A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework
This paper discusses the diffusion of two models of mobile learning within the educational research literature: The Framework for the Rational Analysis of Mobile Learning (FRAME) model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework (3-LEF). The main purpose is to analyse how the two models, now over 10 years...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2018-08-01
|
| Series: | Education Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/8/3/114 |
| _version_ | 1828285913228115968 |
|---|---|
| author | Marguerite Koole Rosemary Buck Kerry Anderson Drea Laj |
| author_facet | Marguerite Koole Rosemary Buck Kerry Anderson Drea Laj |
| author_sort | Marguerite Koole |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper discusses the diffusion of two models of mobile learning within the educational research literature: The Framework for the Rational Analysis of Mobile Learning (FRAME) model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework (3-LEF). The main purpose is to analyse how the two models, now over 10 years old, have been referenced in the literature and applied in research. The authors conducted a systematic review of publications that referenced the seminal papers that originally introduced the models. The research team summarized the publications by recording the abstracts and documenting how the models were cited, described, interpreted, selected, rejected, and/or modified. The summaries were then coded according to criteria such as fields of study, reasons for use, criticisms and modifications. In total, 208 publications referencing the FRAME model and 97 publications referencing the 3-LEF were included. Of these, 55 publications applied the FRAME model and 10 applied the 3-LEF in research projects. The paper concludes that these two models/frameworks were likely chosen for reasons other than philosophical commensurability. Additional studies of the uptake of other mobile learning models is recommended in order to develop an understanding of how mobile learning, as a field, is progressing theoretically. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T09:22:39Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d708555f6ae54895bc1e128da94fe85b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2227-7102 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T09:22:39Z |
| publishDate | 2018-08-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Education Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-d708555f6ae54895bc1e128da94fe85b2022-12-22T02:52:33ZengMDPI AGEducation Sciences2227-71022018-08-018311410.3390/educsci8030114educsci8030114A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation FrameworkMarguerite Koole0Rosemary Buck1Kerry Anderson2Drea Laj3Department of Curriculum Studies, College of Education, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B5, CanadaCalgary Board of Education, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B5, CanadaSaskatoon Public Schools, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B5, CanadaNanaimo-Ladysmith Public Schools, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B5, CanadaThis paper discusses the diffusion of two models of mobile learning within the educational research literature: The Framework for the Rational Analysis of Mobile Learning (FRAME) model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework (3-LEF). The main purpose is to analyse how the two models, now over 10 years old, have been referenced in the literature and applied in research. The authors conducted a systematic review of publications that referenced the seminal papers that originally introduced the models. The research team summarized the publications by recording the abstracts and documenting how the models were cited, described, interpreted, selected, rejected, and/or modified. The summaries were then coded according to criteria such as fields of study, reasons for use, criticisms and modifications. In total, 208 publications referencing the FRAME model and 97 publications referencing the 3-LEF were included. Of these, 55 publications applied the FRAME model and 10 applied the 3-LEF in research projects. The paper concludes that these two models/frameworks were likely chosen for reasons other than philosophical commensurability. Additional studies of the uptake of other mobile learning models is recommended in order to develop an understanding of how mobile learning, as a field, is progressing theoretically.http://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/8/3/114mobile learningFRAME model3-level evaluation frameworkdiffusion of modelssystematic review |
| spellingShingle | Marguerite Koole Rosemary Buck Kerry Anderson Drea Laj A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework Education Sciences mobile learning FRAME model 3-level evaluation framework diffusion of models systematic review |
| title | A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework |
| title_full | A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework |
| title_fullStr | A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework |
| title_short | A Comparison of the Uptake of Two Research Models in Mobile Learning: The FRAME Model and the 3-Level Evaluation Framework |
| title_sort | comparison of the uptake of two research models in mobile learning the frame model and the 3 level evaluation framework |
| topic | mobile learning FRAME model 3-level evaluation framework diffusion of models systematic review |
| url | http://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/8/3/114 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT margueritekoole acomparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT rosemarybuck acomparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT kerryanderson acomparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT drealaj acomparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT margueritekoole comparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT rosemarybuck comparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT kerryanderson comparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework AT drealaj comparisonoftheuptakeoftworesearchmodelsinmobilelearningtheframemodelandthe3levelevaluationframework |