“Do you think students need a ubiquitous computing environment if you are using moodle? If not, how often do you think students need access to computers?”
Source: Lisa Velmer Nielsen Comment via Facebook

My short answer to this question is, YES. The follow-up question for me is, what do you mean by ubiquitous in light of all the new technologies now available, and what time and physical limitations are on the technology you have now accessible to students?

Before I share my response to this question, it’s worth considering some other perspectives. Here’s one:

The term “ubiquitous computing” was introduced by Mark Weiser (1991) who wrote, “The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it” (p. 94).
Source: Mark Weiser as cited in Teaching and Learning in a Ubiquitous Environment by Annette Kratcoski, Karen Swan, and Deborah Campbell.

This idea of ubiquitous technology access is occurring, whether by design or not. Mobile learning devices have made ubiquitous access to the Internet–where Web 2.0 tools, including Moodle, reside–possible. With my iPod Touch, a $300 device, I’m able to access these resources and, to a limited extent, participate. The low cost of netbooks and similar computing devices also make access to these online learning environments easier…and access increases as the devices get less expensive. It’s now possible for families to afford a $300 device, much cheaper than a flat-panel television set, and the cost of wireless connection to watch online services like Hulu and Netflix.

Yet, there are concerns with increased ubiquity of digital devices. As a high school student, I had the opportunity to study George Orwell’s “1984.” It was a powerful novel, one that is echoed in the words of Adam Greenfield:

“…just by walking down the street you could be subject to a personal biometric system, you could be scanned by the gateway of the transit system, there could be something embedded in the street or in the flooring beneath you… you could be touching other tangible interfaces in the environment around you… the lamp posts and the other features of the streetscape could have informational services… and last but not least there’s the surveillance element, there’s a UAV, a robotic helicopter which is also surveying the cityscape and communicating with all of these devices… This is really what I mean by a transformation of the relationship between user and device. This person is not a user anymore in any real sense of the English world, they are a subject.
Source: Adam Greenfield, Everyware-The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing as cited in Orwellian Ubiquitous Computing May Build Surveillance Society

I mention this because it’s important to awaken to the benefits of exciting technology applications (which most of us are) but then our subsequent blindness to the disadvantages of that technology.

Consider the findings of the study referenced first in this blog entry…To quickly summarize the results of ubiquitous computing:

• It enabled teachers to provide more authentic learning experiences for students
• It enabled teachers to link their students to experts and resources that extended beyond their regular classroom curriculum
• students of all ability levels were more motivated and more engaged and able to represent their knowledge and understanding in a variety of forms reflecting their own personalization and choice.
• ubiquitous access to digital technologies can provide teachers and students new ways of constructing, representing and sharing knowledge
• When used effectively within the curriculum, digital technologies can be powerful tools to motivate and stimulate learning and to foster connections with families, the community, and beyond.

“The peak of refinement in physical product design,” Adam citing a Japanese Designer in this first video, “when the the relationship and the object and the user has been understood so well when the user uses it without necessarily being conscious of it.” Could Moodle be so well understood–or any course management system–that frequent use means students don’t have to spend time learning it anymore, they just use it? And, wouldn’t that knowledge/application with little conscious thought facilitate greater access? I’m not spending time sitting in front of something figuring it out…instead I’m wrestling with ideas and concepts, and encouraging their exploration, which, by the way, just happens to occur online.

So, back to Lisa’s question…does Moodle require a ubiquitous computing environment? I’d ask this question if I only had one or two computers in a classroom, computer labs that were in disrepair or antiquated, and low socioeconomic group of students…simply, ubiquitous access through a variety of connections is now possible. I don’t think it should be an obstacle to NOT moving forward with Moodle.

The data suggests that, in contrast to the less costly approach of a desktop-based environment, the integration of ubiquitous technology in a wireless environment transforms in the activities and dynamics of the face-to-face classroom and significantly enhances the opportunities for communication and collaboration in the learning environment as a whole.
Source: Students in the Ubiquitous Computing Environment

How many computers make for a ubiquitous computing environment, or at least one that supports the use of course management systems? Not sure. More is better…but I worry that in our eagerness to bring about increased access, we may also be realizing Orwell’s vision as expressed in 1984.

var addthis_pub=”mguhlin”;

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org