Mobile Learning in a Rural Medical School: Feasibility and Educational Benefits in Campus and Clinical Settings

Students in a new medical school were provided with laptops. This study explored the feasibility and educational benefits of mobile learning for two cohorts of students learning in two settings—university campus (first-year students) and rural clinical placements (second-year students). Evaluation involved questionnaires, focus groups (faculty and students), and document analysis. Descriptive statistics were computed. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Response rates for questionnaires exceeded 84%. Compared with second-year students, significantly more first-year students (60%) took their laptops to campus daily () and used their laptops for more hours each day (). All students used laptops most frequently to access the internet (85% and 97%) and applications (Microsoft Word (80% and 61%) and Microsoft PowerPoint (80% and 63%)). Focus groups with students revealed appreciation for the laptops but frustration with the initial software image. Focus groups with faculty identified enthusiasm for mobile learning but acknowledged its limitations. Physical infrastructure and information technology support influenced mobile learning. Document analysis revealed significant costs and issues with maintenance. If adequately resourced, mobile learning through university-issued laptops would be feasible and have educational benefits, including equitable access to learning resources, when and where they are needed. However, barriers remain for full implementation.

[1]  Debra Nestel,et al.  Evaluation of mobile learning: Students' experiences in a new rural-based medical school , 2010, BMC medical education.

[2]  Kevin Kavanaugh,et al.  A randomized trial comparing digital and live lecture formats [ISRCTN40455708 , 2004, BMC medical education.

[3]  S. Geddes,et al.  Mobile learning in the 21st century: benefit for learners , 2004 .

[4]  Gary W. Matkin Distance education: its concepts and constructs. , 2007, Journal of veterinary medical education.

[5]  Leonard Webster,et al.  Interlearn - A tool for collaborative learning , 2002, ASCILITE.

[6]  Keats Garman Eastside, Westside... An Exercise in Applying Document Analysis Techniques in Educational Evaluation. Research on Evaluation Program Paper and Report Series. No. 78. Interim Draft. , 1982 .

[7]  Renato Baptista,et al.  Computer aided learning versus standard lecture for undergraduate education in urology. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[8]  Lioba Howatson-Jones Rgn Designing web-based education courses for nurses , 2004 .

[9]  M. Sims,et al.  Videoconferencing in a veterinary curriculum. , 2007, Journal of Veterinary Medical Education.

[10]  James B McGee,et al.  What medical educators need to know about “Web 2.0” , 2008, Medical teacher.

[11]  R. Leipzig,et al.  The impact of E-learning in medical education. , 2006, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[12]  J. Ivey Focus groups. , 2011, Pediatric nursing.

[13]  J. Sargeant Medical education for rural areas: opportunities and challenges for information and communications technologies. , 2005, Journal of postgraduate medicine.

[14]  John Traxler,et al.  Defining mobile learning , 2005 .

[15]  H. Brenton,et al.  Handheld computers in veterinary medical education: a view from human medical education. , 2005, Journal of veterinary medical education.

[16]  David M Fleiszer,et al.  New Directions in Medical e-Curricula and the Use of Digital Repositories , 2004, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[17]  R. Barbour Making sense of focus groups , 2005, Medical education.

[18]  D. Mertens Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods , 1997 .

[19]  J. Kitzinger The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants , 1994 .

[20]  G. Yamey The professor of “telepreventive medicine” , 2004, British medical journal.

[21]  T. Snijders Statistical Models for Social Networks , 2011 .

[22]  Stephen Doheny-Farina,et al.  Medical Student Evaluations of Lectures Attended in Person or From Rural Sites via Interactive Videoconferencing , 2004, Teaching and learning in medicine.

[23]  R. Belue,et al.  Objective assessment of videoconferenced lectures in a surgical clerkship. , 2005, American journal of surgery.

[24]  M. Kirshbaum Promoting physical exercise in breast cancer care. , 2005, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).