Creating Learning Opportunities On-the-Go

  • Franziska TredeEmail author
  • Lina Markauskaite
  • Celina McEwen
  • Susie Macfarlane
Part of the Understanding Teaching-Learning Practice book series (UTLP)


This chapter addresses the question: How could mobile devices help students develop deep authentic engagement with professional knowledge work and the capacity to be practitioners and learners on-the-go? It specifically focuses on how mobile technologies could be used to engage students in active (co-)construction of shared professional knowledge. First, this chapter discusses the relationship between mobile work, mobile learning and knowledge creation for, and in, practice. Then, it discusses how students’ authentic development of various professional knowledge artefacts, such as digital professional learning resources or shareable representations of their professional practice, can help students learn from the specificity of a given work environment and contribute to the learning of others. After, the chapter discusses what it means to learn on-the-go and offers a set of pedagogical strategies to support the development of students’ capacities for learning on-the-go throughout their professional career. These pedagogical strategies engage students in (co-)creation of digital professional knowledge artefacts.


  1. Ahmad, N., & Orton, P. (2010). Smartphones make IBM smarter, but not as expected. Retrieved from
  2. Allert, H., Reisas, S., & Richter, C. (Eds.). (2014). Design as inquiry: A manual. Kiel, Germany: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.Google Scholar
  3. Ambrose, G., & Harris, P. (2010). Basics design 08: Design thinking. Lausanne, Switzerland: AVA Publishing SA.Google Scholar
  4. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52, 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2013). Technology mapping: An approach for developing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 199–221. Scholar
  6. Benedict, L., & Pence, H. E. (2012). Teaching chemistry using student-created videos and photo blogs accessed with smartphones and two-dimensional barcodes. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(4), 492–496. Scholar
  7. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Bersin, J. (2017). The disruption of digital learning: Ten things we have learned. Retrieved from
  9. Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 28(Winter 2010), 30–35.Google Scholar
  10. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. Scholar
  11. Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. Scholar
  12. Clarke, R. J. (2015). Apps in the field: Prototyping HyperSite for describing work practices in Workplaces. In Y. Zhang (Ed.), Handbook of mobile teaching and learning (pp. 535–555). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Colbert, A., Yee, N., & George, G. (2016). The digital workforce and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 731–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Collins, H. M. (2010). Tacit and explicit knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Damsa, C. I., Kirschner, P. A., Andriessen, J. E. B., Erkens, G., & Sins, P. H. M. (2010). Shared epistemic agency: An empirical study of an emergent construct. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 143–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davies, B. S., Rafique, J., Vincent, T. R., Fairclough, J., Packer, M. H., Vincent, R., & Haq, I. (2012). Mobile medical education (MoMEd): How mobile information resources contribute to learning for undergraduate clinical students—A mixed methods study. BMC Medical Education, 12(1), 1.
  17. Dimond, R., Bullock, A., Lovatt, J., & Stacey, M. (2016). Mobile learning devices in the workplace: ‘As much a part of the junior doctors’ kit as a stethoscope’? BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 207. Scholar
  18. Drake, S. D., Jaffe, J., & Boggs, R. (2011). IDC market analysis report: Worldwide mobile worker population 2009–2013 forecast. Framingham, MA: ODC.Google Scholar
  19. Eraut, M. (2009). Understanding complex performance through learning trajectories and mediating artefacts. In N. Jackson (Ed.), Learning to be professional through a higher education e-book (p. 17). Surrey: Surrey Centre for Excellence in Professional Training and Education (SCEPTrE).Google Scholar
  20. Falconer, I., & Littlejohn, A. (2009). Representing models of practice. In L. Lockyer, S. Bennett, S. Agostinho, & B. Harper (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning design and learning objects (pp. 20–40). Hershey: Idea Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forehand, J. W., Miller, B., & Carter, H. (2017). Integrating mobile devices into the nursing classroom. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 12(1), 50–52. Scholar
  22. Goodyear, P., & Markauskaite, L. (2012). Pedagogic designs, technology and practice-based education. In J. Higgs, R. Barnett, S. Billett, M. Hutchings, & F. Trede (Eds.), Practice-based education (pp. 131–144). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodyear, P., & Steeples, C. (1998). Creating shareable representations of practice. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 6(3), 16–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gruber, M., de Leon, N., George, G., & Thompson, P. (2015). Managing by design. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 1–7. Scholar
  25. Hassenzahl, M. (2013). User experience and experience design. In M. Soegaard & R. F. Dam (Eds.), The encyclopedia of human-computer interaction (2nd ed.). The Interaction Design Foundation.Google Scholar
  26. Herman Miller Inc. (2007). On the move: How mobile employees are changing the workplace. Research Summaries. Retrieved from
  27. Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., … Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by designTM into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547. Scholar
  28. Leonardi, P. M., Nardi, B. A., & Kallinikos, J. (Eds.). (2012). Materiality and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Littlejohn, A., Falconer, I., & McGill, L. (2008). Characterising effective eLearning resources. Computers & Education, 50(3), 757–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Malafouris, L. (2012). How things shape the mind: A theory of material engagement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. Scholar
  32. Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2014). Professional work and knowledge. In S. Billett, C. Harteis, & H. Gruber (Eds.), International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (Vol. 1, pp. 79–106). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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
  35. Muukkonen, H., & Lakkala, M. (2009). Exploring metaskills of knowledge-creating inquiry in higher education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 187–211. Scholar
  36. Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: How do they shape progressive inquiry discourse? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 527–565. Scholar
  37. Nash, C., Jarrahi, M. H., Sutherland, W., & Phillips, G. (2018). Digital nomads beyond the buzzword: Defining digital nomadic work and use of digital technologies. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10766, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nicolini, D. (2013). Practice theory, work and organization: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Nicolini, D., Mengis, J., & Swan, J. (2012). Understanding the role of objects in cross-disciplinary collaboration. Organization Science, 23(3), 612–629. Scholar
  40. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448. Scholar
  42. Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., Muukkonen, H., Kosonen, K., & Karlgren, K. (2011). The roles and uses of design principles for developing the trialogical approach on learning. Research in Learning Technology, 19(3), 233–246. Scholar
  43. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557–576. Scholar
  44. Pachler, N., Pimmer, C., & Seipold, J. (2011). Work-based mobile learning: Concepts and cases. Berlin: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Parkes, M., Stein, S., & Reading, C. (2015). Student preparedness for university e-learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 1–10. Scholar
  46. Pimmer, C., & Pachler, N. (2014). Mobile learning in the workplace: Unlocking the value of mobile technology for work-based education. In M. Ally & A. Tsinakos (Eds.), Increasing access through mobile learning (pp. 193–203). Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning.Google Scholar
  47. Polanyi, M. (1966/2009). The tacit dimension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. Scholar
  49. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 397–417). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  51. Seid-Karbasi, P., Ye, X. C., Zhang, A. W., Gladish, N., Cheng, S. Y. S., Rothe, K., … Wasserman, W. W. (2017). CuboCube: Student creation of a cancer genetics e-textbook using open-access software for social learning. PLOS Biology, 15(3), e2001192. Scholar
  52. Sweet, R. (2011). The mobile worker: Concepts, issues, implications. Adelaide: Commonwealth of Australia. National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER).Google Scholar
  53. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134–144. Scholar
  54. Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Sormunen, K., Dillon, P., & Sointu, E. (2015). The impact of authentic learning experiences with ICT on pre-service teachers’ intentions to use ICT for teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 81, 49–58. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franziska Trede
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lina Markauskaite
    • 2
  • Celina McEwen
    • 1
  • Susie Macfarlane
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia
  2. 2.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Deakin UniversityBurwood, MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations