This dissertation is really exploring informal learning processes for individuals in recovery…i.e. what are the informal learning processes that are used by individuals who have one year of sobriety? How do they integrage mobile tech (specifically app use) into their recovery process? How are they used to actively construct, develop, build new understandings of recovery..ie enhance learning in recovery. How does mobile technology expand the constructivist approach/understanding of recovery? Creating or constructing new definitions of recovery, self, living? Mobile technology in supporting, enhancing learner-centered control; How app use supports an individual’s informal, constructivist, learning process. How are people taking to recovery apps to learn how to recovery? Ways in which people integrate mobile tech to learn how to recover? Ways in which mobile tech supports multiple, new opportunities for participation in recovery? An informal learning process that utilizes recovery apps.
How they learn to recover using smartphone apps?
On a more specific level, it is particularly looking at the use of smartphone recovery apps in the informal learning process. So, essentially, I am looking at how individuals in recovery with 1 or more years of sobriety are using recovery apps to support their informal learning needs/ support their process of learning how to recover…which is largely informal…in fact, almost all informal. I am exploring conversations with learner who have constructed a learning process that includes mobile technology.
On a theoretic level, I am specifically looking to see how constructivism can explain how app use informs their learning. Or more generally how constructivism and informal learning are linked.
A case study method will be best b/c…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Severaly learning theories appear to be particularly synergistic c with affordance. Knowledge construction during recovery is characterized as an informal L process.
Try to find access to Int’l journal of mobile and blended learning
Notes from 1/18
Learning within the context of recovery
Role of mobility in the process of learning; how smartphone apps and mobile technology support the creation of recovery learning spaces. This will require exploring the situations/context in which the apps are being used…where are the learners? What made it seem right/situationally? Who was there? What was the nature of the app use? Intent for using in that moment?....understanding this will shed light on how the grocery store becomes a recovery learning space. This is important because recovery needs to be embedded in everything people do..it is not a separate activity or one that just exists in the AA room or during the office visit with a professional. It is everywhere, in every task. Recovery has always been a mobile….recoverers are just now getting the opportunity (via technology) to match the task demands more mobile-ly.
Learners build and understaning through interactions with the environment, mobile technology to increase interactions with the environment makes the bus a recovery learning environment. Process of making new knowledge by piecing together what we already know with what we are currently experiencing.

Mobile Learning
1.
Mobility of the learner; Josie Taylor (2006) discusses the mobility aspect of the information too..in the sense that it can be accessed virtually anywhere (ie dropbox, wiki, cloud)
2.
Informal—outside classroom
3.
Create learning spaces
4.
Successful practices…learning-centered
5.
Ubiquitous
What is the theory of mobile learning? Or mobile learning theory?
Has been automatically taken to mean e-L w mobile tech. Yet…per Traxler..it is a continuation of conventional e-L and also a reaction to its perceived inadequacies (the tethering effect) and limitations.
Mobile devices: PDA, gaming station, tablet, camera, phone, graphing calculator
A definition of mL will help supervise its evolution and direction. Ann Jones (2006)…will also help with defining research agend and procedures for making predictions or generalizations. mL is a “noisy” phenomenon…context is everything. mL is not just mobile and learning (it was never electronic + learning either!!)
There have been trends in increasing VLE over computer assisted learning
There has been an increase in social constructivism over behaviorism and instructionism
There has been an increase in the focus on discursive vs. didactic strategies….(of or relating to knowledge obtained by reason and argument rather than intuition.)
Prediction in 2002 that mL would last 5 years before being subsumed by e-L. However, not the case…mL is still growing, gaining identity and differentiation vs. losing itself by being folded into e-L. Now specific conferences, journals, and defined research agendas
Research has focused on mobile training and performance support: technologies are used to increase productivity and efficiency of mobile workers by delivering info and support just in time and in context
for immediate application, priorities, roles and duties mL is thought to increase wider access and participation in the Learning process (personal info mgmt.)

INFORMAL, PERSONALIZED, SITUATED mobile Learning mL is tied to culture…there is an American version (largely in terms of TRAINING) and an European
(situated informal learning)
Sharples, Taylor, Vavoula
1.
Is it significantly diff from theories of classroom, workplace, Lifelong learning?
2.
Does it account for the mobility of learners?
3.
Covers both—FORMAL AND INFORMAL
4.
Theorizes learning as a constructive and social process (just does not say that the social part is the critical aspect like social constructivism; still maintains that it is important nonetheless—just not primary like social constructivism)
5.
Analyze learning as a personal and situated activity mediated by technology
Issues with theory
1.
Import a conventional e-L theory and worry about whether it will transfer (ex Laurillard
Conversational Framework)
2.
Create a local theory and worry about validity (connectvism Siemens, navigationism)
3.
Subscribe to some much more general, abstract theory and worry about specificity and granularity (Engestrom’s Activity Theory)
Learning in the MOBILE AGE vs. Mobile Learning…(Taylor, 2006). Position of addressing learnig as transformed by mobile systems and tech vs. letting educational technology drive the defn and development of mL.
Koole 2009 provides a Framework for framing mL—FRAME (Framework for Rational Analysis of Mobile
Education)..reminds me of PEO except use DLS
Defines mL as the combination of interations between learners, their devices, and others; focus on the mobility of Learner vs. technology. Describes a mode of Learning in which learners may move within diff. physical and virtual locations and thereby participate and interact with people, information, systems ANYWHERE, ANYTIME
Thomas Craig and Van Lom…impact of constructivist L theory and mobile technology. Am I really considering mobile Learning or just mobile technology….important question to ask and address in the dissertation .
Constructivism:
Active and self-directed process (works well with InfL); Constructivist learning is a MEANING MAKING
PROCESS (much like recovery)
Experiment learning through real life to CONSTRUCT AND CONDITIONALIZE knowledge
Challenge faulty schema
Create original, new schema

Analyze, conceptualize, synthesize prior to creating new knowledge/schema. Learner interprets, examines, questions, analyzes, reflects, negotiates
Heuristic problem solving of ill-defined issues
In the process of creating discourse, people are essentially creating a very specific version of reality. Not only using concepts but CONSTRUCTING—people use and create propositions (things that they propose, hypothesis, opinions) and it is these propositions that frame discourse. The propositions come from what they know, how they are thinking about, and using what they know.
The nature of knowledge is that it is constructed..it is not acquired, it does not exist, it cannot be discovered. It is not linear; it is complex process. It is nonpositivist. It focuses on the concept development of the Learner and Deep understanding. It requires the learner to be ACTIVE…someone must construct which is an active process. It is the opposite of ojectivism…knowledge does not exist independent of learner. The learner is an information constructor and not a blank slate—the learner comes to learning situations with a culture, beliefs, former experiences. The extent to which knowledge creation can be arbitrarily controlled depends on context. Formal learning contexts are often
controlling for the role of the Teacher (vs. Learner) at the fore. Learners essentially construct their own learning processes. (some are more effective than others; some include mobile technology). Authentic learning makes form more meaningful learning (might explain why they have incorporated mobile technology). Essential: timely support and feedback (another explanation for mobile technology)
Constructivist Learner
1.
Must actively strive to make sense of new experiences or disorienting, disequilibrizing issues
2.
Relate it to what is already known, an existing schema (This transaction becomes the immediate context for interpreting any new Learning)
3.
Learning always takes place through meaning-making processes. Dialogue (self-dialogue too) catalyst for knowledge acquisition
4.
Learning is intrinsically rewarding provided that it is engaging and challenging
Informal L is different from Formal L on the basis of its: goals, mechanism for L, metacognitive awareness, and assessment of Learning.