Week 8 Response

I love the idea of place-based mobile learning apps as presented by Zimmerman (2014) in theory. It’s a very natural use of new technologies, and a location-based approach is a logical but powerful way of helping users connect with learning in informal settings. Unfortunately, the actual images (particularly Figures 1 & 2) of the apps she describes are uninspiring. This is a sticking point that I often return to; as ed tech designers, we can make tools that are both functional and theoretically compelling, but if they don’t bring joy to the user, they won’t get used.

Some might argue that the aesthetic component of the design is less important during the research process, but I very much disagree. For example, Zimmerman cites the study of Tan et al, who sought “to encourage peers to communicate and to develop artifacts to support learning.” It seems that the Tan experiment yielded significant results, but how might that experience—and ultimately, the data—have changed if the user interface looked less dated? Or if  instead of just including video and photo capabilities, Tan et al had designed the platform to leverage a tool with which peers are already communicating by mimicking the features of Snapchat?