT, 2014, pp. 190–196.Google Scholar
  9. Christensen, R., & Williams, M. (2015). Teacher and student perceptions during the first year of a one-to-one mobile learning initiative. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (pp. 1428–1433). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
  10. Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: an investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.Google Scholar
  11. Cochrane, T. D. (2010). Exploring mobile learning success factors. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 18(2), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corbeil, J. R., & Valdes-Corbeil, M. E. (2007). Are you ready for mobile learning? Educause Quarterly, 2, 51–58.Google Scholar
  13. Crook, C. (2012). The ‘digital native’ in context: tensions associated with importing Web 2.0 practices into the school setting. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 63–80.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Donelly, C. (2013). Innovation Drives Lab School @ Punahou. Punahou News, July 23, 2013.Google Scholar
  15. Elias, T. (2011). Universal instructional design principles for mobile learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2).Google Scholar
  16. Faille, M. & Morrison, K. (2013). Rise of the mobile phone. National Post, April 5, 2013.
  17. Frohberg, D., Goth, C., & Schwabe, G. (2009). Mobile learning projects – a critical analysis of the state of the art. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 307–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  19. Griffin, D., & Christensen, R. (1999). Concerns-Based Adoption Model Levels of Use of an Innovation (CBAM-LOU). Adapted from Hall, Loucks, Rutherford, & Newlove (1975). Denton: Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning.Google Scholar
  20. Hall, G. E., Loucks, S. F., Rutherford, W. L., & Newlove, B. W. (1975). Levels of use of the innovation: a framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1), 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirsch, B., & Ng, J. W. (2011). Education beyond the cloud: anytime-anywhere learning in a smart campus environment. In Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (ICITST), 2011 International Conference (pp. 718–723). IEEE.Google Scholar
  22. Hsu, H., Wang, S., & Cormac, L. (2008). Using audio blogs to assist English-language learning: an investigation into student perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2), 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hwang, G.-J., & Chang, H.-F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023–1031.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Hwang, G.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011). Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: a review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), E65–E70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. International Telecommunications Union (ITU). (2010). Measuring the information society 2010. Geneva, Switzerland: ITU.
  26. Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago: MacArthur Foundation.Google Scholar
  27. Khaddage, F. (2013). The iPad global embrace! Are we branding mobile learning?. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 1, 3234–3240.Google Scholar
  28. Khaddage, F., & Cosío, J. H. (2014). Trends and barriers on the fusion of mobile apps in higher education where to next and how? In M. Searson & M. Ochoa (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (pp. 903–909). Chesapeake: AACE.Google Scholar
  29. Khaddage, F., & Knezek, G. (2013). iLearn via mobile technology: A comparison of mobile learning attitudes among university Students in two nations. Proceedings of the IEEE 13th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  30. Khaddage, F., & Lattemann, C. (2013). The future of mobile apps for teaching and learning. In Z. Berge & L. Muilen-burg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning: Definitions (pp. 119–128). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Khaddage, F., & Zeidan, F. (2012) iPad in Education in the Middle East, Ready or Not? A College Case Study. Published in: Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 2012 15th International Conference, E-ISBN : 978-1-4673-2426-7 DOI:  10.1109/ICL.2012.6402161.
  32. Khaddage, F., Lanham, E., & Zhou, W. (2009). A mobile learning model for universities: re-blending the current learning environment. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 3(1), 18–23.Google Scholar
  33. Kim, J. (2013). measuring factors that influence teachers’ willingness in using mobile phone in the classroom. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (pp. 3730–3737). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  34. Koole, M. L. (2009). A model for framing mobile learning. In M. Ally (Ed.), Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training (pp. 25–47). Edmonton: AU Press, Athabasca University.Google Scholar
  35. Korf M., & Oksman E (2012). Native, HTML5, or hybrid: understanding your mobile application development options.
  36. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Sharples, M. (2009). Editorial: mobile and contextual learning. Research in Learning Technology, 17(3), 159–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lai, K., Khaddage, F., Knezek, G. (2013). Blending student technology experiences in formal and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.Google Scholar
  38. Looi, C., Sun, D., Seow, P., & Chia, G. (2014). Enacting a technology-based science curriculum across a grade level: the journey of teachers’ appropriation. Computers & Education, 71, 222–236.Google Scholar
  39. Looi, C. K., Zhang, B., Chen, W., Seow, P., Chia, G., Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2011). 1:1 mobile inquiry learning experience for primary science students: a study of learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 269–287.Google Scholar
  40. Looi, C.-K., Zhang, B., Chen, W., Seow, P., Chia, G., Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2010). 1:1 mobile inquiry learning experience for primary science students: a study of learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lu, M. (2008). Effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phones. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 515–525.Google Scholar
  42. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mudge JT. (2012). Native app vs. Mobile web app: A quick comparison six revisions, useful information for web developers and designers website available online from: [last accessed October 2012].
  44. Nagel, D. (2014). One-third of U.S. students use school-issued mobile devices. THE Journal. Available
  45. Norris, C. A., & Soloway, E. (2011). Learning and schooling in the age of mobilism. Educational Technology, 51(6), 3.Google Scholar
  46. Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2013). Los Angeles’ 640,000 iPad purchase: too big to fail. THE Journal.Google Scholar
  47. Pachler, N. (2009). Research methods in mobile and informal learning: Some issues. In G. Vavoula., N. Pachler, A. Kukulska-Hulme (eds.). Researching Mobile Learning (pp. 1–15). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  48. PBS & Grunwald Associates LLC. (2010). Deepening connections: teachers’ increasingly rely on media and technology. Available:
  49. Project Tomorrow. (2010). Project K-Nect evaluation report. Irvine: Project Tomorrow.Google Scholar
  50. Project Tomorrow. (2011). Speak-up national findings, K-12 students and parents report. Irvine: Project Tomorrow.Google Scholar
  51. Project Tomorrow: Speak Up. (2011). Learning in the 21st century. Mobile devices + social media = personalized learning. Washington: Blackboard K-12.Google Scholar
  52. Project Tomorrow: Speak Up. (2014). The new digital learning playbook: Understanding the spectrum of students’ activities and aspirations. Irving: Project Tomorrow.Google Scholar
  53. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 337–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  55. Ropp, M. M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sandholtz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (1996). Teacher change in technology-rich classrooms. In C. Fisher, D. C. Dwyer, & K. Yocam (Eds.), Education and technology: Reflections on computing in classrooms (pp. 281–299). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Seilhamer, R., Chen, B., Sugar, A. (2013). A framework for implementing mobile technology. In Z. Berge & L. Muilenburg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  58. Sha, L., Looi, C.-K., Chen, W., & Zhang, B. (2011). Understanding mobile learning from the perspective of self-regulated learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 366–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sharpes, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, F. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of e-learning research (pp. 221–247). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Sharples, M., Arnedillo-Sanchez, I., Milrad, M., & Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff et al. (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 233–249). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a theory of mobile learning. Proceedings of mLearn 2005, 1(1), 1–9.Google Scholar
  62. Shih, K., Chen, H., Chang, C., & Kao, T. (2010). The development and implementation of scaffolding-based self-regulated learning system for e/m-learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 80–93.Google Scholar
  63. Smith, A. (2013). Smartphone ownership – 2013 update. Retrieved June 24, 2013, from
  64. Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook for information technology in primary and secondary education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  65. St. John’s Curriculum Goes 1:1 with iPads for Fall 2013.
  66. Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing, and evaluating mobile learning. The moving finger writes and having writ…. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 8(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
  67. UB Custom Publishing Group (2012). Abilene Christian University mobilizes learning with smartphones, University Business.Google Scholar
  68. Uden, L. (2007). Activity theory for designing mobile learning. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 1(1), 81–102.Google Scholar
  69. UNESCO. (2012). Working paper series on mobile learning: Turning on mobile learning in North America. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  70. Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.) (2008). International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (Vol. 20). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  71. Williams, B., & Bearman, M. (2008). Podcasting lectures: the next silver bullet? Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care, 6(3), 109–112.Google Scholar
  72. Winters, N. (2006). What is mobile learning. In M. Sharples (ed.). Big issues in mobile learning (pp. 5–9). University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
  73. Wu, W.-H., Wu, J., Chen, C.-Y., Kao, H.-Y., Lin, C.-H., & Huang, S.-H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: a meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 59, 817–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wyatt, T. H., Krauskopf, P. B., Gaylord, N. M., Ward, A., Huffstutler-Hawkins, S., & Goodwin, L. (2010). Cooperative m-learning with nurse practitioner students. Nursing Education Perspectives, 31(2), 109–112.Google Scholar
  75. Young, J. R. (2011). Smartphones on campus: the search for ‘killer’ apps. The Chronicle of Higher Education, B6–B8.Google Scholar
  76. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: an ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). A constructivist mobile learning environment supported by a wireless handheld network. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(4), 235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ferial Khaddage
    • 1
  • Rhonda Christensen
    • 2
  • Wing Lai
    • 3
  • Gerald Knezek
    • 2
  • Cathie Norris
    • 2
  • Elliot Soloway
    • 4
  1. 1.Deakin University School of I.T.MelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.University of North TexasDentonUSA
  3. 3.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  4. 4.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations