Teachers’ conceptions and practices of mobile language learning and teaching

2.1 Mobile language learning, pedagogical opportunities and challenges

There are generally two approaches defining mobile learning, one centering on the technology aspect, emphasizing that learning takes place via a hand-held electronic device such as a smartphone or tablet; the other focusing on the active use of such devices in context: “Learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices” (Crompton 2013a, p. 4). Continuous evolution of the field of mobile learning has yielded further perspectives, highlighting attributes such as personalisation, connectivity, authenticity, and relationship with time (Burden and Kearney 2016; Casebourne 2024; Crompton 2013b; Kukulska-Hulme 2016). Whatever the approaches, mobile learning provides more opportunities for practice, focus, feedback, reflection, collaboration, data collection, and can increase engagement and interaction (Kukulska-Hulme 2019). Mobile learning was also considered the only source of learning for students in some developing countries during the COVID-19 pandemic as they could not afford desktop computers or laptops (Halepoto and Lohar 2022).

As language learning requires frequent exposure, situated practice and constant feedback, it means that language learning and practice outside the classroom, which can be facilitated by the use of mobile technology, is considered essential for the development of language competence (Levy and Kennedy 2005). A growing body of studies on mobile assisted language learning (MALL) ranges in focus from the efficacy of various mobile applications and evaluation of MALL outcomes (Burston and Giannakou 2022; Tang et al. 2024), to emerging learner practices and perceptions (e.g., Kan and Tang 2018), integration of MALL into formal learning (Chwo et al. 2016), MALL learning activities design (Kukulska-Hulme et al. 2015) and recent trends in MALL (Karakaya and Bozkurt 2022; Kukulska-Hulme et al. 2021).

Despite the afore-mentioned learning opportunities brought about by MALL, there are also pedagogical challenges. First, MALL has been criticized for adhering to a behaviorist, teacher-centered framework that prioritizes content delivery – such as vocabulary and grammar drills – over fostering interactive or communicative learning. Second, MALL task types have been scrutinized for being short, self-contained and requiring minimal cognitive effort due to the fragmented and distraction-prone nature of mobile learning environments, used primarily for reinforcing and practicing previously learned material, rather than introducing complex new content (Burston 2014). Third, teachers encounter significant challenges when integrating mobile technology into their teaching, including psychological anxiety, expanded pedagogical responsibilities, and the need to adapt to flexible learning in digital environments (Zhang and Yu 2023). To address these issues, institutions should provide sustainable technical support to help teachers navigate digital education effectively. Additionally, it is crucial to explore teachers’ perceptions of mobile learning, including how it can support their teaching and learning practices, as well as the challenges they may face in its implementation.

2.2 Teacher conceptions of mobile learning and teaching

Conceptions of teaching and learning refer to instructional beliefs, perceptions, and understandings concerning the nature of the content to be taught, the methodologies and approaches to teaching and learning, including their underlying rationales, as well as the roles and responsibilities of both teachers and students in the educational process (Chan and Elliott 2004). Conceptions of teaching and learning have been broadly categorized into two primary approaches: quantitative and qualitative (Chan 2011). The quantitative conception also known as teacher-centered instruction, concentrates on teachers’ input and the quantity of knowledge acquired, viewing teaching as transmission of knowledge and students as recipients of the knowledge. In this context, technology is primarily utilized as a tool for delivering knowledge. In contrast, the qualitative conception also known as student-centered instruction, aligns with the constructivist perspective of learning. Rather than being passive recipients, students are actively engaged in exploration, cooperation and critical thinking activities (Cheng et al. 2009). Here, technology is employed as a means to facilitate inquiry-based learning and collaborative engagement.

Conceptions of mobile learning might encompass its interpretation in terms of its distinctive features, requisite skills, and associated processes, often in comparison to other learning environments, such as face-to-face or online learning (Crompton and Burke 2018). Defined by its portability and flexibility, mobile learning is inherently shaped by contextual factors and influenced by individuals’ personal and cultural backgrounds, which, in turn, affect its perception and utilization. These conceptions guide the processes and behaviours learners activate, such as microlearning or collaborative activities, and influence their effectiveness in supporting learning (Crompton and Traxler 2018). Ultimately, conceptions of mobile learning impact how learners engage with it and their ability to achieve educational goals (Crompton and Burke 2018).

In their study of pre-service teachers’ conceptions of using mobile technology in their teaching and their practices of integrating technology in lesson plans, Tsai and Tsai (2019) discovered four different conceptions of teaching using mobile devices, described as “technology support”, “knowledge transmission”, “learning facilitation”, and “supporting students to learn”, with the first two perceived as quantitative or teacher-centered conceptions viewing instruction using mobile devices as a way to transfer knowledge, while the last two as qualitative or student-centered conceptions considering mobile learning as an alternative to help students construct knowledge. Teachers with more constructivist views of teaching which emphasizes supporting student learning in a more active way, seemed to achieve better quality technology integration in their lesson plans than teachers with traditional, teacher-centered views. While pre-service teachers’ own learning experiences with mobile devices may also influence their teaching, this aspect was not investigated. Additionally, it is important to note that this study focused on science teachers, not language teachers.

Based on interview data from 15 teachers, Hsieh and Tsai (2017) derived six hierarchically related categories of teachers’ conceptions of mobile learning, from teacher-/content-oriented to learner-/learning-oriented, namely: meeting student preferences, conducting classes efficiently, invigorating/enhancing learning, parting from traditional teaching, focusing on student ownership and extending learning. In light of the RAT framework suggested by Hughes et al. (2006), which delineates three types of roles for technology: Replacement (technology substitutes established practices, serving as an alternative means to achieve the same instructional goals), Amplification (technology enhances current practices, increasing efficiency and productivity), and Transformation (technology fundamentally changes practices to create new learning opportunities), teachers’ beliefs regarding mobile learning in Hsieh and Tsai (2017) fell within the amplification category. Their study calls for the investigation of teachers’ conceptions of mobile learning as posited by Kukulska-Hulme (2012), whereby the adoption of technology in teaching can be possible only after faculty members are convinced of its value for everyday use.

Holding the belief that the acceptance of mobile technology by teachers will affect the contribution of mobile technology to learning, Baydas and Yilmaz (2018) applied a motivational model to investigate pre-service teachers’ intention to adopt mobile learning, via structural equation modeling. Analysis of data demonstrated that the majority of the participating pre-service teachers’ experiences of mobile learning were concerned with the learning of course contents (e.g., to prepare for assignments, exams, responding to in-class discussions or joining in learning communities), arising from cognitive needs (i.e., motivation to use a mobile learning tool for acquiring information, knowledge, understanding, etc.). Moreover, attitudes and cognitive needs had an influence on their behavioral intention to engage in mobile learning. Affective needs (for personal fulfillment through use of the tools in constructing knowledge within the learning process) also exerted an influence on their intentions to get involved in mobile learning. The study, conducted among pre-service teachers in a Faculty of Education in Türkiye, revealed how different needs such as cognitive, affective and social needs impact participants’ intention to adopt mobile learning. The study demonstrates that teacher perceptions of mobile learning and how it might affect their intentions to use mobile technology in teaching and learning is an important line of inquiry that should be extended to other disciplines and contexts. Furthermore, there is a lack of research with in-service teachers.

Over the past two decades, MALL studies on the Chinese mainland have predominantly focused on college students, with limited research on other student groups and even less on teachers (cf. Chen and Jia 2020). The main themes investigated to date have included the efficacy of MALL in enhancing language skills and optimizing teaching and learning modes (Meng and Chen 2021), students’ mobile literacy (Wong and Li 2023), engagement in MALL (Jin 2020), as well as learning motivation and strategies (Hui et al. 2019). Though studies suggested that teachers predominantly utilized technology for teacher-centered activities, e.g., preparing instructional materials, rather than for student-centered approaches, e.g., fostering a communicative language learning environment (e.g., Li et al. 2019), they did not explore the underlying reasons why teachers seldom integrated technology for student-centered purposes, such as through an examination of teachers’ conceptions of technology-enhanced learning.

A recent investigation into teacher and student evaluation of a lexical mobile learning program identified two limitations of distracting learning environments and uncertain learning outcomes, leading to recommendations for future WeChat-based language learning and teaching programs including the active involvement of instructors who were considered instrumental in enhancing learners’ learning outcomes and engagement in mobile-based environments and the advancement of instructor technology-related knowledge and skills (Li 2023). This study again underscored the importance of research on teacher conceptions, roles and digital literacy in mobile learning contexts.

Against this backdrop, the present study intends to bridge a gap in the literature by concentrating on the prime users of technology, i.e., teachers, how they conceptualize MALL, their mobile-assisted language learning and teaching practices, and the inter-connection between their conceptions and practices.

3.1 Research context

The present study was undertaken within a Master’s program in English language teaching at a university in China, which employs a blended teaching and learning approach incorporating face-to-face lectures, live-streamed sessions, as well as online synchronous and asynchronous support. The students enrolled in this program are studying part-time and are required to complete a minimum of ten core course modules ranging from applied linguistics, to language teaching methodology, second language acquisition, computer-assisted language learning, and research methods. The majority of the participants in the program are in-service English language teachers.

The aim of this study is to investigate in-service teachers’ conceptions of mobile language learning and explore how these conceptions are connected to their own personal experiences with mobile language learning and their teaching practices.

Specifically, the study set out to address the following research questions (RQs):

3.2 Participants

As presented in Table 1, fifty-nine students enrolled in a Master’s program in English Language Education participated in this study, comprising forty-two in-service teachers (71 %) and seventeen pre-service teachers. The majority of participants (49, or 83 %) were between the ages of 26 and 45 and possessed several years of language teaching experience. Additionally, nearly 90 % of the participants held a Bachelor of Arts (BA) or Bachelor of Science (BSc) degree. Given their teaching experience, it can be argued that these participants are well-positioned to provide nuanced insights into their conceptions of mobile language learning, as well as the effectiveness, usability, and pedagogical value of mobile language learning tools.

Among the 42 in-service teacher participants, more than 90 % worked in public schools or training schools, and most of them (85.72 %) taught primary or secondary school students (Table 2). The high percentage of participants working in public or training schools suggests that the findings would be particularly relevant to similar educational settings, where specific curricular demands and institutional policies might influence their perceptions toward and practices of integrating mobile language learning.

In summary, the demographic characteristics of these in-service teacher participants provide a context for understanding teacher conceptions of mobile language learning, offering insights for developing effective strategies and tools to enhance language education for learners in public and training school settings.

3.3 Data collection

An online survey questionnaire on mobile language learning and teaching was used to collect data (see Appendix A).

Previous questionnaire studies investigating teacher perspectives on mobile learning or mobile assisted language learning have focused on attitudes, readiness to adopt, and on perceived factors and barriers in mobile learning adoption (Alghamdi 2022; Alrasheedi et al. 2015; Nikolopoulou et al. 2023; Xu and Zhu 2020). They have not addressed language teachers’ conceptions of mobile learning, nor did they ask about their own learning to improve their language knowledge through mobile learning.

The purpose of the questionnaire in this study was to collect data relating to participants’ conceptions and experiences of their mobile language learning and teaching. It included how they define mobile learning, their uses of mobile devices in their language learning and language teaching, perceptions of benefits and challenges, whether they encouraged their students to engage in out-of-class mobile learning, and any changes to how languages are taught and learnt. Based on the principles of experiential learning, using mobile devices for learning and teaching results in individuals reflecting on their experiences, both consciously and unconsciously, and leads them to form their own personal conceptions of what mobile learning is, its benefits and challenges. Furthermore, it is recognised that out-of-class and informal mobile learning experiences can differ significantly from classroom-based mobile learning, with out-of-class/informal learning having some transformational effects on achievement and practices (Cole and Vanderplank 2016; Dressman and Sadler 2020). The questionnaire for our study was developed collaboratively and iteratively by the research team, consisting of experts in mobile language learning, language teaching, and questionnaire design and analysis. It was decided to have mainly open questions and to avoid pre-prepared responses, thus enabling participants to express their conceptions and experiences more freely.

The questionnaire consists of seventeen questions, with objective questions, such as Questions 1–7 on participants’ background, and subjective questions like Questions 8–22 (except Questions 9, 11, 13, 16, 19, 21) intending to gauge participants’ conceptions of mobile learning and their use of mobile devices for their language learning and teaching. For participant responses to those subjective questions, one participant may mention multiple items, resulting in the total percentage of items exceeding the percentage of the participants who answered the questions.

The questionnaire was prepared in English; Chinese translation was provided in its administration. The questionnaire was sent to 90 students via an online questionnaire platform “Questionnaire Star”, and 59 students returned complete responses.

3.4 Data analysis

Quantitative descriptive analysis was carried out for analyzing closed objective questions, namely Questions 1–7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 19 and 21 in the survey, to give us an initial broad understanding of the research questions we sought to answer.

For the subjective and open-ended questions, the phenomenographic method, a thematic analysis approach for examining participants’ comprehension of various phenomena, concepts and principles in qualitative ways (Marton 1986), was undertaken to investigate participating teachers’ conceptions of and approaches to mobile language learning and teaching. The two researchers first reviewed participants’ subjective responses, then underlined relevant sentences and main ideas indicating participants’ conceptions, with similarities and differences being scrutinized, and qualitatively different categories of conceptions being identified through a process of iterative discussion.

For example, for Question 8 on conceptions of mobile language learning, three main themes – “time and place”, “mobile technology” and “convenience” – were identified and coded. Descriptions such as “Regardless of where you are and how busy you are, you can make full use of all your spare time to enrich your knowledge and better your overall competence anytime” (Participant No. 33) and “You could learn it whenever and wherever you want” (Participant No. 43) were categorized under the theme of “time and place”. Similarly, responses like “Use mobile devices, computers, ipads, and mobile phones for learning” (Participant No.10), “Learning knowledge by phone, computer or pad” (Participant No. 21) were coded under the theme of “mobile technology”. Feedback such as “Convenient” (Participant Nos. 12/18/19) and “It will make the study more convenient, but it offers too much freedom for the student to learn” (Participant No. 25) were grouped under the theme of “convenience”.

Nevertheless, it was also observed that some responses encompassed multiple themes. In particular, the themes of “time and place” and “mobile technology” were mentioned together in five responses. For example, statements like “Learning with the help of phones, computers, ipads, and without the limit of time and space.” (Participant No. 7) and “I can study English at any place any time, I mainly use mobile phones and ipads for learning.” (Participant No. 11) illustrate the overlap between these themes.

The preceding process is visualized in Figure 1, supported by an example of participants’ responses to the conceptions of mobile learning (Question 8 in the survey) as elaborated above.

Figure 1:

The coding procedure of qualitative responses.

4.1 Conceptions of mobile language learning

Regarding the definition of mobile learning (Table 3), over two fifths (42.6 %) of the participants highlighted the concepts of time and place, specifically referring to learning without the limitations of time and location or the ability to learn anytime and anywhere. A comparable proportion of participants (38.9 %) defined mobile learning as learning facilitated by the use of mobile technologies or devices such as a cell phone and tablet computer. The two central themes, “time and place” and “mobile technology” align with some of the established definitions of Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL) in previous research (e.g., Kukulska-Hulme 2012).

Notably, the terms “convenient” and “convenience” emerged as key concepts, ranking third in frequency (18.5 %) among participants’ responses. Compared to previous research on conceptions of mobile language learning (Burden and Kearney 2016; Casebourne 2024; Crompton 2013a, 2013b; Kukulska-Hulme 2016), which rarely emphasized convenience, the findings of this study highlight its crucial role. This indicates that participants perceive the purpose of mobile learning as being related to its accessibility, usefulness, affordability, and related factors. This shift in perspective contributes a practical dimension, emphasizing that the flexibility and accessibility of mobile devices are perceived to be crucial factors in their effectiveness for language learning.

4.2 Conceptions and experiences of mobile language learning

Most of the participants (87.7 %) claimed they had used mobile devices for language learning (Question 9), and the top three responses to the purpose of mobile language learning were listening (41.7 %), reading (33.3 %) and vocabulary learning (27.1 %), followed by speaking (22.9 %), online class (16.7 %), and learning for teaching (10.4 %) (Table 4).

Participants’ top preferences for listening, reading and vocabulary learning with mobile devices matched findings from earlier studies (e.g., Kan and Tang 2018; Read and Kukulska-Hulme 2015; Stockwell 2010), indicating learners’ primary engagement with mobile language learning arising from cognitive needs as specified in Baydas and Yilmaz (2018).

Some example activities are reported by the participants, such as:

“I use mobile devices for English listening (listening to news and TED talks), reading some English materials and studying some English courses.” (Participant No. 16)

“I study video courses from abroad, join pronunciation practice groups.” (Participant No. 40)

Among the twenty-three participants who mentioned time and place while defining mobile learning, seven used mobile devices for listening and reading, respectively. Six used them in an online class, while others used them for vocabulary learning, speaking, and information search. Few participants practiced writing, prepared for tests, did homework, or learned grammar via mobile devices (see Figure 2). This suggests that activities like listening, reading, vocabulary learning, speaking, and information searches were more adaptable to mobile learning, as they were not significantly restricted by time and place.

Figure 2:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ using mobile devices for language learning in Q10 who mentioned “time and place” in Q8.

For the twenty-one participants who mentioned mobile technology while defining mobile learning, eight used mobile devices to learn vocabulary, and five used them for listening and reading, respectively. Three participants utilized mobile devices in an online class and another three used them for learning teaching methods (see Figure 3). These findings suggest that mobile devices are considered to be particularly effective for vocabulary acquisition and engaging with audio and textual content, aligning with earlier studies by Kukulska-Hulme et al. (2017) and Kan and Tang (2018).

Figure 3:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ using mobile devices for language learning in Q10 who mentioned “mobile technology” in Q8.

The participants who associated mobile learning with convenience in Q8 mainly used mobile devices for four language skills (i.e., listening, reading, speaking and writing) and vocabulary learning, with listening accounting for the largest proportion (see Figure 4). This finding suggested that the perceived convenience of mobile learning strongly supported its use for a variety of language skills, particularly listening. This assertion was verified by research from Kim and Kwon (2012), which demonstrated the effectiveness of mobile devices for practicing listening skills due to their portability and the availability of abundant audio resources. Furthermore, Burston (2014) underscored that the on-the-go nature of mobile devices enabled learners to engage in listening practice more frequently and in diverse contexts, thereby enhancing their overall listening proficiency.

Figure 4:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ using mobile devices for language learning in Q10 who mentioned “convenience” in Q8.

In order to further examine the participants’ perception of mobile learning, they were asked if they thought mobile learning could help them tackle challenges in their language learning. The results revealed more than three quarters (78 %) of participants had a positive response (Question 11). As shown in Table 5, time and place (40 %) was the most important challenge (This is not surprising as the participants investigated were in-service teachers who were studying in the program with a full-time job), which corresponded to the fact that 42.6 % of participants considered time and place was also one of the most important features while defining mobile learning (c.f. Table 3). Other challenges that mobile learning helped participants overcome included listening (20 %), speaking (15.6 %), acquiring new knowledge (13.3 %), vocabulary learning (11.1 %), and reading (8.9 %), with just a few participants naming other challenges.

Some participants commented:

“The books are too heavy to carry, and the online and digital devices can help you read thousands of books whenever and wherever you want.” (Participant No. 47)

“I found it difficult to improve listening and speaking, but I started to use some APPs on the phone to practice whenever I want anytime I can. This turned out to be very useful for me.” (Participant No. 38)

“My work is teaching in a training school, so usually I am too busy to do the self-study. By using mobile learning, I can study when I was traveling or whenever I have time. It is a very important way for work people to keep study after graduation from school. It is fast and easy.” (Participant No. 58)

Participants highlighted the convenience of mobile learning, such as accessing resources anytime and anywhere, improving listening and speaking skills through apps, and fitting study into busy schedules. Their comments emphasized the flexibility and practicality of mobile learning as an effective tool for overcoming obstacles and maintaining continuous learning.

4.3 Conceptions and experiences of mobile language teaching

Among the 42 teacher participants, nearly three quarters (73.8 %) had used mobile devices for their teaching (Question 13). Nearly a quarter (23.3 %) used mobile devices to enhance teaching effects such as incorporating games, music, a WeChat audio tutorial, and teaching mini-lessons, while one fifth of participants respectively mentioned using multimedia (showing PPT slides or playing videos via mobile devices, 20 %), teaching listening (20 %), teaching speaking (20 %), and assigning homework (20 %) (Table 6), all of which mainly serve cognitive needs (Baydas and Yilmaz 2018).

Aligning teacher use of mobile devices in teaching with the RAT (i.e., replacement, amplification, and transformation) framework (Hughes et al. 2006) revealed teaching practices with mobile technologies such as enhancing teaching effects, using multimedia and the teaching of listening, speaking, and assigning homework all fall mainly into the amplification category, suggesting the use of technology was to increase efficiency and productivity. Specific examples included incorporating games into the learning process, using mobile devices to show PowerPoint presentations and play music to help students relax, providing WeChat audio tutorials to students, and assigning homework, giving feedback and delivering assessment. By amplifying and improving teaching efficacy and efficiency, the use of mobile devices made the educational process more productive and manageable for both teachers and students.

The participants were then asked how mobile devices assisted them most in teaching. Enhancing teaching effects was highlighted again, as more than one third (37 %) of participants mentioned it, followed by richer resources (22.2 %), homework (18.5 %), and communication with parents and students (14.8 %) (Table 7), which echoes Hsieh and Tsai’s (2017) findings and stresses the prominent role of the affordances of mobile technology, such as its multimedia functions, availability of resources, and communication functions affecting teachers’ use of mobile technology in their teaching.

Arguably the first three, namely enhancing teaching effects, richer resources and homework, might serve learners’ cognitive needs (i.e., quest for acquiring information, knowledge and understanding), while communication with parents and students serves social needs (i.e., for interaction and collaboration) as categorized in Baydas and Yilmaz (2018). For example, one participant commented on using resources on mobile devices to facilitate their teaching:

“I can use mass of the resources on the net and also ask my students to use a dubbing app on their parents’ phones to practice their speaking and listening.” (Participant No. 38)

Another participant noted an increase in the speed of interactions:

“Through mobile devices, I can monitor my students’ learning progress and communicate with the parents in a timely manner.” (Participant No. 26.)

A very high percentage (85.7 %) of participants encouraged their students to use mobile devices outside the classroom for language learning (Question 16). The top three detailed responses were related to listening, vocabulary learning, and speaking, which accounted for about one third (37.1 %), one quarter (25.7 %), and one fifth (20 %), respectively (Table 8).

Participants’ responses for encouraging students’ mobile learning practices (Table 8) are different from their own mobile learning preferences of listening, reading and vocabulary learning as the top three (c.f. Table 4). Arguably one of the reasons might be that they are mainly teaching primary and secondary students, for whom listening, vocabulary learning and speaking might be more important than reading. For example, participants stressed the importance of dubbing and watching English cartoons for kids:

“I ask my students to take a video clip about their role play and share it in the Wechat group or I encourage them to be a dubber in some kind of APP.” (Participant No. 26)

“I will ask them to use a dubbing APP to imitate the pronunciation and intonation of the native speakers and they can also enrich their vocabulary along the way.” (Participant No. 38)

“First, dub for movies. Second, English cartoons for kids to develop sense of the languages and get attracted to the plot and understand the meanings without the help of native tongue.” (Participant No. 42)

Participants emphasized the use of engaging and interactive methods, such as dubbing and watching English cartoons, to develop students’ pronunciation, intonation, and vocabulary in an enjoyable and meaningful way. These strategies not only help students improve their language skills but also foster intrinsic motivation by making learning fun and contextually relevant.

The biggest challenge the participants faced in their teaching was less-motivated students (43.9 % in Table 9), which could explain why the highest percentage of teachers selected using mobile technology mainly to enhance teaching effects (such as incorporating games, music, etc.), to engage and motivate students (c.f. Table 7). This finding is not surprising as earlier studies found mobile devices were being used to promote student engagement in the class (e.g., Hsieh and Tsai 2017).

When asked if they thought mobile learning could help tackle these challenges, 61.9 % chose the positive answer (Question 19). A notable response to detailed elaboration is the entertaining property of mobile learning (45.8 %) (Table 10), which echoed findings from previous studies such as Hsieh and Tsai (2017). As one participant noted,

“The dubbing app includes many materials, such as cartoons, movies and speeches, which are interesting. Besides, students can use their spare time to do online reading.” (Participant No. 38)

Over a third (37.5 %) of the participants highlighted time and place. There were 20.8 % who stated they could get richer online resources via mobile learning when they met problems in teaching. One participant commented,

“(Mobile learning helps to) break the barriers of time and place, enhance autonomous learning and interest through effective programs on mobile devices.” (Participant No. 36)

For the 18 participants who were challenged by less-motivated students in teaching in Q18 (Table 9), most of them (8) thought this could be solved by mobile learning because it was entertaining (see Figure 5).

Figure 5:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ opinions on the ways that mobile learning helped tackle the challenge of less-motivated students in Q20.

As one participating teacher commented,

“Using fun games online could attracts students’ interest. By using the Internet, we could get more information to teach and learn.” (Participant No. 43)

The 7 participants who were challenged by limited resources in teaching (Table 9) indicated they benefited from mobile learning because it was not limited by time or place, it was entertaining, and it provided richer resources for them (see Figure 6).

Figure 6:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ opinions on the ways that mobile learning helped tackle the challenge of limited resources in Q20.

Furthermore, entertainment and flexibility of time and place of mobile learning helped 7 participants improve their communication with parents and students (Figure 7).

Figure 7:

Frequency and ratio of participants’ opinions on how mobile learning helped tackle the challenge of communication with parents and students in Q20.

Lastly, the data indicated that a significant majority of participants (71.2 %) believed that mobile learning has transformed the way languages are taught and learned (Question 21). The primary (non-exclusive) reasons cited for this change are its flexibility in terms of time and place (68.4 %), access to richer resources (18.4 %), and its time-saving nature coupled with higher efficiency (18.4 %) (Table 11). These findings highlight mobile learning’s ability to address traditional limitations in language education, such as dependency on physical classrooms, fixed schedules, and limited access to learning materials.

Participants made the comments shown below,

“Students can learn a language not just from teacher.” (Participant No. 13)

“Mobile learning meets a lot of people’s need and gives people more chances to learn anytime and anywhere.” (Participant No. 23)

“It saves a lot of time and is more flexible. It’s convenient for both teachers and students to learn something.” (Participant No. 28)

“Teaching resources can be more easily and widely shared, teacher powerpoints and audios can be used repeatedly for revision, and the time and location of studying is not restricted.” (Participant No. 29)

Participants’ comments further reinforce the flexibility mobile learning offers to both students and teachers, the equitable access to learning resources, and the ability to revisit teaching materials for deeper understanding and revision. Mobile learning appears to empower learners to take control of their education, enabling self-paced study and facilitating access to diverse resources beyond the classroom environment.