Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014).

Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.


Learning with Mobile Devices
Perceptions of Students and Teachers
at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria


Margarete Grimus
Institute for Information Systems Computer Media
Graz University of Technology, Austria
margarete.grimus@aon.at

Martin Ebner
Institute for Information Systems Computer Media
Graz University of Technology, Austria
martin.ebner@tugraz.at


Abstract: This publication aims to report on the findings of a study of readiness for
integrating mobile phones in secondary schools (grade 5 – 8) in Austria. Surveys are used to
examine the ownership and usage of mobile phones of kids of the age from 10 to 14 years,
teachers and additionally teacher candidates. Findings indicate that gathered data show the
reality outside school and the lack of readiness of teachers and teacher candidates. Educators
and school authority need to take a serious approach to accepting 21st century technology.
It can be summarized that the educational system has to be adapted to today’s and tomorrow’s
technologies. Issues based on the research and compared with data from the recent JIM Study
are discussed: Youth and mobile technologies, school (demands and challenges), teacher
education and Bring Your Own Devices (BOYD).



Introduction

The increase of mobile technologies has changed nearly all fields of daily life. Today’s mobile phone
is a storage medium, media player, navigation system, encyclopedia, digital camera, game console, appointment
book, news portal and last but not least a communication platform (JIM 2013). This development leads to
questions concerning the chances of integration of mobile phones in our educational system – named mobile
learning (Ebner et al. 2008). Mobile phones are common 21
st
century tools. Schools all over the world are
challenged to prepare their students for a global 21
st
century marketplace, which means to teach 21
st
century
skills (e.g. self-directed and collaborative learning) (Norris 2011, p. 20).
Today mobile devices like smart-phones belong to many children and youngsters as basic media
equipment (JIM 2013). They use them for the communication, for the procurement of information, to play, to
create images and videos. ‘Students comfort with digital devices and their assumption of always available
digital connectivity will not automatically, by themselves, make them’ educated.’ (Prensky 2012) Mobile
devices can provide a level of reach, scope and immediacy that is largely unattainable through traditional
classroom environments (Huber & Ebner 2013). The most up-to-date content can be accessible immediately --
from anywhere -- and it can be repeatedly reviewed for better comprehension and understanding (UNESCO
2013a).
Studies report decreasing age of the children who own a mobile phone while at the same time the
percentage of young mobile phone owners increases. This study aims to figure out perceptions in the respective
target groups (pupils, teachers and teacher candidates) on the topic of learning with mobile devices as well as to
gather base information about the use of the devices. Data were gathered in 2009 and 2013 and show clearly the
different attempts of pupils (age 10-14 years) and teachers perspectives of use in education.
Based on these results the issue of using mobile devices at school will be discussed.


Methodology
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.


Objectives of the Research
It can be recognized that the age of kids owning a personal mobile phone is decreasing. The purpose of
this study was to carry out conditions and perceptions for using mobile phones for teaching and learning in
schools in Austria. The age of students in lower secondary school (grade 5-8) ranks from 10 - 14 years. To
examine the possibilities of use of mobile devices for learning the research work was conducted with
questionnaires developed for the target groups of teachers, teacher-candidates and students in secondary schools
in Styria, Austria in 2013. Besides general demographic information (age and gender) the possession of mobile
phones (including model, net operator and rate) and the daily user routines (SMS, photo/ video, Internet, e-mail)
was questioned.
The major research questions are defined as following:
1. What are the presuppositions (equipment)?
2. What are the attitudes of school children aged from 10-14 years?
3. What are the perceptions of teachers and prospective teachers?


Research Method

Research was conducted within the frame of questionnaires and surveys. Data collection was
performed in two cycles (anonymously).
The study group in 2013 consisted of 22 teachers, 157 teacher-candidates and 84 students (10 – 14
years). In 2009 the sample consisted of 1075 students (10-14 years) and 20 teachers. The results of the pupils
were thereafter compared with the survey of pupils in 2009. It has to be considered that 84 pupils participated in
2013 while in 2009 the sample encompassed 1075 pupils.


Research Study

Students

The first questions dealt with ownership of a mobile phone and the user profile. Figure 1 provides the
percentage of ownership of mobile phones at the age of 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 years.

Figure 1. Pupils in lower secondary school report the ownership of mobile phones in 2013 and 2009.

The results of the comparison from 2009 and 2013 provide findings about the basic aspects of
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

possession and use of the devices: While in 2009 ownership was already on a high level (> 90 %) in 2013 it
reached 100% of pupils from the age of 11 years and up.
Developments in technology can be seen in the brand and models of the devices. In 2009 access to
mobile Internet and Wi-Fi was below 5%. In 2013 the majority uses smart-phones; a slight difference can be
figured out in the brand of the devices between boys and girls: 68% girls report ownership of a Samsung-
device, while 40 % boys prefer iPhones. All other brands show only low numbers (Sony Ericsson, HTC, LG,
HUAWEI, Alcatel, Medion, Nokia, Google). By analysis of the specification of the models it can be assumed
that nearly all phones are equipped with a camera, Bluetooth, Memory etc. Mobile access to the Internet was
reported from 52 % (58 % girls, 42 % boys); 55 % (50 % girls, 62 % boys) reported WLAN. From the data it
was not clear if all pupils have definite knowledge of their WLAN possibilitiy.
Comparing data from 2009 and 2013 a slight shift of the the phone tariffs from prepaid airtime (in
2009) to monthly dataplans in 2013 can be determined. This may be due to cheaper offers of fixed dataplans.
User daily routines regarding SMS, taking photos / videos, Internet surfing and e-Mails are questioned
in 2009 and 2013. Details are provided in Table 1 and Figure 2.

Survey year 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013
Purpose never rarely often regularly
SMS 4% 3% 20% 20% 25% 30% 47% 48%
Photo/Video 6% 5% 24% 22% 40% 49% 25% 24%
Internet Surfing 71% 19% 15% 24% 5% 37% 4% 20%
E-Mails 81% 49% 9% 27% 2% 20% 2% 4%
Table 1. Comparison of usage of mobile phones for different purpose in 2009 and 2013.


Figure 2: Participants’ usage of mobile phones for different purpose in 2009 and 2013.
A closer look to userprofiles shows clearly that there is not much difference between 2009 and 2013 of
the usage of SMS and Photo/Video, while Internet surfing and use of E-Mails has significantly increased in
2013. A reason could be that the costs for dataplans decreased from around 6,4 !/MB in 2009 (Hödl 2009) to
0,02 – 0,04 !/MB in 2013 (AK 2013).
In contrast to the functions above use of mobile phones for learning is rather low. Results of usage of
mobile phones for learning as well at school as at home or on transfer are given in Table 2.



Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

2013 never rarely often frequently
At school 64% 25% 6% 6%
At home, on transfer
32% 39% 23% 6%
Table 2. Mapping pupils’ usage of mobile phones for learning in 2013.

Not much difference between can be figured out between boys and girls: 67 % girls and 60 % boys
report that they never use their mobile phones for learning at school. This may be due to the fact that mobiles
are not actively used or even banned in most of the schools. However 70 % girls report the use of mobile
phones for learning at home and on transfer (25 % rarely + 35 % often), while this is only the case for 50 %
boys (43 % rarely + 7 % often).
To get more insights about preferences of use of mobiles for learning pupils were asked to write down
their feelings with regard to benefits and challenges. In 2009 the majority of challenges addressed costs,
distraction and safety reasons (privacy). No answers were retrieved on benefits. When asked if they would like
to use the mobile phones in class teaching of 81 % the students in 2009 noted appreciation for it.
In 2013 benefits addressed the possibility of searching for information and the use of the calculator.
One girl expressed that it would be a good opportunity to learn at school how to use mobile phones besides
gaming, some others expected increase in ambition and more fun with learning. Boys commented the possibility
to find information ‘in addition to what is offered in lessons’, less handwriting, less books to carry, and apps
and tools to support learning. The mostly mentioned challenges addressed distraction and cheating. However it
is remarkable that only about a 25 % of the pupils expect improvements in learning achievements by use of
mobile phones in class teaching. Additional comments were related to claims for clear guidelines and the
demand of new concepts for usage of mobile phones for other purposes than gaming.


Teachers

In 2013 twelve female and ten male teachers participated in the survey. They were clustered in age-
groups: the youngest four were between 31and 40 (18 %); 41-50 (8; 36 %), ten were older than 50 years (46 %).
In other words, 100% of the teachers are mobile digital immigrants, as defined by Prensky (2001). 54 % are
already teaching for more than 20 years. All of them own a mobile phone, 86 % a computer, 73 % a laptop or
netbook and 55 % a tablet computer. The most popular phone is a Samsung, followed by an iPhone, HTC and
Motorola. Most of them (18; 81 %) can access the Internet, and 2 (9 %) more when WiFi is available. The
majority (13; 56 %) pointed out that they have no experiences with mobile learning, nine reported some
experience.
In the survey concerns of teachers’ perception towards developments, expectations and relevance of
mobile learning in the future were requested. While 72 % of the teachers approved the question ‘Would you
appreciate and promote mobile learning?’, only about a third (32 %) expect that mobile learning will play an
important role in the future, 45 % mentioned that this would not be the case (23% have no vision about the
future). Lack of technical support and good practice examples are reported as important facts for resistance.
Very little appreciation could be recognized when asked to offer material for learning activities with use of
mobile phones.
The number of teachers participating in 2009 was similar (n=20), with 13 female and seven male
teachers, and an average of 53 years of age. All of them owned a mobile phone, while only 11 were able to
specify their device (model, integrated features). Five teachers reported integrated features, a camera, Bluetooth,
voice-recording and memory. Only six were able to provide information of their tariff, five of them used a
special tariff-offer for teachers. With regard to usage of SMS more than 50 % reported rarely usage; ‘never’ use
of photo/video was reported by 50 %, while 50 % used it rarely. None of the teachers used mobile Internet or e-
Mail with the mobile device. The lack of technical knowledge in dealing with mobile phones and Internet skills
were recognized as a major problem.


Prospective Teachers

115 female and 42 male teacher candidates participated in the survey in 2013, clustered according to
their age: 19 - 20 years (29; 19 %), 21-30 years (97; 62 %); 31-40 years (16; 10 %); 41-50 years (13; 8 %), two
were older than 50 years (1 %); in other words, 81 % were younger than 30 years and can be addressed to be
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

mobile digital natives as defined by Prensky (2001). All of them own a mobile phone, 54 % a computer, 91 % a
laptop or netbook and 17 % a tablet computer. The most popular phone is a Samsung, followed by an iPhone,
HTC and Motorola. Most of them (128, 81 %) can access the Internet with their phones, and 12 (8%) more
when WiFi is available, 18 (11 %) have no access to the Internet. The majority (89; 57 %) pointed out that they
have no experience with mobile learning. 34 reported that they have used a mobile phone for some kind of
learning. The percentage shows, that there is no difference in experience with mobile learning between teachers
and teacher candidates.
Two questions were asked about their perceptions of mobile learning, regarding their different roles as
a teacher candidate and as a teacher. There was nearly no difference: 64 % agreed in the role of a teacher
candidate and 61 % in the role of a teacher. With regard to better achievements in their study 57 % of them
negated this fact.
With regard to benefits it was outlined flexibility (independence of time and location; 24 %), other
benefits addressed lighter schoolbags and less paper. Nothing was reported on the issue of benefits for learning
achievements or didactics.
Challenges were seen in the permanent presence of the devices, which makes it more and more
difficult to control the pupils during lessons. Other issues mentioned were costs, mainly for mobile access to the
mobile Internet, and financial aspects with regard to apps and availability of free apps for learning purpose. The
expenditure and the time to generate useful learning material as well as the management and servicing of
learning contents were referred to be critical criteria.
No data of teacher candidates are available from 2009.


Discussion

Youth and Mobile Technologies

Mobile technology opens the door for a new kind of learning and performance support, providing
anytime and anywhere access to information, processes, and communication (Safran et al. 2010). In our study
participated additional 22 kids at the age of eight and nine years; nine of them (41 %) owned a personal mobile
phone. This underpins the need of research and pedagogical activities to meet the demands for media education.
Our research showed possession of mobile phones from the age of 10 years to 14 years. This is in
accordance to the recently published JIM-Study ‘Youth, Information, (Multi)-Media’ in Germany. Since the
conditions in Austria and Germany are quite similar it can be assumed that over the past years ownership of
children at the age of 12-13 of smart-phones has significantly increased up to 72 % in 2013 (+25 % since 2012),
(JIM 2013). In 2012 the rate of mobile phones with Internet was 75 %, with 18 % using a flatrate, and 85 % of
the 14-15 year old with 24 % flatrate (Statista 2012). The frequency of using Internet services via mobile phone
and mailing of photos and movies have also increased significantly. Online-time has reached 179 minutes on
average per day (Monday – Friday, self-estimate), which is +48min. compared with year 2012. Part of this high
level can probably be explained by the significant increase of smart-phones; the mobile use of Internet access is
almost as usual as the use through stationary devices. 73 % used their mobile phone to go online, this rate has
tripled over the past three years (JIM 2013). In 2013 ownership of mobile phones is close to 100 %, access to
Internet is reported with 79 %, only 6 3% of the 12 – 13 year old have a computer or laptop (JIM 2013).
The statistics figure out clearly that a new area of media usage has been reached with the enormous
distribution of smart-phones. Mobile Internet hits daily routines with cost-efficient accesses, fast connections
and an attractive user interface. Youth users use their mobile devices for social networking and online gaming,
the appropriation of knowledge it is reported rather seldom (JIM 2013). In our research we figured out that
students have very limited knowledge of the benefits of mobile learning (see Table 2).
Since the smart-phone is omnipresent, its pattern of use is different from that of a netbook. As a multi-
functional platform, the smart-phone enriches daily lives by providing practical tools and many different
pastime options. It has been argued that in today’s current culture of video games and interactive entertainment,
students have come to expect a high level of engagement during their learning activities. Prensky (2001, p.1)
argues that, ‘it is now clear that as a result of this ubiquitous environment and the sheer volume of their
interaction with it, today’s students think and process information fundamentally differently from their
predecessors.’
In contrast teachers use smart-phones primarily for making calls, less for SMS and rarely to access
Internet or take videos or photos.
School - Demands and Challenges
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.


Mobile devices have added a new dimension and capabilities to situated learning; the concept of ‘here
and now learning’ is a decade old and has widely been researched as situated learning, which was defined by
Lave & Wenger (1991). ‘Mobile technology opens the door ‘here and now learning’ that occurs when learners
have access to information anytime and anywhere to perform authentic activities in the context of their learning’
(Martin & Erztberger 2013). Situated learning requires knowledge to be presented in authentic contexts. This is
based on the concept of situated cognition, which explains that knowledge cannot be known and fully
understood independent of its context (David et al. 2007).
In 2000 a so called ‘one billion ATS financing for computer invest’ in schools was initiated as a first
phase of ICT integration in schools in Austria: Computer-labs and PCs in classes were installed. After some
years some projects with laptop classes followed, where students were provided with a laptop. The computers
and laptops come with Microsoft Office and a web-browser. One computer-lab at school needs long-term
lesson-planning, to access information it takes time (booting and shutting down are time-consuming
procedures). It does not allow access to information anytime and anywhere. As long as computing is
supplemental, it will have limited impact on teaching and learning; 1:1 computing is very exceptional in Austria
(Micheuz 2013). Very often teachers take the existing curriculum and simply add activities that incorporate a
computer. The computing devices must be seen as essential, not supplemental (Norris 2011).
Since the weight and size of a smart-phone is negligible, students tend to carry them around constantly.
The proliferation of mobile technology provides uncountable opportunities to support learning and performance
both inside and outside school with the devices young people already own. Smart-phones are relatively instant-
on devices; the effort involved in accessing the device is for all intents and purposes zero.
Perspectives that apply to many aspects of education and learning are shown in the paper ‘Using
Smart-phones as Essential tools for Learning’ (Norris et al, 2011), e.g. ‘In addition to working on their smart-
phone, the students were engaged in dialogue and other collaborative activities, using the camera on the smart-
phone to take pictures that enabled them to relate the abstract ideas in the lesson to the concrete things in the
world.’ To create effective 21
st
century learning, it is not just our tools that need to change —it is our didactical
approaches. We need to integrate technology in a manner that not only allows students to do ‘old’ things (such
as writing or research) in new ways but, far more importantly, also enables our students to do new things, in
new ways, and get a different, and better education because of the technology (Prensky 2012).
However, the benefits of the devices and contents are often accompanied by problems arising with
these developments. Various challenges need to be addressed:
• Actually the opinion that mobile technologies in classrooms are bad (‘distracting, disruptive’) is
dominant. Today’s kids are the mobile technology generation, but schools ban the use of mobile
technologies from the classroom. While the today's pupils grow up with mobile technologies as an
everyday device, teachers are mainly not familiar with the universality of technologies.
• There is a need for a proper solution to handle the issues of misuse and digital divide, which means to
be educated in its appropriate usage.
School children know that using mobile technologies outside the classroom is in fact a very good strategy for
coming to understand, finding entertainment, communicating with friends, etc. It must be ensured that young
people are well informed and accompanied in a competent manner on their way into the digital future.
However, so far there cannot be seen a real change in schools which takes into account the issues outlined
above.
Compulsory education ends with the age of 15 years. This implies that what is not included in
education so far would be out of reach for young people who end up their school carrier, most of them coming
from underprivileged families. It is pedagogically irresponsible to leave students alone with this important issue
of abundant potential and missed opportunities for mobile learning.
‘While mobile technology is not and never will be an educational panacea, it is a powerful and often
overlooked tool - in a repertoire of other tools - that can support education in ways not possible
before.’(UNESCO 2013b)


Guidelines

In the media-enactment of the ministry of education in Austria is stated: Media determine our private
and professional everyday life. Technical possibilities of dissemination, communication and networks are more
and more important in the ‘natural’ environment of schoolboys and schoolgirls; they are part of their reality,
their social world. Education should accompany and promote adolescents in their development with the reality
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

of the world. (bm:uk 2012) ‘Media education deals with all communication media and their network-based
combinations… In terms of action learning and learning of experience the schoolboys and -girls should be
encouraged within the scope of media education to produce own media content and network-based media
projects.’ (p.5). With regard to students of grade 5 – 8 it ‘would be pointed out once again the fact that media
education should begin also and particularly in this age group with personal media experiences and media habits
of schoolboys and schoolgirls and lead to self-reflection’.(bm:uk 2012, p 7).
In addition there is a need of guidelines of best practice of mobile devices in schools - there is no doubt
that smart-phones can be used by students inappropriately. To develop guidelines together with the students
they would feel respected and more vindicated and it is a motivator (Handywissen.at 2011). To explore best
practice also would fulfill the demands of the edict, pointing to risks of mobile communication. It can be
assumed that theory of misuse would not have an important effect compared to a practical one. The method of
learning matters and the instrument of learning matters. Under these conditions mobile phones could be used as
an attractive lesson-extending instrument in the learning processes and could also have positive impact on social
competence and good practice. Best practice guidelines were developed the Cyprus Neuroscience &
Technology Institute under European Union through the Safer Internet Plus Programme and are available from
http://www.cyberethics.info/cyethics1/images/stories/pdf/guidelines_for_going_mobile_and_web_3.pdf.


Teacher Education

An essential barrier for successful integration in education is teacher professional development and teacher
education. Norris (et al. 2011) stated that teachers would need to rethink their curriculum, since their existing
paper-and-pencil curriculum is based on a didactic, instructionalist pedagogy that does not lead to students
working independently of the teacher. Teachers were taught how to use computers, but they weren’t taught how
to transform their existing paper-and-pencil curriculum into curriculum that takes advantage of the affordances
of mobile devices, that e.g. students always have the device in their possession to ask questions and explore
other concepts in the lesson (Norris et al. 2011).
With regard to Austrian statistics 61 % of all teachers are 50 years and older (Statistics Austria 2013).
To reach a very intensive training of teachers it is recommended to teach media education at the educational
colleges in the frame of advanced training and continuing education intensively (bm:uk 2012, p 8).
While there are topics and items that need traditional teaching there is a need to prepare students
additional to work both independently and in a team. In the new world a different set of skills is needed. In
order to teach 21
st
century skills and 21
st
century content, it will be also necessary to use 21
th
century
technologies. It is also necessary to change the existing educational policy so that mobile phones will no longer
be regarded as a forbidden device in schools (Mohamad 2012). Media competence and digital literacy has been
significant over the last years already – now it is increasing in importance in the context of mobile devices. The
use of mobile technology in education cannot be delayed or delegated to private experiences. Tips to include the
mobile phone constructively in the lessons and to use it as a positive chance are provided by Handywissen at
(2011) in German and English language: ‘Using the mobile phone in school. Handling opportunities and risks
appropriately’
Looking at our research this seems not to be the case with regard to mobile devices. Teacher
candidates are not aware of benefits, challenges and didactical aspects of use of mobile devices in class-
teaching. Much more research needs to be done before substantiated changes can truly be made. Inadequate
training can impede the benefits.


B.Y.O.D. (Bring Your Own Device)

Students could bring their own device to school (BYOD), which can be used for free in schools and at the same
time save the education system a vast amount of funds. Instead of spending time and energy making sure
students do not bring them to school, it should be preferable to investing the energy into showing them how to
use them properly. This will be a life skill and it is the responsibility of educators to teach life skills; it includes
teaching online safety as well as instruction on the amount of technological power and applications, and
figuring out ways to deal with potential students’ abuse.
Furthermore there is no difference in ownership of mobile phones according to different social groups,
but computers or laptops are scarcer in low income house-holds. 70 % of students (12 – 13 year old) think that a
computer and Internet at home is important for their success at school (JIM 2013, p 38). This has also to be
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

taken in consideration when talking about digital divide: Low income groups have less chance to use own
computers or laptops for learning, but if they could use their mobile phones properly they could access material
for learning. Due to the fact that they are owned by the students (BYOD) there is no need for financing more
computer-labs or laptops. 1:1 means portability and always-available.


Conclusions

The study shows evidence of mobile devices which could support mobile learning at schools. As
mentioned in the results, no statistically representative quantity of teachers was upraised; however, insights are
won about perception.
Using mobile technologies is something the school children experience firsthand outside the
classroom. The children are effective at using mobile technologies, and thus they can use skills inside the
classroom effectively and also on their school work. Framework and conditions must be established which are
adapted to the needs of young users. It is required that education use the 21st century technology to enable 21st
century knowledge and the ability to use them as essential tools. Smart-phones are sustainable, cost-wise, and
are in concert with the emergence of mobile technologies as a dominant technology in the coming decade
(Norris, 2011).
The cost of the device and network is dropping and schools will be able to make use of student-
provided devices, and thus schools will not even need to provide more computing devices per se, schools will
only need to provide is the Internet access (a data plan or free Wi-Fi) and educational software. (Norris, 2011, p.
18).
Hands-on use of technology is the easiest thing for students to learn on their own, and it is not what
truly helps their education - what does that is reflecting, carefully, with their teachers, about what technology
means for their learning (Prensky 2012). Children must be trained to take advantage of the opportunities
presented by modern technologies. There is still a need for research on mobile phones used in the context of
learning.


References
All Internet-resources last retrieved April 22
nd
, 2014

Ahmed, S. & Parsons, D. (2013). Abductive science inquiry using mobile devices in the classroom. Computers
& Education,63 (pp.62 – 72).
AK (2013). Tarifwegweiser. Arbeiterkammer Wien, Nov. 2013 (p.14). Retrieved from
http://www.mobilfunkrechner.de/akwien/pdf/mobilfunknetz.pdf
bm:uk (2012). Grundsatzerlass zur Medienerziehung Rundschreiben Nr. 4/2012, Geschäftszahl BMUKK-
48.223/0006-B/7/2011 Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur Retrieved from
http://www.efit21.at/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Medienerlass-2012.pdf
David, B., Chalon, R., Champalle, O., Massarey, G., Yin, C. (2007). Contextual mobile learning: a step further
to mastering professional appliances. IEEE Multidisciplinary Engineering Education Magazine, 2(3) (pp. 5–9).
Ebner, M., Scerbakov, N., Stickel, C., Maurer, H. (2008) Mobile Information Access in Higher Education.
Proceedings of E-Learn 2008, Las Vegas (pp. 777-782).
Grunwald Associates LLC. (2013). Living and Learning with Mobile Devices: What Parents Think About
Mobile Devices for Early Childhood and K–12 Learning. Retrieved from http://www.learningfirst.org/sites/
default/files/assets/Living%20and%20Learning%20with%20Mobile%20Devices%20FINAL.pdf
Handywissen.at (2011) Amann-Hechenberger,B., Buchegger,B., Schwarz, S. (eds.) Das Handy in der Schule
Mit Chancen und Risiken kompetent umgehen. Austrian Institute for Applied Telecommunications (OIAT)
Second edition in German Language 2011. Retrieved from
http://www.saferInternet.at/uploads/tx_simaterials/Unterrichtsmaterial_Das_Handy_in_der_Schule.pdf.
Originally published in: Grimus, M. & Ebner, M. (2014). Learning with Mobile Devices Perceptions of Students and
Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools in Austria. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2014 (pp. 1600-1609). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Hödl, S. (2009). mLearning im Schulunterricht: Theoretische Konzepte – Reale Bedingungen. Abschlussbericht
zum Projektpraktikum. Graz University of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.connectaschool.org/sites/
default/files/Module%202%20update%20LCCDs_executive% 20summary.pdf
Huber, S. & Ebner, M. (2013). iPad Human Interface Guidelines for M-Learning. In Z.L. Berge and L.Y.
Muilenburg (eds.). Handbook of mobile learning. (pp. 318-328). New York: Routledge.
ITU (2012). Key global telecom indicators for the World Telecommunication Service Sector. International
Telecommunications Union. Retrieved from. http://www.itu.int/ITU-
D/ict/statistics/material/pdf/2011%20Statistical%20highlights_June_2012.pdf .
JIM 2013. Jugend, Information, (Multi-) Media. Basisstudie zum Medienumgang 12- bis 19-Jähriger in
Deutschland. Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (eds.) Retrieved from
http://www.mpfs.de/fileadmin/JIM-pdf13/JIMStudie2013.pdf
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Lenhart, A., Ling, R., Campbell, S. & Purcell, K. (2010). Teens and mobile phones. Washington, DC: Pew
Internet& American Life Project. Retrieved from http://pewInternet.org/Reports/2010/Teens-and-Mobile-
Phones.aspx
Martin, F. & Ertzberger, J. (2013). Here and now mobile learning: An experimental study on the use of mobile
technology. Computers & Education, 68 (pp. 76-85). Retrieved from
http://people.uncw.edu/martinf/site2009/publications/Martin_ComputersandEducation_MobileLearning.pdf
Micheuz, P. (2013). Quergeschrieben. Speech at the Education. Sommertagung 26.-28.8.2013, Klagenfurt.
Retrieved from http://elsa20.schule.at/news/einzelansicht/nc/1/article/quergeschrieben-edudays-in-stein-
gemeiselt/
Mohamad, M., Woolard, J. (2012.) Issues and challenges in implementing mobile learning in malaysian
schools. In, 6th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia de Alcántara, ES,
05 - 07 Mar 2012, http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/301100/
Norris, C, Hossain, A, Soloway, E. (2011). Using Smartphones as Essential Tools for Learning. Educational
Technology May-June 2011 (pp. 18-25). Retrieved from
http://cecs5580.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/50303907/ET%20article%20Norris%20Soloway.pdf
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. In: On The Horizon, ISSN 1074-8121, MCB
University Press, Vol. 9 Iss. 5, pp 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Prensky, M. (2012). Before Bringing in New Tools, You Must First Bring in New Thinking. Published in
Amplify, June 2012.
Royle K, Stager S & Traxler J (2013) Teacher Development with Mobiles – Comparative Critical Factors. .
UNESCO Mobile Learning Week 2013, Paris, February 2013. Retrieved from http://www.wlv.ac.uk/pdf/sef-
royle-mobilelearning.pdf
Safran, C., Ebner, M., Kappe, F., Holzinger, A. (2010), M-Learning in the Field: A Mobile Geospatial Wiki as
an Example for Geo-Tagging in Civil Engineering, In: Looking Toward the Future of Technology-Enhanced
Education, Ebner. M & Schiefner, M. (Ed.), IGI Global, Hershey, (pp. 263 – 274).
Statista (2012). Percentage of youth owning a mobile phone with Internet connection and/or a flatrate.
Retrieved from http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/248898/umfrage/besitz-von-Internetfaehigen-handys-
durch-jugendliche/
Statistics Austria (2913) Teachers in school-year 2011/201; Age-structure. Data of 19.3.2013. Retrieved from
http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/bildung_und_kultur/formales_bildungswesen/lehrpersonen/index.htm
l
UNESCO (2013a). Policies and Practices in Leveraging Low - Cost Computing Devices (LCCDs) for
Education. Executive summary update to ‘Mobile Learning for Teachers: Global Themes.’
UNESCO (2013b). UNESCO Policy Guidelines for Mobile Learning, 2013. United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (p. 8).