Challenges and Opportunities

Acknowledging and addressing challenges and opportunities in changing environments assists successful change management. At the highest level, lack of standards and lack of senior management endorsement appear among the main barriers to effective implementation of mobile learning in HE (eLearning Guild, 2008). Managers who have demonstrated commitment on both the tactical and the operating strategic levels have a crucial impact upon the acquisition and implementation of technology within an organisation (Haro-Domı´nguez, Ortega-Egea, & Tamayo-Torres, 2010). This can be far-reaching in the ability of an organisation to prioritise or resource activity, or for staff to believe that benefits can be achieved through involvement in that activity.

Lack of instructor confidence and lack of training and technical difficulties with devices have been reported by HE and further education institutions as limiting uptake and implementation (Baylor & Ritchie, 2002; Berthelsen, 2008: Bhati et al., 2010; Jones, 2004; Kukulska-Hulme & Pettit, 2007). Other limiting factors have been identified as age and ability of teachers and trainers (Al-Qeisi, 2009; Facer et al., 2005; Hall & Mansfield, 1975; Herrington & Herrington, 2006; Morris & Venkatesh, 2000; Peters, 2007; Porter, 1963; Walsh, 2008).

27

Facer, Faux and McFarlane (2005) studied the challenges and opportunities of mobile learning and identified a general lack of confidence in teaching with handheld devices ranging from uncertainty amongst educators in relation to technical aspects through to understanding how best to utilise the technology in a meaningful way within the curriculum (2005, p. 4). Staff familiarity with technology appears to be crucial to effective service delivery. It is the contention of this investigation that such familiarity is crucial in all areas of the institution, in support as well as teaching areas. Gaining skills in the workplace is a key to success, and successful implementation depends upon competence.

A range of approaches facilitates the implementation of mobile learning within the educational setting. The ‘champions’ approach, that incorporates early adopters testing and trialling the deployment of instruction, has been adopted by many HE institutions (Bothma & Cant 2011; Kennedy Manzo, 2010; Whitworth, Garnett, & Pearson, 2012). While this approach allows for flexibility of implementation, it can suffer from lack of support and planned infrastructure, leading to short-term projects that may eventually founder through lack of sustained resourcing (Keegan, 2005). The appointed champions run the risk of finding themselves overloaded with work and expectations for which they are unprepared and under-resourced. The use of champions has also emerged from research into the Australian library and information workforce, with such positions being identified as internal mentoring or informal work buddies (Hallam, 2009, p. 87). The NeXus report showed 43% of the TAFE libraries surveyed supported internal mentoring programmes (Hallam, 2009, p. 88).

Mobile web best practice has been addressed by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework for the VET sector. The reports recommended basic principles of resource creation for mobile devices to assist learners, teachers and course designers in judging whether the mobile learning developed was good practice. These included whether mobile learning enhanced the context or authenticity of learning, enabled flexible and convenient use, leveraged the power of mobile devices, supported equal access to learning, responded to the diversity of the learner group, and increased the availability of m-learning resources to the community likely to use them (Low, 2007; O’Connell & Smith, 2007, p. 8). Such recommendations as these include rationale and best practice that are applicable to the library setting in the effective development and delivery of library services to mobile devices. Similar guidelines to inform practice and policy regarding emerging technologies and the Net generation in higher education arose from the premise that current HE staff were ill-equipped to educate the new digitally-oriented generation of learners (Kennedy,

28

Dalgarno, Bennett, Gray, Waycott, Judd, … Chang, 2009). Again, the ill-preparedness of staff in relation to technology and student expectations is a situation affecting more than faculty, it extends to the library and other support areas facing the requirement to up-skill.

To be effective, mobile learning must be seen to add benefit. A number of projects designed to highlight the benefits of including mobile learning have been implemented in HE institutions world-wide and have suffered disappointing results when they have proved unsustainable and non-transferable across the institution (Gaskell & Mills, 2009; Keegan, 2005). In some cases, the institutions have concluded this stemmed from a technology/learner mismatch. In other words, the learners did not perceive the mobile learning opportunities created for them met their needs or provided any additional benefits. Avoidance and lack of take up was the response, with students proving disinclined to engage with the opportunities (Booth, 2009; Kern & Stephens, 2008; Koole, 2006). This issue has been raised in an opinion piece by Lippincott (2008a) on the unique situation that arises when technology regarded by the user as personal and individualised needs to be integrated with institutionally-based systems, with user frustration resulting from failure to do so seamlessly.

The majority of published research and opinion pieces on mobile learning have identified exciting opportunities. Constant connectivity, location-awareness, limitless access and interactive capabilities are benefits offered by the mobile web (Kroski, 2008). Increased freedom and flexibility for learning can lead to greater collaboration, motivation and to personalisation of learning (Gaskell & Mills, 2009). Findings from a number of studies have indicated that students equipped with internet connectivity and a range of learning applications on their mobile devices will engage more meaningfully with both learning opportunities and their fellow students (Kennedy Manzo, 2010; Kim, et al., 2006; Naismith et al., 2004); a hallmark of authentic learning environments (Herrington & Herrington, 2006; Traxler, 2007b, p. 18). The augmented range of learning environments enables interaction with a variety of contexts that can be shared, including students working in the field, at a distance, within the workplace, home, laboratory, classroom, library, in transit, between classes, and which facilitate crucial outcomes such as independent learning.