Learning to Teach with Mobile Technologies: Pedagogical Implications In and Outside the Classroom

  • Wendy L. Kraglund-GauthierEmail author
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history


In learner-centered, technologically enabled postsecondary classrooms, twenty-first-century digital and mobile technologies provide avenues for flexible, personal learning for different groups in the same classroom and enable individual discovery. These same technologies also present risks and ethical dilemmas, including challenges to pedagogical processes and instructors’ academic identity in postsecondary teaching and learning contexts. In the current technology-enabled educational milieu of this century, this may mean instructors thinking differently about engrained, traditional pedagogical practices and exploring the interconnections between subject matter disciplines in a globally connected society. In this chapter, the author presents the argument that the past century’s concepts of reflection-on-practice and reflection-in-practice remain of prime importance, and when the implications for teaching and learning in and outside the classroom with digital and mobile technologies are considered and addressed, a rich pedagogical experience can emerge.


Digital technologies Learning Mobile devices Pedagogy Philosophies of teaching Reflection Teaching 


  1. Al-Emran, M., H.M. Elsherif, and K. Shaalan. 2016. Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior 56: 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anders, A.K. 2017. Equity through access: 21st century learning & the necessity of 1-to-1. T|H|E Journal, May. Retrieved 8 Aug, from
  3. Ardies, J., S. De Maeyer, D. Gijbels, and H. van Keulen. 2014. Students attitudes towards technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 25 (1): 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bailey, M. 2002. Learning, technology and educational transformation: Transforming pedagogical practice. Retrieved 3 Aug 2017, from
  5. Bandura, A. 1993. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist 28 (2): 117–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bangert, A.W. 2004. The seven principles of good practice: A framework for evaluating online teaching. Internet and Higher Education 7: 217–232. Scholar
  7. Beatty, J.E., J.S.A. Leigh, and K.L. Dean. 2009. Philosophy rediscovered: Exploring the connections between teaching philosophies, educational philosophies, and philosophy. Journal of Management Education 33 (1): 99–114. Scholar
  8. Benade, L. 2015. Teachers’ critical reflective practice in the context of twenty-first century learning. Open Review of Educational Research 2 (1): 42–54. Scholar
  9. Berglund Summer Institute. 2006. Learning, technology and educational transformation. Examining the ed. tech. metamorphosis: Emerging butterfly or deleterious root worm? Retrieved 8 Aug 2017, from
  10. Biggs, J. 2002. Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education.Google Scholar
  11. Bloom, B.S. 1984. Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  12. Bower, J.L., and C.M. Christensen. 1995. Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Business Review 73 (1): 43–53.Google Scholar
  13. Bridges, N., and J. Traxler. 2005. Mobile learning: The ethical and legal challenges. In Mobile learning anytime everywhere, ed. J. Attewell and C. Savill-Smiths, 203–207. London: Learning and Skills Development Agency.Google Scholar
  14. Brookfield, S. 1990. The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  15. Center for Instructional Development and Educational Research. 2009. Pedagogy. Retrieved 13 Feb 2012, from
  16. Chickering, A.W., and Z.F. Gamson. 1999. Chapter 6: Development and adaptations of the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 80: 75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Churchill, D. 2018. Chapter 7: Transformation of teaching through 3D learning-outcomes based curriculum approach in higher education. In Educational access and excellence, ed. T.R. Dash and M. Behera, 66–75. New Delhi: Allied.Google Scholar
  18. Cochrane, T. 2013. M-learning as a catalyst for pedagogical change. In Handbook of mobile learning, ed. Z.L. Berge and L.Y. Muilenburg, 247–258. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Crawford, K. 1996. Vygotskian approaches in human development in the information era. Educational Studies in Mathematics 31: 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Danielson, C. 2007. Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. 2nd ed. Alexandria: ASTD.Google Scholar
  21. Darkenwald, G.G., and S.B. Merriam. 1982. Adult education: Foundations of practice. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  22. Dewey, J. 1959. Dewey on education. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  23. Dogtiev, A. 2018, January 8. App download and usage statistics 2017. Retrieved 17 Feb 2018, from
  24. Elias, J.L., and S. Merriam. 1984. Philosophical foundations of adult education. 2nd ed. Malabar: Kreiger.Google Scholar
  25. Flannery, D., and R. Wislock. 1991. Why we do what we do: Our working philosophy of adult education. Adult Learning 2 (8): 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Friesen, N. 2010. The place of the classroom and the space of the screen: Relational pedagogy and Internet technology. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  27. Fullan, M.G. 1993. Change forces: Probing the depth of educational reform. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gikas, J., and M.M. Grant. 2013. Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones, and social media. Internet and Higher Education 19: 18–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Higgins, A., and M. Northover. 2011. Implementing an online system: Voices of experience. In Flexible pedagogy, flexible practice: Notes from the trenches of distance education, ed. E. Burge, C. Gibson, and T. Gibson, 127–138. Athabasca: Athabasca University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Jaffee, D. 1998. Institutionalized resistance to asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 2 (2): 21–32.Google Scholar
  31. Kirkpatrick, D. 2011. Flexibility in the twenty-first century: The challenge of Web 2.0. In Flexible pedagogy, flexible practice: Notes from the trenches of distance education, ed. E. Burge, C. Campbell Gibson, and T. Gibson, 19–28. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Kraglund-Gauthier, W.L. 2014. Chapter 7. An instructional designer’s tale: The ghost in the machine, supporting the virtual post-secondary educator. In Teaching online: Stories from within, ed. T.G. Ryan and D.C. Young, 75–88. Champaign: Common Ground.Google Scholar
  33. Kraglund-Gauthier, W.L., and D.C. Young. 2014. Chapter one. Hiding behind a password: Are online classes as private as we think? In Legal issues in global contexts: Perspectives on technical communications in an international age, ed. K. St. Amant and M. Courant Rife, 7–26. Amityville: Baywood.Google Scholar
  34. Kukulska-Hulme, A., and J. Traxler. 2005. Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Lalonde, C. 2011. Courses that deliver: Reflecting on constructivist critical pedagogical approaches to teaching online and on-site foundations courses. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 23 (3): 408–123.Google Scholar
  36. Laurillard, D. 2005. e-Learning in higher education. In Changing higher education: The development of teaching and learning, ed. P. Ashwin, 71–84. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Leach, J., and B. Moon. 2009. The power of pedagogy. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  38. Loughran, J. 2006. Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lindeman, E. (1926/1961). The meaning of adult education. Montreal: Harvest House.Google Scholar
  40. MacLeod, K.A., and W.L. Kraglund-Gauthier. 2015. A case study of infusing technology into pre-service science teacher learning: Conceptions and attitudes while navigating changing digital landscapes. Journal of European Education 5 (2): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Manyika, J., M. Chui, J. Bughin, R. Dobbs, P. Bisson, and A. Marrs 2013. Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business, and the global economy. McKinsey Global Institute. Retrieved 19 July 2017, from
  42. Martin, B. 2018, March 6. Global digital future in focus 2018. Retrieved 12 Mar 2018, from
  43. McKeachie, W.J., and M. Svinicki. 2014. McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research and theory for college and university teachers. 14th ed. Boston: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  44. Mentis, M. 2008. A teacher’s research journey into e-learning: Aligning technology, pedagogy and context. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Massey University, Auckland.Google Scholar
  45. Mentor, I., D. Elliot, M. Hulme, J. Lewin, and K. Lowden. 2011. A guide to practitioner research in education. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Merriam, S., ed. 2001. The new update on adult learning theory, New directions for adult and continuing education. Vol. 89. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  47. Merriam, S., and R.S. Caffarella. 1999. Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  48. Niess, M.L., and H. Gillow-Wiles 2016, April 17. Transforming technological pedagogical knowledge: Teachers’ thinking with a systems pedagogical tool. Paper presented at the 2015 Conference of the American Education Research Association, Chicago. Retrieved 5 Aug 2017, from
  49. Oblinger, D., and L.J. Oblinger. 2005. Educating the net generation. Boulder: EDUCAUSE.Google Scholar
  50. Osterman, K.F., and R.B. Kottkamp. 1993. Reflective practice for educators: Improving schooling through professional development. Newbury Park: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  51. P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning. 2015. P21 framework definitions. Retrieved 2 Aug 2017 from
  52. P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning. 2017. Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved 2 Aug 2017 from
  53. Richter, F. 2018, February 23. The mobile world. Retrieved 1 Mar 2018, from
  54. Schön, D.A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  55. Schön, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  56. Statista. 2018. Number of mobile app downloads worldwide in 2016, 2017, and 2021 (in billions). Retrieved 1 March 2018, from
  57. Strong, M., J. Gargani, and Ō. Hacifazlioğlu. 2011. Do we know a successful teacher when we see one? Experiments in the identification of effective teachers. Journal of Teacher Education 62 (4): 367–382. Scholar
  58. Taggart, G.L., and A.P. Wilson. 2005. Promoting reflective thinking in teachers: 50 action strategies. 2nd ed. Newbury Park: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  59. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. 2015. Future ready learning: Reimaging the role of technology in education. Retrieved 8 Aug 2017 from
  60. Ungerleider, C., and T. Burns 2003. A systematic review of the effectiveness and efficiency of networked ICT in education. A state of the field report to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and Industry Canada. Retrieved 12 Nov 2014, from
  61. Vygotsky, L.S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Weimer, M.E. 2010. Chapter 7: New faculty: Beliefs that prevent and promote growth. In Inspired college teaching: A career-long resource for professional growth, 149–172. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  63. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zinn, L.M. 1999. Philosophy of adult education inventory [Brochure]. Boulder: Lifelong Learning Options.Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.St. Francis Xavier UniversityAntigonishCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationYorkville UniversityFrederictonCanada

Section editors and affiliations

  • Hea-Jin Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Education and Human Ecology, Faculty of Mathematics EducationThe Ohio State University at LimaLimaUSA

Personalised recommendations