Pedagogy, practice and accessibility potential

There are two alternative approaches to providing accessibility advice for mobile learning. A technology based approach looks at the functions available on devices with particular accessibility benefits. This guidance is already well developed in the report Usability and Accessibility of PDAs in Education, in which Peter Rainger’s original work has been updated by David Sugden.

An alternative pedagogy based approach is developed below to illustrate how the same functions can be used in different ways to provide different benefits – and indeed barriers. The examples given are mapped against Bloom’s taxonomy to illustrate the way the same resource can be used to create different learning experiences. In summary, Bloom’s taxonomy identifies 5 levels of learning. This is traditionally shown in a pyramid with the low level (superficial learning) at the base and the higher levels (deep learning) at the top as illutrated below.
 

Figure 1 - Bloom's taxonomy of learning.

Using m-Learning (or indeed any other sort of learning) the same sort of activity can be developed at different levels. It is important to recognise that learners working at low level qualifications are often highly motivated by the higher level tasks such as creating, rearranging or criticising. The higher level tasks implicitly require learners to engage with knowledge or understanding and often act as an effective strategy to create “learning by stealth” since they motivate learners to explore the lower level knowledge required for the task.

Using Bloom’s taxonomy to create different m-Learning experiences

Example 1: Using audio recordings to create alternative learning experiences

The examples below show a range of ways audio recording and playback can create very varied learning experiences at a range of different levels on Bloom's taxonomy. Even for the same functionality (in this case audio recording and playback) the accessibility pros and cons vary with the pedagogical approach – as suggested in the model of accessible m-learning in the previous section. More creative and engaging uses may provide a critical mass of motivation that raises the accessibility of the learning experience above the bar provided by the small, inflexible interface.

Low levels in Bloom’s taxonomy:

• An audio recording can provide basic material that a learner needs; this might include recipes, instructions, background information etc.
• The learner may store basic notes in audio format – eg laboratory results, key vocabulary definitions, language phrases etc.
• Text based information – eg handout notes - can be transformed to MP3 format using text to speech software. The learner listens to the background information.
• On a fieldcourse, audio clips loaded onto a device might include background information on different locations or hints and tips for data collection.

Medium levels of Bloom’s taxonomy

• A learner compares audio files in order to select and use the appropriate information – eg language based work or practical work.
• A learner creates their own audio clips explaining observations or summarising group discussions.

Higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy

• Learners listen to audio clips and assess them for bias or prejudice – eg in humanities or social sciences.
• Learners create audio clips to replicate particular styles – eg rhetorical, documentary, propagandist.
• Learners create their own audio clips to summarise a series of arguments for or against a particular issue.

With each of these different approaches different accessibility factors come into play. Group based work allows a division of labour that may bypass individual accessibility barriers. Creating audio recordings may provide excellent benefits for dyslexic or motor impaired learners compared to notetaking but may be inappropriate for speech impaired or deaf learners.

Example 2 – generic approaches at different levels

The example above could be replicated using the built-in camera function in a mobile phone or a PDA and could equally be replicated using specific types of software such as word processing software or database reference software. The list below summarises some of the possibilities at each stage of Bloom’s taxonomy.

Low levels in Bloom’s taxonomy – knowledge and understanding

Typical keywords might include “Define, describe, label, list, memorise, recall, identify, label, who, when, where.” …moving through to “Summarise, interpret, contrast, predict, estimate, classify, describe, discuss, explain, indicate, give examples, paraphrase, locate.”

Resources could include

• Information databases (eg reference material such as dictionaries, translators, Shakespeare plays, periodic table, anatomy databases).
• Quiz software with basic factual questions.
• Personal notetaking (observations, facts and figures) and audio clips.
• Spreadsheet software for data recording.
• Static maps for reference.
• Mapping software and/or GPS systems.
• Collaborative activities/fieldwork etc (beaming data to compile results).
• Podcasts for reference.

Medium levels of Bloom’s taxonomy

Typical keywords might include “Apply, relate, choose, demonstrate, illustrate, operate, practise, solve, determine.” …moving through to “Calculate, compare, contrast, criticise, describe, distinguish, examine, test,.”

Resources could include

• Interactive Flash or Java games.
• Fieldwork sampling instructions/images/animations.
• User selected photo galleries for portfolio evidence.
• Past questions and revision tips.
• Problem solving via personal notetaking or spreadsheet application.
• Creating audio clips.
• Web search.
• Wireless collaboration (eg beaming files to assemble data for arguments)
• Guided photo-tours with questions.
• Quiz software with more sophisticated questions – eg calculations.

Higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy

Typical keywords might include “Modify, rearrange, construct, substitute, plan, create, explore.” …moving through to “Recommend, appraise, defend, judge, evaluate, conclude.”

Resources could include

• Personal notes or audio clips synthesising key arguments.
• Synthesising text reference materials – eg themes from Shakespeare or impacts of climate change.
• Collaborative summaries by wireless, SMS or mobile blog/wiki.
• Web searches to add value to lecture or to dispute points of view.
• Evaluating audio clips or creating audio clip to critique arguments.
• Create a presentation to defend a viewpoint.

The same m-learning activity may have different accessibility implications depending on how it is used. In general the higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy lead to much more engaging activities in which the learner plays an active role, often in partnership with others. This active engagement influences the “balance of accessibilities” discussed in the model of accessible m-learning and may make the difference between a learner tackling other barriers or giving up. See also the Ferl Becta resource from the Excellence Gateway.

The next section explores some sample m-learning activities in more detail with commentary on the accessibility pros and cons.

Previous Section                                                            Next Section