Ts Tssai, Chia-Wen, Pei-Di Shen, and Yi-Chun Chiang. "The application of mobile technology in e-learning and online education environments: a review of publications in SSCI-indexed journals from 2003 to 2012." International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 9.4 (2013): 85+. Academic OneFile. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
URL
http://cmich.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.cmich.idm.oclc.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_cmichu&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA385070541&asid=71ce22e937084e2435a2c7e60a639b60
http://cmich.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.cmich.idm.oclc.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_cmichu&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA385070541&asid=71ce22e937084e2435a2c7e60a639b60
International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems. 9.4 (October-December 2013): p85.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2013 IGI Global
Abstract:
In this paper, the authors reviewed the empirical mobile technology (MT) studies, and those focused on adopting and designing MT for students ' learning, published in SSCI journals from 2003 to 2012. It is found that the number of articles has significantly increased, particularly after 2008. Among the 74 published papers, most of them were conducted in higher education, as well as on computing domain. Furthermore, the quantitative research method was used more in MT and e-learning research. The findings in this study may provide potential direction and help policymakers in governments and researchers in professional organizations to allocate the necessary resources and prepare for supporting future research and applications of MT.
Keywords: E-Learning, Higher Education, Literature Review, Mobile Technology (MT), Online Education
Full Text:
BACKGROUNDAND OBJECTIVES
The rapid proliferation of mobile technology (MT) devices such as mobile phones and tablets has had a significant impact on society, bringing about important changes in ways of daily life (Nedungadi & Raman, 2012). It is worth noting that technology has been regarded as a potential solution to the problems inherent within mass education (Hinvest & Brosnan, 2012), with technological advances leading educators to reconsider and ascertain whether new instructional methods modify or even magnify student's learning styles (Ongun, Altas & Demirag, 2011). Despite the potential for educational technology to enhance academic performance, current research has failed to demonstrate enhanced student learning outcome through using technology within education (Bremer, 2005).
Although diverse forms and increasing services are offered by MT, educational use is still immature because of the technological limitations and pedagogical considerations (Traxler, 2007). That is, implementing innovative approaches like personalized learning on mobile devices requires reminding students of the pedagogical justification for this new way of doing things (Nedungadi & Raman, 2012). In addition, due to the high cost of computer labs and technological devices in schools, many schools have an unfavorable student-to-computer ratio, and most students can only access computer labs or use such devices once or twice a week (Park, 2011). Therefore, educators should make more effort to facilitate learning by using MT and integrate them with appropriatelearning strategies for both teachers and students.
MT can be viewed from two aspects, including technological devices such as Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), Bluetooth, 3G, and General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) as well as mobile information appliances such as mobile phones, PDA, and laptop computers (Nah, Siau & Sheng, 2005; Varshney & Vetter, 2000). Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula and Sharples (2004) indicate that in the extensive literature about the challenges and benefits of using MT for learning, the advantages of MT have been shown to be convenience, flexibility and connectedness (Chae & Yeum, 2010).
Recently, several studies have investigated use of MT in education (e.g., Chu, Hwang, Tsai, & Tseng, 2010; Traxler, 2005). After decades of research, various elements of MT have been proposed. Naismith et al. (2004) describe the use of MT corresponding to six categories of learning activity: behaviorism, constructivism, situated learning, collaborative learning, informal/lifelong learning, and support. Serious and significant issues as to how MT can best be used for students' learning must be considered. This study aims to review MT studies published in influential international journals from 2003 to 2012. The research questions of the current study are the following:
1. What research topics related to MT were published in selected journals from 2003 to 2012?
2. What research sample groups related to MT were selected in these published articles from 2003 to 2012?
3. What research domains related to MT were adopted in these published articles from 2003 to 2012?
4. Is there any significant association between the research topic and the selection of the research sample group for these publications from 2003 to 2012?
5. Is there any significant association between the research topic and the adoption of the domain for these publications from 2003 to 2012?
METHODS
In order to conduct a systematic review of MT research, the authors used the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) database to search for and collect the literature for review in this study. The time period was set from 2003 to 2012, and the keywords for the topical search in SSCI publications were "mobile technology", "e-learning", and "online education". Only journal papers were reviewed in this study. Based on the topics and the principle of "journals only," 88 papers (including seven duplicates) were selected for review. However, among them, three papers are classified as "system design" studies, and the content of seven papers does not focus on using MT in e-learning or online education. Eliminating the duplicates and the latter seven papers from our consideration, finally, 74 studies were selected for this review. To confirm that the selected papers were related to MT research in e-learning and online education, the researchers in this study manually and systematically screened the content of each paper. The researchers analyzed and classified sample groups, subject domains and the research methods involved (qualitative, quantitative or mixed) among the 74 papers in this study.
RESULTS
Number of Papers Published
The number of papers related to MT research in e-learning and online education that were published from 2003 to 2012 is shown in Figure 1. It is worth noting that only nine were published from 2003 to 2007, whereas 65 of them were published from 2008 to 2012. Accordingly, Figure 1 reveals that the research in this field increased at a fast pace from 2008. This result indicates that the adoption of MT in e-learning research has received increasing attention from researchers, educators and schools, greatly advanced in the recent 5 years.
Sample Groups in the Reviewed Studies
Regarding the distribution percentages of the sample groups involved in the selected papers from 2003 to 2012, Table 1 shows that undergraduates had the highest ranking (43.24%), followed by Non-specified (21.62%) and Adult learners (10.80%). Only a few studies selected compulsory education students (8.11%), High school students (5.41%), teachers (5.41%), and patients (5.41%). In this study, we find undergraduates were most frequently investigated as the research sample in MT and e-learning studies conducted from 2003 to 2012. This may be because most undergraduates have MT (e.g. cellular phone) and thus have more opportunities to use it for education. In addition, it should also be noted that the number of studies focusing on high school students is dramatically increasing. That is, the adoption of MT and e-learning are getting more and more emphasis in secondary education contexts.
Subject Domains Involved in the Reviewed Studies
Table 2 shows the domains selected for the MT studies conducted from 2003 to 2012. It is found that 27.02% of the 74 papers report on studies in the computing domain, which is the highest ranking. Besides, 24.32% of the MT studies focus on education fields. Then, 20.27% of the MT studies were medical science domain, followed by science (13.51%), social science (12.16%), Non-specified (1.35%) and system (1.35%). It can be seen that the sequence remains the same, implying that domains of computing and social science account for major samples of MT research from 2003 to 2012.
Research Methods Adopted
As for the research methods used in the selected MT research in e-learning and online education papers from 2003 to 2012, it is revealed in Table 3 that the most frequently used research methods were quantitative (39.19%), followed by qualitative (20.27%), mixed methods (9.46%), and system design (4.05%). In addition, some papers focused on review of literature (27.03%). Furthermore, the complete analysis of the 74 selected papers is shown in Table 4.
CONCLUSION
This paper reviews the advancement of MT research from 2003 to 2012 based on the articles published in SSCI journals. It is found that the number of articles has significantly increased, particularly after 2008. Among the 74 published papers, most of them were conducted in higher education, as well as on computing domain. Moreover, the quantitative research method was used more in online MT research. These findings may provide reference for educators and researchers who plan to contribute to the relevant studies. The analysis results in this study could help policymakers in governments and researchers in professional organizations to allocate the necessary resources and prepare for supporting future research and applications of MT.
DOI:10.4018/ijeis.2013100106
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to express appreciation for the reviewers' valuable comments and the financial support of NSC101-2410-H-130-007from the National Science Council, Taiwan, R.O.C.
REFERENCES
Andersson, A., & Hatakka, M. (2010). Increasing interactivity in distance educations: Case studies Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Information Technology for Development, 16(1), 16-33. doi:10.1080/02681100903533719
Arvanitis, T. N., Williams, D. D., Knight, J. F., Baber, C., Gargalakos, M., Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2011). A human factors study of technology acceptance of a prototype mobile augmented reality system for science education. Advanced Science Letters, 4(11-12), 3342-3352. doi:10.1166/asl.2011.2044
Benson, R., & Samarawickrema, G. (2009). Addressing the context of e-learning: using transactional distance theory to inform design. Distance Education, 50(1), 5-21. doi:10.1080/01587910902845972
Bremer, J. (2005). The Internet and children: Advantages and disadvantages. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14(3), 405-428. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2005.02.003 PMID:15936666
Bustos, H., & Nussbaum, M. (2009). An experimental study of the inclusion of technology in higher education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 17(1), 100-107. doi:10.1002/cae.20188
Caballe, S., Xhafa, F., & Barolli, L. (2010). Using mobile devices to support online collaborative learning. Mobile Information Systems, 6(1), 27-47.
Callow, J., & Zammit, K. (2012). Where lies your text? (Twelfth Night Act I, Scene V): Engaging high school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds in reading multimodal texts. Engineers Australia, 47(2), 69-77.
Chae, M., & Yeum, D. (2010). The impact of mobile technology paradox perception and personal risk-taking behaviors on mobile technology adoption. International Journal of Management Science, 16(2), 115-138.
Chandra, S. (2011). Experiences in personal lecture video capture. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(3), 261-274. doi:10.1109/TLT.2011.10
Chang, C. Y, & Lee, G. (2010). A major e-learning project to renovate science leaning environment in Taiwan. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 7-12.
Charitonos, K., Blake, C., Scanlon, E., & Jones, A. (2012). Museum learning via social and mobile technologies: (How) can online interactions enhance the visitor experience? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 802-819. doi:10.1111/j.14678535.2012.01360.x
Chen, C. M., & Chen, M. C. (2009). Mobile formative assessment tool based on data mining techniques for supporting web-based learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 256-273. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.005
Chen, C. M., & Chung, C. J. (2008). Personalized mobile english vocabulary learning system based on item response theory and learning memory cycle. Computers & Education, 51(2), 624-645. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.06.011
Chen, C. M., & Hsu, S. H. (2008). Personalized intelligent mobile learning system for supporting effective English learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 153-180.
Chen, N. S., Kinshuk., & Wang, Y H. (2007). Cyber schooling framework: Improving mobility and situated learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 25(3), 421-433.
Cheng, J. S., Huang, E., & Lin, C. L. (2012). An e-book hub service based on a cloud platform. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(5), 39-55.
Chiasson, M. A., Hirshfield, S., & Rietmeijer, C. (2010). HIV prevention and care in the digital age. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 55(Supply 2), S94-S97.
Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). A knowledge engineering approach to developing mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 54(1), 289-297. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.023
de Marcos, L., Barchino, R., Jimenez, M. L., Hilera, J. R., Martinez, J. J., & Gutierrez, J. A. et al. (2011). Using m-learning on nursing courses to improve learning. CIN: Computers, Informatics. Nursing, 29(5), 311-317.
El-Hussein, M. O. M., & Cronje, J. C. (2010). Defining mobile learning in the higher education landscape. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 12-21.
Enriquez, J. G. (2011). Tug-o-where: Situating mobilities of learning (t)here. Learning, Media and Technology, 56(1), 39-53. doi:10.1080/17439884 .2010.531022
Evans, C. (2008). The effectiveness of m-leaming in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education. Computers & Education, 50(2), 491-498. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.016
Garrett, B. M., & Jackson, C. (2006). A mobile clinical e-portfolio for nursing and medical students, using wireless personal digital assistants (PDAs). Nurse Education Today, 26(8), 647-654. doi:10.1016/j. nedt.2006.07.020 PMID:17011674
Gatautis, R. (2008). The impact of ICT on public and private sectors in Lithuania. The Engineering Economist, 4(59), 1-28.
Geniets, A. (2010). Lost in translation: Why civic online efforts in Britain have failed to engage youngwomen from low socioeconomic backgrounds. European Journal of Communication, 25(4), 398-412. doi:10.1177/0267323110380998
Gerber, S., & Scott, L. (2007). Designing a learning curriculum and technology's role in it. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 461478. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9005-6
Gold, J., Lim, M. S., Hocking, J. S., Keogh, L. A., Spelman, T., & Hellard, M. E. (2011). Determining the impact of text messaging for sexual health promotion to young people. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 38(4), 247-252. PMID:20966830
Gonzalez-Pacanowski, T., & Medina, P. (2009). Comunicacion online en el sector salud. Valor de la infografia. El Profesional de la Informacion, 18(4), 413-420. doi:10.3145/epi.2009.jul.08
Green, D. R., & King, S. D. (2004). Pencil out, stylus in: Geospatial technologies give coastal fieldwork a new dimension. Geography (Sheffield, England), 89(1), 58-70.
Haase, R., Schultheiss, T., Kempcke, R., Thomas, K., & Ziemssen, T. (2012). Use and acceptance of electronic communication by patients with multiple sclerosis: A multicenter questionnaire study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14(5), e135. doi:10.2196/jmir.2133 PMID:23069209
Hill, J. L., & Nelson, A. (2011). New technology, newpedagogy? Employing video podcasts in learning and teaching about exotic ecosystems. Environmental Education Research, 17(3), 393-408. doi:10.1080/ 13504622.2010.545873
Hill, T. R., & Roldan, M. (2005). Toward third generation threaded discussions for mobile learning: Opportunities and challenges for ubiquitous collaborative environments. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(1), 55-70. doi:10.1007/s10796-005-5338-7
Hinvest, N., & Brosnan, M. (2012). Identifying vulnerability markers for pathological internet use and pathological video-game playing within an educational context. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(4), 357-376. doi:10.2190/EC.46.4.c
Hinvest, N., & Brosnan, M. (2012). Identifying vulnerability markers for pathological internet use and pathological video-game playing within an educational context. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(4), 357-376. doi:10.2190/EC.46.4.c
Huang, Y M., Kuo, Y H., Lin, Y T., & Cheng, S. C. (2008). Toward interactive mobile synchronous learning environment with context-awareness service. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1205-1226. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.009
Jeng, Y L., Wu, T. T., Huang, Y M., Tan, Q., & Yang, S. J. H. (2010). The add-on impact of mobile applications in learning strategies: A review study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 3-11.
Jenkins, M., Browne, T., Walker, R., & Hewitt, R. (2011). The development of technology enhanced learning: findings from a 2008 survey of UK higher education institutions. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(5), 447-465. doi:10.1080/10494820903484429
Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e(3)-learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175-185. doi:10.1080/01587910802154970
Klopper, A., & Nel, C. (2010). Development and integration of multimedia teaching and learning support material (LTSM) to support reading skills. Tydskrift vir Geesteswetenskappe, 50(4), 541-558.
Kravcik, M., Kaibel, A., Specht, M., & Terrenghi, L. (2004). Mobile collector for field trips. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 7(2), 25-33.
Kreps, G. L., & Neuhauser, L. (2010). New directions in eHealth communication: Opportunities and challenges. Patient Education and Counseling, 78(3), 329-336. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2010.01.013 PMID:20202779
Lan, Y. F., & Sie, Y S. (2010). Using RSS to support mobile learning based on media richness theory. Computers & Education, 55(2), 723-732. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2010.03.005
Lan, Y F., Tsai, P. W., Yang, S. H., & Hung, C. L. (2012). Comparing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of problem-based online asynchronous discussion in e/m-learning environments. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1122-1135. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.004
Lau, R. Y K., Ip, R. K. F., Chan, M. T., Kwok, R. C. W., Wong, S. W. M., So, J. C. F., & Wong, E. Y W. (2010). Podcasting: An internet- based social technology for blended learning. IEEE Internet Computing, 14(3), 33-41. doi:10.1109/MIC.2010.74
Li, L. C., Townsend, A. F., & Badley, E. M. (2012). Self-management interventions in the digital age: New approaches to support people with rheumatologic conditions. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Rheumatology, 26(3), 321-333. doi:10.1016/j. berh.2012.05.005 PMID:22867929
Ly, K. H., Carlbring, P., & Andersson, G. (2012). Behavioral activation-based guided self-help treatment administered through a smartphone application: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials, 13(1), 62-67. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-13-62 PMID:22607302
Maheu, M. M., Pulier, M. L., McMenamin, J. P., & Posen, L. (2012). Future of telepsychology, telehealth, and various technologies in research and practice. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 43(6), 613-621. doi:10.1037/a0029458
Marcos Lopez, L., Tamez Almaguer, R., & Lozano Rodriguez, A. (2009). Mobile learning as a tool for the development of communication skills in virtual discussion boards.Revista Comunicar, 17(33), 93-100.
Miners, A., Harris, J., Felix, L., Murray, E., Michie, S., & Edwards, P. (2012). An economic evaluation of adaptive e-learning devices to promote weight loss via dietary change for people with obesity. BMC Health Services Research, 12(190), 1-9. PMlD:22214259
Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49(3), 581-596. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011
Nah, F., Siau, K., & Sheng, H. (2005). The value of mobile applications: A study on a public utility company. Communications of the ACM, 48(2), 85-90. doi:10.1145/1042091.1042095
Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2004). Literature review in mobile technologies and learning (Futurelab Series Report 11). Retrieved from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Mobile_Review.pdf
Nedungadi, P., & Raman, R. (2012). A new approach to personalization: Integrating e-learning and m-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 659-678. doi:10.1007/ s11423-012-9250-9
Nedungadi, P., & Raman, R. (2012). A new approach to personalization: Integrating e-learning and m-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 659-678. doi:10.1007/ s11423-012-9250-9
Newman, L., Biedrzycki, K., & Baum, F. (2012). Digital technology use among disadvantaged Australians: Implications for equitable consumer participation in digitally-mediated communication and information exchange with health services. Australian Health Review, 36(2), 125-129. doi:10.1071/ AH11042 PMID:22624630
Nihuka, K. A., & Voogt, J. (2012). Collaborative e-learning course design: Impacts on instructors in the open university of Tanzania. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 232-248.
Ohrstrom, P. (2011). Helping autism-diagnosed teenagers navigate and develop socially using e-learning based on mobile persuasion. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(4), 54-71.
Ongun, E.,Altas, D., & Demirag, A. (2011). A study of 8th graders' perceptions of socio-cultural perspective of creativity by using information technology tools in realisation of homework goals. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 21-26.
Ongun, E.,Atlas, D., & Demirag, A. (2011). A study of 8th graders' perceptions of socio-cultural perspective of creativity by using information technology tools in realisation of homework goals. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 21-26.
Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78-102.
Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78-102.
Pathirana, A., Gersonius, B., & Radhakrishnan, M. (2012). Web 2.0 collaboration tool to support student research in hydrology-an opinion. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16(8), 2499-2509. doi:10.5194/hess-16-2499-2012
Pfaeffli, L., Maddison, R., Whittaker, R., Stewart, R., Kerr, A., & Jiang, Y et al. (2012). A mHealth cardiac rehabilitation exercise intervention: findings from content development studies. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 12(36), 1-9. PMID:22284388
Pocatilu, P., & Boja, C. (2009). Quality characteristics and metrics related to m-learning process. Amfiteatru Economic, 26, 346-354.
Pocatilu, P., & Ciurea, C. (2011). Modern solutions for economic higher education in the knowledge-based society. The Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 13(30), 497-511.
Poon, W. C. (2008). User's adoption of e-banking services: The Malaysian perspective. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 23(1), 59-69. doi:10.1108/08858620810841498
Rau, P. L. P., Gao, Q., & Wu, L. M. (2008). Using mobile communication technology in high school education: Motivation, pressure, and learning performance. Computers & Education, 50(1), 1-22. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.03.008
Rosman, P. (2008). M-learning - a paradigm of new forms in education. E+MEkonomie a Management, 11(1), 119-125.
Ruth, A., & Houghton, L. (2009). The wiki way of learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 135-152.
Schreiber, B., & Aartun, K. (2011). Online support service via mobile technology - a pilot study at a higher education institution in South Africa. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 21(4), 635-642.
Schwabe, G., & Goth, C. (2005). Mobile learning with a mobile game: design and motivational effects. Journal of ComputerAssisted Learning, 21(3), 204-216. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00128.x
Shih, J. L., Chu, H. C., & Hwang, G. J., & Kinshuk. (2011). An investigation of attitudes of students and teachers about participating in a context-aware ubiquitous learning activity. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3), 373-394. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-8535.2009.01020.x
Sims, R. (2008). Rethinking (e)learning: A manifesto for connected generations. Distance Education, 29(2), 153-164. doi:10.1080/01587910802154954
Stiffler, D., Stoten, S., & Cullen, D. (2011). Podcasting as an instructional supplement to online learning a pilot study. CIN: Computers, Informatics. Nursing, 29(3), 144-148.
Teng, W., Lu, H. P., & Yu, H. (2009). Exploring the mass adoption of third-generation (3G) mobile phones in Taiwan. Telecommunications Policy, 33, 628-641. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2009.07.002
Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing, and evaluating mobile learning: The moving finger writes and having write. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2), 1-12.
Triantafillou, E., Georgiadou, E., & Economides, A. A. (2008). The design and evaluation of a computerized adaptive test on mobile devices. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1319-1330. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2006.12.005
Uzunboylu, H., Cavus, N., & Ercag, E. (2009). Using mobile learning to increase environmental awareness. Computers & Education, 52(2), 381-389. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.008
Vandelanotte, C., & Mummery, W. K. (2011). Qualitative and quantitative research into the development and feasibility of a video-tailored physical activity intervention. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 8(1), 70-80. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-70 PMID:21718546
Varshney, U., & Vetter, R. (2000). Emerging wireless and mobile networks. Communications of the ACM, 43(6), 73-81. doi:10.1145/336460.336478
Viljoen, J., du Preez, C., & Cook, A. (2005). The case for using SMS technologies to support distance education students in South Africa: Conversations. Perspectives in Education, 23(4), 115-122.
Vyas, R., Albright, S., Walker, D., Zachariah, A., & Lee, M. Y. (2010). Clinical training at remote sites using mobile technology: An India-USA partnership. Distance Education, 31(2), 211-226. doi:10.1080/0 1587919.2010.498856
Waard, I., & de, ., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M. S., Hogue, R., Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A., & Rodriguez, O. C. (2011). Using mLearning and MOOCs to understand chaos, emergence, andcomplexity in education. InternationalReview of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 94-115.
Wang, S. L., & Wu, C. Y. (2012). Application of context-aware and personalized recommendation to implement an adaptive ubiquitous learning system. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 10831-10838. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.02.083
Wright, C. R., Dhanarajan, G., & Reju, S. A. (2009). Recurring issues encountered by distance educators in developing and emerging nations. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(1), 1-25.
Yen, J. C., & Lee, C. Y. (2011). Exploring problem solving patterns and their impact on learning achievement in a blended learning environment. Computers & Education, 56(1), 138-145. doi:10.10l6/j. compedu.2010.08.012
Chia-Wen Tsai is an Associate Professor in the Department of Information Management, Ming Chuan University. Dr. Tsai is one of the Editors-in-Chief of International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, and International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction. He is also the Associate Editor of Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. He is interested in onlineteaching methods and knowledge management.
Pei-Di Shen now works as Director of the Teacher Education Center and professor of Graduate School of Education, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan. Professor Shen is one of the Editors-in-Chief of International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design. Her primary interest areas are E-learning, Knowledge Management, Virtual Community, and Management Information Systems. Her research focus is distance delivery in higher education.
Yi-Chun Chiang, M.Ed., is a staff member of the Teacher Education Center, Ming Chuan University, Taiwan.
Chia-Wen Tsai, Department of Information Management, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Pei-Di Shen, Teacher Education Center, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Yi-Chun Chiang, Teacher Education Center, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Table 1. Sample groups of the MT studies published from 2003 to 2012
Compulsory High Higher Teachers Adult
Education School Education Learners
Students Students Students
Percentage 8.11% 5.41% 43.24% 5.41% 10.80%
Patients Non-
Specified
Percentage 5.41% 21.62%
Table 2. Subject domains in the MT studies published from 2003 to 2012
Computing Education Medical Science Social
(Including Science Science
ICT)
Percentage 27.02% 24.32% 20.27% 13.51% 12.16%
System Non-
Specified
Percentage 1.35% 1.35%
Table 3. Research methods in the MT studies published from
2003 to 2012
Qualitative Quantitative Mixed System
Method Design
Percentage 20.27% 39.19% 9.46% 4.05%
Literature
Review
Percentage 27.03%
Table 4. The selected KIT studies published from 2003 to 2012
Subject Domains
No. Author (Year) Computing Education
(including ICT)
1. Andersson & Hatakka (2010) [check]
2. Arvanitis, Williams,
Knight, Baber, Gargalakos,
Sotiriou, & Bogner (2011)
3. Benson & Samarawickrema (2009) [check]
4. Bustos & Nussbaum (2009) [check]
5. Caballe, Xhafa & Barolli (2010) [check]
6. Callow & Zammit (2012)
7. Chandra (2011) [check]
8. Chang & Lee (2010) [check]
9. Chari tonos, Blake,
Scanlon, & Jones (2012)
10. Chen & Chen (2009)
11. Chen & Chung (2008) [check]
12. Chen & Hsu (2008) [check]
13. Chen, Kinshuk, & Wang (2007)
14. Cheng, Huang, & Lin (2012)
15. Chiasson, Hirshfield, &
Rietmeijer (2010)
16. de Marcos, Barchino, Jimenez,
Hilera, Martinez, Gutierrez,
Gutierrez, & Oton (2011)
17. El-Hussein & Cronje (2010) [check]
18. Enriquez (2011) [check]
19. Evans (2008)
20. Garrett & Jackson (2006)
21. Gatautis (2008)
22. Geniets (2010)
23. Gerber & Scott (2007) [check]
24. Gold, Lim, Hocking, Keogh,
Spelman, & Hellard (2011)
25. Gonzalez-Pacanowski &
Medina (2009)
26. Green & King (2004)
27. Haase, Schultheiss, Kempcke,
Thomas, & Ziemssen (2012)
28. Hill & Nelson (2011)
29. Hill & Roldan (2005) [check]
30. Hinvest al. (2012) [check]
31. Huang, Kuo, Lin, & [check]
Cheng (2008)
32. Jeng, Wu, Huang, [check]
Tan, & Yang (2010)
33. Jenkins, Browne, [check]
Walker, & Hewitt (2011)
34. Keller (2008) [check]
35. Klopper & Nel (2010) [check]
36. Kravcik, Kaibel,
Specht, & Terrenghi (2004)
37. Kreps & Neuhauser (2010)
38. Lan&Sie (2010) [check]
39. Lan, Tsai, Yang, & [check]
Hung (2012)
40. Lau, Ip, Chan, Kwok, Wong, [check]
So, & Wong (2010)
41. Li, Townsend, &
Badley (2012)
42. Ly, Carlbring, &
Andersson (2012)
43. Maheu, Pulier,
McMenamin, & Posen (2012)
44. Marcos Lopez, Tamez [check]
Almaguer, & Lozano
Rodriguez (2009)
45. Miners, Harris, Felix,
Murray, Michie, &
Edwards (2012)
46. Motiwalla (2007) [check]
47. Nedungadi & Raman (2012)
48. Newman, Biedrzycki, & [check]
Baum (2012)
49. Nihuka & Voogt (2012) [check]
50. Ohrstrom (2011) [check]
51. Ongun al. (2011)
52. Park (2011)
53. Pathirana, Gersonius, &
Radhakrishnan (2012)
54. Pfaeffli, Maddison,
Whittaker, Stewart, Kerr,
Jiang, Kira, Carter, &
Dalleck (2012)
55. Pocatilu & Boja (2009) [check]
56. Pocatilu & Ciurea (2011) [check]
57. Poon (2008)
58. Rau, Gao, & Wu (2008) [check]
59. Rosman (2008) [check]
60. Ruth & Houghton (2009) [check]
61. Schreiber & Aartun (2011)
62. Schwabe & Goth (2005) [check]
63. Shih, Chu, Hwang, &
Kinshuk (2011)
64. Sims (2008) [check]
65. Stiffler, Stoten, &
Cullen (2011)
66. Triantafillou,
Georgiadou, &
Economides (2008)
67. Uzunboylu, Caws, &
Ercag (2009)
68. Vandelanotte, &
Mummery (2011)
69. Viljoen, du Preez, &
Cook (2005)
70. Vyas, Albright,
Walker, Zachariah,
& Lee (2010)
71. Waard, Abajian, Gallagher,
Elogue, Keskin, Koutropoulos,
& Rodriguez (2011)
72. Wang & Wu (2012)
73. Wright, Dhanarajan, [check]
& Reju (2009)
74. Yen & Lee (2011) [check]
No. Author (Year) Medical Science Social
Science Science
1. Andersson & Hatakka (2010)
2. Arvanitis, Williams, [check]
Knight, Baber, Gargalakos,
Sotiriou, & Bogner (2011)
3. Benson & Samarawickrema (2009)
4. Bustos & Nussbaum (2009)
5. Caballe, Xhafa & Barolli (2010)
6. Callow & Zammit (2012) [check]
7. Chandra (2011)
8. Chang & Lee (2010)
9. Chari tonos, Blake, [check]
Scanlon, & Jones (2012)
10. Chen & Chen (2009) [check]
11. Chen & Chung (2008)
12. Chen & Hsu (2008)
13. Chen, Kinshuk, & Wang (2007)
14. Cheng, Huang, & Lin (2012)
15. Chiasson, Hirshfield, & [check]
Rietmeijer (2010)
16. de Marcos, Barchino, Jimenez, [check]
Hilera, Martinez, Gutierrez,
Gutierrez, & Oton (2011)
17. El-Hussein & Cronje (2010)
18. Enriquez (2011)
19. Evans (2008) [check]
20. Garrett & Jackson (2006) [check]
21. Gatautis (2008) [check]
22. Geniets (2010) [check]
23. Gerber & Scott (2007)
24. Gold, Lim, Hocking, Keogh, [check]
Spelman, & Hellard (2011)
25. Gonzalez-Pacanowski & [check]
Medina (2009)
26. Green & King (2004)
27. Haase, Schultheiss, Kempcke, [check]
Thomas, & Ziemssen (2012)
28. Hill & Nelson (2011) [check]
29. Hill & Roldan (2005)
30. Hinvest al. (2012)
31. Huang, Kuo, Lin, &
Cheng (2008)
32. Jeng, Wu, Huang,
Tan, & Yang (2010)
33. Jenkins, Browne,
Walker, & Hewitt (2011)
34. Keller (2008)
35. Klopper & Nel (2010)
36. Kravcik, Kaibel, [check]
Specht, & Terrenghi (2004)
37. Kreps & Neuhauser (2010) [check]
38. Lan&Sie (2010)
39. Lan, Tsai, Yang, &
Hung (2012)
40. Lau, Ip, Chan, Kwok, Wong,
So, & Wong (2010)
41. Li, Townsend, & [check]
Badley (2012)
42. Ly, Carlbring, & [check]
Andersson (2012)
43. Maheu, Pulier, [check]
McMenamin, & Posen (2012)
44. Marcos Lopez, Tamez
Almaguer, & Lozano
Rodriguez (2009)
45. Miners, Harris, Felix, [check]
Murray, Michie, &
Edwards (2012)
46. Motiwalla (2007)
47. Nedungadi & Raman (2012) [check]
48. Newman, Biedrzycki, &
Baum (2012)
49. Nihuka & Voogt (2012)
50. Ohrstrom (2011)
51. Ongun al. (2011) [check]
52. Park (2011) [check]
53. Pathirana, Gersonius, & [check]
Radhakrishnan (2012)
54. Pfaeffli, Maddison, [check]
Whittaker, Stewart, Kerr,
Jiang, Kira, Carter, &
Dalleck (2012)
55. Pocatilu & Boja (2009)
56. Pocatilu & Ciurea (2011)
57. Poon (2008) [check]
58. Rau, Gao, & Wu (2008)
59. Rosman (2008)
60. Ruth & Houghton (2009)
61. Schreiber & Aartun (2011) [check]
62. Schwabe & Goth (2005)
63. Shih, Chu, Hwang, & [check]
Kinshuk (2011)
64. Sims (2008)
65. Stiffler, Stoten, & [check]
Cullen (2011)
66. Triantafillou,
Georgiadou, &
Economides (2008)
67. Uzunboylu, Caws, & [check]
Ercag (2009)
68. Vandelanotte, & [check]
Mummery (2011)
69. Viljoen, du Preez, &
Cook (2005)
70. Vyas, Albright, [check]
Walker, Zachariah,
& Lee (2010)
71. Waard, Abajian, Gallagher,
Elogue, Keskin, Koutropoulos,
& Rodriguez (2011)
72. Wang & Wu (2012)
73. Wright, Dhanarajan,
& Reju (2009)
74. Yen & Lee (2011)
Research
No. Author (Year) System n.s. Methods
Qualitative
1. Andersson & Hatakka (2010) [check]
2. Arvanitis, Williams,
Knight, Baber, Gargalakos,
Sotiriou, & Bogner (2011)
3. Benson & Samarawickrema (2009)
4. Bustos & Nussbaum (2009)
5. Caballe, Xhafa & Barolli (2010)
6. Callow & Zammit (2012) [check]
7. Chandra (2011) [check]
8. Chang & Lee (2010)
9. Chari tonos, Blake,
Scanlon, & Jones (2012)
10. Chen & Chen (2009)
11. Chen & Chung (2008)
12. Chen & Hsu (2008)
13. Chen, Kinshuk, & Wang (2007)
14. Cheng, Huang, & Lin (2012) [check]
15. Chiasson, Hirshfield, &
Rietmeijer (2010)
16. de Marcos, Barchino, Jimenez,
Hilera, Martinez, Gutierrez,
Gutierrez, & Oton (2011)
17. El-Hussein & Cronje (2010)
18. Enriquez (2011)
19. Evans (2008)
20. Garrett & Jackson (2006) [check]
21. Gatautis (2008)
22. Geniets (2010)
23. Gerber & Scott (2007) [check]
24. Gold, Lim, Hocking, Keogh,
Spelman, & Hellard (2011)
25. Gonzalez-Pacanowski &
Medina (2009)
26. Green & King (2004)
27. Haase, Schultheiss, Kempcke,
Thomas, & Ziemssen (2012)
28. Hill & Nelson (2011)
29. Hill & Roldan (2005)
30. Hinvest al. (2012) [check]
31. Huang, Kuo, Lin, &
Cheng (2008)
32. Jeng, Wu, Huang, [check]
Tan, & Yang (2010)
33. Jenkins, Browne,
Walker, & Hewitt (2011)
34. Keller (2008)
35. Klopper & Nel (2010)
36. Kravcik, Kaibel,
Specht, & Terrenghi (2004)
37. Kreps & Neuhauser (2010) [check]
38. Lan&Sie (2010)
39. Lan, Tsai, Yang, &
Hung (2012)
40. Lau, Ip, Chan, Kwok, Wong,
So, & Wong (2010)
41. Li, Townsend, & [check]
Badley (2012)
42. Ly, Carlbring, &
Andersson (2012)
43. Maheu, Pulier,
McMenamin, & Posen (2012)
44. Marcos Lopez, Tamez
Almaguer, & Lozano
Rodriguez (2009)
45. Miners, Harris, Felix,
Murray, Michie, &
Edwards (2012)
46. Motiwalla (2007)
47. Nedungadi & Raman (2012)
48. Newman, Biedrzycki, & [check]
Baum (2012)
49. Nihuka & Voogt (2012) [check]
50. Ohrstrom (2011) [check]
51. Ongun al. (2011)
52. Park (2011)
53. Pathirana, Gersonius, & [check]
Radhakrishnan (2012)
54. Pfaeffli, Maddison,
Whittaker, Stewart, Kerr,
Jiang, Kira, Carter, &
Dalleck (2012)
55. Pocatilu & Boja (2009)
56. Pocatilu & Ciurea (2011)
57. Poon (2008)
58. Rau, Gao, & Wu (2008)
59. Rosman (2008)
60. Ruth & Houghton (2009) [check]
61. Schreiber & Aartun (2011)
62. Schwabe & Goth (2005)
63. Shih, Chu, Hwang, &
Kinshuk (2011)
64. Sims (2008)
65. Stiffler, Stoten, &
Cullen (2011)
66. Triantafillou,
Georgiadou, &
Economides (2008)
67. Uzunboylu, Caws, &
Ercag (2009)
68. Vandelanotte, &
Mummery (2011)
69. Viljoen, du Preez, &
Cook (2005)
70. Vyas, Albright,
Walker, Zachariah,
& Lee (2010)
71. Waard, Abajian, Gallagher,
Elogue, Keskin, Koutropoulos,
& Rodriguez (2011)
72. Wang & Wu (2012)
73. Wright, Dhanarajan,
& Reju (2009)
74. Yen & Lee (2011)
No. Author (Year) Quantitative Mixed
Method
1. Andersson & Hatakka (2010)
2. Arvanitis, Williams, [check]
Knight, Baber, Gargalakos,
Sotiriou, & Bogner (2011)
3. Benson & Samarawickrema (2009)
4. Bustos & Nussbaum (2009) [check]
5. Caballe, Xhafa & Barolli (2010)
6. Callow & Zammit (2012)
7. Chandra (2011)
8. Chang & Lee (2010)
9. Chari tonos, Blake, [check]
Scanlon, & Jones (2012)
10. Chen & Chen (2009) [check]
11. Chen & Chung (2008) [check]
12. Chen & Hsu (2008) [check]
13. Chen, Kinshuk, & Wang (2007)
14. Cheng, Huang, & Lin (2012)
15. Chiasson, Hirshfield, &
Rietmeijer (2010)
16. de Marcos, Barchino, Jimenez, [check]
Hilera, Martinez, Gutierrez,
Gutierrez, & Oton (2011)
17. El-Hussein & Cronje (2010)
18. Enriquez (2011)
19. Evans (2008) [check]
20. Garrett & Jackson (2006)
21. Gatautis (2008)
22. Geniets (2010) [check]
23. Gerber & Scott (2007)
24. Gold, Lim, Hocking, Keogh, [check]
Spelman, & Hellard (2011)
25. Gonzalez-Pacanowski &
Medina (2009)
26. Green & King (2004)
27. Haase, Schultheiss, Kempcke, [check]
Thomas, & Ziemssen (2012)
28. Hill & Nelson (2011) [check]
29. Hill & Roldan (2005)
30. Hinvest al. (2012)
31. Huang, Kuo, Lin, & [check]
Cheng (2008)
32. Jeng, Wu, Huang,
Tan, & Yang (2010)
33. Jenkins, Browne, [check]
Walker, & Hewitt (2011)
34. Keller (2008)
35. Klopper & Nel (2010)
36. Kravcik, Kaibel,
Specht, & Terrenghi (2004)
37. Kreps & Neuhauser (2010)
38. Lan&Sie (2010) [check]
39. Lan, Tsai, Yang, & [check]
Hung (2012)
40. Lau, Ip, Chan, Kwok, Wong, [check]
So, & Wong (2010)
41. Li, Townsend, &
Badley (2012)
42. Ly, Carlbring, & [check]
Andersson (2012)
43. Maheu, Pulier,
McMenamin, & Posen (2012)
44. Marcos Lopez, Tamez [check]
Almaguer, & Lozano
Rodriguez (2009)
45. Miners, Harris, Felix,
Murray, Michie, &
Edwards (2012)
46. Motiwalla (2007) [check]
47. Nedungadi & Raman (2012) [check]
48. Newman, Biedrzycki, &
Baum (2012)
49. Nihuka & Voogt (2012)
50. Ohrstrom (2011)
51. Ongun al. (2011) [check]
52. Park (2011)
53. Pathirana, Gersonius, &
Radhakrishnan (2012)
54. Pfaeffli, Maddison, [check]
Whittaker, Stewart, Kerr,
Jiang, Kira, Carter, &
Dalleck (2012)
55. Pocatilu & Boja (2009) [check]
56. Pocatilu & Ciurea (2011) [check]
57. Poon (2008) [check]
58. Rau, Gao, & Wu (2008) [check]
59. Rosman (2008)
60. Ruth & Houghton (2009)
61. Schreiber & Aartun (2011) [check]
62. Schwabe & Goth (2005) [check]
63. Shih, Chu, Hwang, & [check]
Kinshuk (2011)
64. Sims (2008)
65. Stiffler, Stoten, & [check]
Cullen (2011)
66. Triantafillou,
Georgiadou, &
Economides (2008)
67. Uzunboylu, Caws, & [check]
Ercag (2009)
68. Vandelanotte, &
Mummery (2011)
69. Viljoen, du Preez, & [check]
Cook (2005)
70. Vyas, Albright,
Walker, Zachariah,
& Lee (2010)
71. Waard, Abajian, Gallagher,
Elogue, Keskin, Koutropoulos,
& Rodriguez (2011)
72. Wang & Wu (2012) [check]
73. Wright, Dhanarajan,
& Reju (2009)
74. Yen & Lee (2011)
No. Author (Year) System Literature
Design Review
1. Andersson & Hatakka (2010)
2. Arvanitis, Williams,
Knight, Baber, Gargalakos,
Sotiriou, & Bogner (2011)
3. Benson & Samarawickrema (2009) [check]
4. Bustos & Nussbaum (2009)
5. Caballe, Xhafa & Barolli (2010)
6. Callow & Zammit (2012)
7. Chandra (2011)
8. Chang & Lee (2010) [check]
9. Chari tonos, Blake,
Scanlon, & Jones (2012)
10. Chen & Chen (2009)
11. Chen & Chung (2008)
12. Chen & Hsu (2008)
13. Chen, Kinshuk, & Wang (2007)
14. Cheng, Huang, & Lin (2012) [check]
15. Chiasson, Hirshfield, &
Rietmeijer (2010)
16. de Marcos, Barchino, Jimenez,
Hilera, Martinez, Gutierrez,
Gutierrez, & Oton (2011)
17. El-Hussein & Cronje (2010) [check]
18. Enriquez (2011) [check]
19. Evans (2008)
20. Garrett & Jackson (2006)
21. Gatautis (2008) [check]
22. Geniets (2010)
23. Gerber & Scott (2007)
24. Gold, Lim, Hocking, Keogh,
Spelman, & Hellard (2011)
25. Gonzalez-Pacanowski &
Medina (2009)
26. Green & King (2004)
27. Haase, Schultheiss, Kempcke,
Thomas, & Ziemssen (2012)
28. Hill & Nelson (2011)
29. Hill & Roldan (2005) [check]
30. Hinvest al. (2012)
31. Huang, Kuo, Lin, &
Cheng (2008)
32. Jeng, Wu, Huang,
Tan, & Yang (2010)
33. Jenkins, Browne,
Walker, & Hewitt (2011)
34. Keller (2008) [check]
35. Klopper & Nel (2010) [check]
36. Kravcik, Kaibel, [check]
Specht, & Terrenghi (2004)
37. Kreps & Neuhauser (2010)
38. Lan&Sie (2010)
39. Lan, Tsai, Yang, &
Hung (2012)
40. Lau, Ip, Chan, Kwok, Wong,
So, & Wong (2010)
41. Li, Townsend, &
Badley (2012)
42. Ly, Carlbring, &
Andersson (2012)
43. Maheu, Pulier, [check]
McMenamin, & Posen (2012)
44. Marcos Lopez, Tamez
Almaguer, & Lozano
Rodriguez (2009)
45. Miners, Harris, Felix, [check]
Murray, Michie, &
Edwards (2012)
46. Motiwalla (2007)
47. Nedungadi & Raman (2012)
48. Newman, Biedrzycki, &
Baum (2012)
49. Nihuka & Voogt (2012)
50. Ohrstrom (2011)
51. Ongun al. (2011)
52. Park (2011) [check]
53. Pathirana, Gersonius, &
Radhakrishnan (2012)
54. Pfaeffli, Maddison,
Whittaker, Stewart, Kerr,
Jiang, Kira, Carter, &
Dalleck (2012)
55. Pocatilu & Boja (2009)
56. Pocatilu & Ciurea (2011)
57. Poon (2008)
58. Rau, Gao, & Wu (2008)
59. Rosman (2008) [check]
60. Ruth & Houghton (2009)
61. Schreiber & Aartun (2011)
62. Schwabe & Goth (2005)
63. Shih, Chu, Hwang, &
Kinshuk (2011)
64. Sims (2008)
65. Stiffler, Stoten, &
Cullen (2011)
66. Triantafillou,
Georgiadou, &
Economides (2008)
67. Uzunboylu, Caws, &
Ercag (2009)
68. Vandelanotte, &
Mummery (2011)
69. Viljoen, du Preez, &
Cook (2005)
70. Vyas, Albright, [check]
Walker, Zachariah,
& Lee (2010)
71. Waard, Abajian, Gallagher,
Elogue, Keskin, Koutropoulos,
& Rodriguez (2011)
72. Wang & Wu (2012)
73. Wright, Dhanarajan,
& Reju (2009)
74. Yen & Lee (2011)
Figure 1. Numbers of MT studies published from 2003 to 2012
Numbers of Mobile
Technology (MT)
Studies
2003 0
2004 2
2005 3
2006 1
2007 3
2008 11
2009 9
2010 12
2011 18
2012 15
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Source Citation (MLA 7th Edition)
Tsai, Chia-Wen, Pei-Di Shen, and Yi-Chun Chiang. "The application of mobile technology in e-learning and online education environments: a review of publications in SSCI-indexed journals from 2003 to 2012." International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 9.4 (2013): 85+. Academic OneFile. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.
URL
http://cmich.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_cmichu&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA385070541&it=r&asid=71ce22e937084e2435a2c7e60a639b60
http://cmich.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_cmichu&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA385070541&it=r&asid=71ce22e937084e2435a2c7e60a639b60
No comments:
Post a Comment