The value of mobile technology in teaching and learning French.

What should be considered as mobile technology (m-technology)? Naismith 2004 divides it into 3 categories:

• Portable and personal: mobile phones, game consoles, pda, tablets, laptops.
• Portable and shared: street kiosks, interactive museum displays...
• Personal and static are also included like classroom response systems.

However a more widely accepted definition would be the use of personal electronic devices. The most common devices used by teachers and learners in my experience are mobile phones, tablet and laptops

As technology is moving so fast, it must be understood any study being made and then published is always late compared to the current evolution of mobile technology and its applications.

Perceived value by teachers

Teachers using mobile learning see these following values according to Savile-Smith 2006.

1. In case of lack of students' motivation, it can be used to catch the students 'attention
2. Lightweight compared to PCs or more traditional means like books
3. It is used as a support for teaching, not its main component
4. For special needs students, it may be useful
5. Getting “new” technology in the classroom

However, in a lot of classes, paper is still a very common medium but tablets and laptops are more and more used. I usually develop my lesson-plans and activities on my laptop. It is very handy when I am in the train, the sizes of the screen and keys are ideal for me. When I need some internet information I usually do it from home or the library.

Evidence based value

Researchers noted many benefits of mobile technology.

• It is less costly than a standard PC.
• It is mobile, so there is a continuity in its use while moving.
• The numerous applications probably stimulate more creativity in owners.
• Usually learners are so savvy with it that there is no or less need in training them, in a way it is saving time and money.
• It fits with the learners' culture so their overall learning experience is probably better.

Even if tablets and mobile phones are less costly, the overall cost of a subscription to a network is quite prohibitive and some people can find it difficult to include it in their budget. For instance I own a “vintage” mobile phone with a pay-as-you-go SIM card.

For teenagers learners, it is part of their culture and most of them are always using it. Being always connected has become the way to be. When I ask them how they got proficient with their m-technology, they usually describe a trial and error process which is often very time consuming. This process does not usually go well with adults and teachers. They have less time to spare (work, house chores, children, caring for parents...), they feel the process is too simplistic and does not compare well with proper teaching. By the way this may be a barrier to the use of technology by some teachers.

Potential technical and social drawbacks of m-technology.

From a technical point of view, Maniar (2008) noted the issue of screen and key-size. Elias (2011) was concerned by limited memory and Crescente (2011) noted the issue of technology becoming very quickly obsolete.

There are many more technical points to be described like:

• The ability of the Institution to provide the required bandwidth for all learners at any time to have an adequate streaming.
• Different formats, standards, operating systems supported by different technologies.
• Previous materials need to be rewritten/adapted for new technology.
• Battery life is limited.

Despite all those issues m-technology is very trendy and popular among learners.

There are also social challenges involved. From my point of view the most challenging one is the “digital divide” that is defined in Wikipedia as “an economic and social inequality according to categories of persons in a given population in their access to, use of, or knowledge of information and communication technologies” . Other main issues follow:

• Raftree and martin (2013) show the importance of adequate support in m-education
• Sharples (2000) notes the need to design personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning
• There is no m-learning working time directive, we do not know what is the correct amount of time to devote to m-learning to avoid major perturbation in learners' and teachers' personal and school lives (Masters, 2007)
• We must not forget we are favoured living in a developed country with an easy access to m-learning compared developing countries (Masters, 2005)
• New types of assessment are needed.
• Real authorship, piracy as well as hacking are real issues
• Conceiving an appropriate theory for m-learning and teaching is needed, it will also need to evolve with technology.
• Protection of personal data on each individual learning evolution should be paramount.

In our society I am very watchful when using m-technology to be sure that every learner could have the same chances and quality of access to learning materials independently of the level of m-technology he/she uses.

The evolution of m-learning/Teaching will depend on the creativity of teachers, its evaluation as well as the evolution of technology.

• In a classroom setting, Murray (2011) described more collaboration and communication happening among learners with the use of videos, apps and interactive activities.
• Obviously, books, Power Point presentations on a screen can easily be replaced by m-technology with a targeted on demand real-time access to appropriate data.
• There is a possibility of real time access to updated information and its processing.
• Possibility of continuity of learning inside and outside the classroom (should there be a time constraint?)

The use of m-technology leads to an enhancement of concept understanding as well as the building of team skills like communication and collaboration Naismith (2004).

Currently in the classroom I used videos to teach. In the future I would like to create and use podcast coupled with visual material, they would be available online for students to progress in French.

I think the video teaching like Khan Academy or Duolingo are going to develop. Schools are going to collaborate more and more with these types of teaching structure.

We will also use more e-libraries and on-line exams.

As Bill Gates showed in one of his TED talks, the use of self-recording in the classroom for better refectivity and feedback will probably become a standard in the future,

Currently m-technology can also allow a better learning experience

• In tele-education, m-technology and sms are very useful to convey practical information about school life (venue issues, change of timetable, cancellations...)
• Better learner/learner and tutor/learner communication
• More collaboration belonging to a virtual community.

Teachers' creativity will play a major part in the success of m-technology as a tool to promote learning French. As a trainee French teacher, I like and will use the book “Language learning with Technology” by Stanley Graham. All through the book, the author develops ideas for integrating technology in the classroom. It gives many examples on how to improve learners' engagement and outcomes in language teaching.

To conclude, mobile Technology is currently part of the culture of our learners. The number of tools surrounding this technology is increasing constantly in quantity and quality. As a future French teacher I am excited about the future of Language teaching with m-technology

Crescente, Mary Louise; Lee, Doris (March 2011). "Critical issues of m-learning: design models, adoption processes, and future trends". Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers 28 (2).

Digital Divide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide

Elias, Tanya (February 2011). "Universal Instructional Design Principles for Mobile Learning". International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 12 (2): 143–156.

Maniar, N.; Bennett, E., Hand, S. & Allan, G (2008). "The effect of mobile phone screen size on video based learning". Journal of Software 3 (4): 51–61.

Masters, K. (2005). "Seeing, Understanding, Learning in the Mobile Age". Budapest, Hungary, April 2005

Masters, K.; Ng'ambi D. (2007). "Proceedings of IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning". Lisbon, Portugal. pp. 171–175.

Murray, Orrin; Nicole Olcese (November–December 2011). "Teaching and Learning with iPads, Ready or Not?". TechTrends 55 (6).

Naismith, Laura; Lonsdale, Peter; Vavoula, Giasemi; Sharples, Mike (2004). "Literature Review in Mobile Technologies and Learning". FutureLab Series (11).

Raftree,L.; Martin, N. (2014). “What's holding back mobile phones for Education?”. Stanford Social Innovation Review Blog. Standford Social Innovation Review. February 11, 2013.

http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/whats_holding_back_mobile_phones_for_education

Savil-Smith et al. (2006), Mobile learning in Practice: Piloting a Mobile Learning Teachers’ Toolkit in Further Education Colleges. p. 8

Sharples, M. (2000). "The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning". Computers & Education 34 (3-4): 177–193.