Mobile Technologies for Teaching and Learning

  • Rajiv RamnathEmail author
  • Ajay Kuriakose
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history


Mobile information technologies can unshackle learners from desks and classrooms and allow them to learn on the go. They can explore and consume information, record their learning, and collaborate with mentors and with each other at any time and in any place. A mobile device knows user location and identity, so learning can be location and situation based and personalized to the user. In this chapter, we describe current mobile computing technologies and their use in teaching and learning. We project how mobile technologies will evolve in the future and examine – using the various theories and processes of learning as a lens – how the growing affordances of these technologies may influence student learning and education in the future.


  1. Ahlqvist, O., and C. Schlieder. 2017. Geogames and geoplay, game-based approaches to the analysis of geo-information. To appear 2017.Google Scholar
  2. Ahlqvist, O., R. Benkar, R. Ramnath, K. Vatev, A. Heckler, and B. Mikula. 2013. Online map games – playful interaction with geographical science tools. In Games + Learning + Society conference 9.0, Madison, June 2013.Google Scholar
  3. Ahlqvist, Ola, Zhaoyi Chen, Peixuan Jiang, and Rajiv Ramnath. 2014. Online map games – playful interaction with complex real-world issues. In AGILE conference on geographic information science, Castellon, 3 June 2014.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, L.W., D.R. Krathwohl, et al. 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Argyris, C., and D. Schön. 1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  6. Baumann, J.F., N. Seifert-Kessell, and L.A. Jones. 1992. Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students’ comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Literacy Research 24 (2): 143–172. Scholar
  7. Bernstein, Sharon. 1991. PBS game show charts new territory. LA Times article,
  8. Bransford, John D., Ann L. Brown, and Rodney R. Cocking, eds. 2000. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. 1st ed. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clough, G. 2010. Geolearners: Location-based informal learning with mobile and social technologies. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 3 (1): 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ericsson, K.A., and H.A. Simon. 1980. Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review 87 (3): 215–251. Scholar
  11. Fischer, G., and E. Scharff. 1998. Learning technologies in support of self-directed learning. Interactive Media in Education 98(4).
  12. Gerard, R.W. 1967. Shaping the mind: Computers in education. In Computer-assisted instruction: A book of readings, ed. R.C. Atkinson and H.A. Wilson. New York: Training & Development Journal.Google Scholar
  13. Heckler, A.F., and B.D. Mikula. 2016. Factors affecting learning of vector math from computer-based practice: Feedback complexity and prior knowledge. Physical Review Physics Education Research 12: 010134 Published 9 June 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Herold, M., T. Lynch, R. Ramnath, and J. Ramanathan. 2012. Student and instructor experiences in the inverted classroom. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 2012), Seattle, Oct 2012.Google Scholar
  15. Hunsaker, Johanna Steggert. 1981. The experiential learning model and the learning style inventory: An assessment of current findings. Journal of Experiential Learning and Simulation 2: 145–152.Google Scholar
  16. IDC. 2017. Smartphone OS market share, 2017 Q1.
  17. Kolb, D.A. 1984. Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Lage, M.J., G.J. Platt, and M. Treglia. 2000. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. Journal of Economic Education 31 (1): 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Luo, Shuanglan, and Xueqin Huang. 2012. A survey research on the online learning adaptation of the college students. In: 2nd international IEEE conference on Consumer Electronics, Communications and Networks (CECNet), Three Gorges, YiChang.Google Scholar
  20. Meejaleurn, S., A. Uratchanoprakorn, and S. Boonlue. 2010. The construction of the online-learning in a group activity using blended learning on the information communication and network system at Grade 9. In 2nd International Conference on Computer Technology and Development (ICCTD), 2–4 Nov 2010.Google Scholar
  21. Mikula, B., and A. Heckler. 2017. Framework and implementation for improving physics essential skills via computer-based practice: Vector math. Physical Review Physics Education Research 13: 010122 Published 8 May 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mikula, B., A. Heckler, O. Ahlqvist, R. Benkar, R. Ramnath, and K. Vatev. 2013. GeoGame: An online geography game for learning about the green revolution. In Poster Paper, Games + Learning + Society conference 2013, Memorial Union, Madison, June 2013.Google Scholar
  23. Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon (MCB University Press) 9 (5): 1–6.Google Scholar
  24. Rogers, A. 2003. What is the difference? A new critique of adult learning and teaching. The National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, England and Wales. ISBN 1 86201 184 2.
  25. Schon, D.A. 1983. The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Schon, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner, Jossey-Bass Higher Education Series. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Tan, Tan-Hsu, and Tsung-Yu Liu. 2004. The mobile-based interactive learning environment (MOBILE) and a case study for assisting elementary school english learning. In ICALT04 proceedings of the IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, 530–534, 2004.Google Scholar
  28. Terrell, S. 2005. Supporting different learning styles in an online learning environment. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration VIII(II). Also at
  29. Wiley, D.A. 2000. Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In The instructional use of learning objects: Online Version. read/chapters/wiley.doc. Retrieved 07 June 2004.
  30. Yan, W., C. Li, J. Ma, S. Ma, and H. Truong. 2012. m-LTE: A mobile-based learning and teaching interactive environment. In IEEE international conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE), Hong Kong.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Belinda Gimbert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational StudiesThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations