STUDENTS READINESS AND MOTIVATION TO USE MOBILE PHONE FOR LEARNING ENGLISH AT HIGHER LEARNING INSTITUTION

Meizareena Mizad¹⁺ --- Zailin Shah Yusoff² --- Zainal Abidin Sayadi³ --- Azmi Abdul Latif³ --- Safra Liyana Sukiman⁵

^1,2,3,4,5 Department of English Language and Linguistics, Centre for Language Studies, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn, Malaysia

Keywords:Mobile learning Higher learning institution Readiness Motivation.

ARTICLE HISTORY: Received:31 July 2018 Revised:10 September 2018 Accepted:12 October 2018 Published:9 November 2018.

Contribution/ Originality:The paper' s primary contribution is finding that the respondents were prepared for the integration of m-learning in UTHM and were motivated to participate in m-learning for English course in the university. Thus, more studies on m-learning perception and motivation should be piloted to other universities’ staff and educators in Malaysia.

1. INTRODUCTION

The term technology is familiar now in the field of education and the use of mobile technology in learning has started to attract the interest from educators. More significantly, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) opens more ways of learning, for instance, Web 2.0 applications may trigger some 21st century skills namely critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration and communication, global awareness and information literacy (Rahamat et al., 2017 ). Moreover, the rapid growth on ICT have reshaped our live today, and nowadays' university students have an immense use of mobile phones, iPads and other portable devices. All these smart phones and other portable devices are equipped or ready for social media applications like Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, YouTube, WhatsApp, Telegram, and Instagram, which are part of what is known as Social Web 2.0, best characterized by the notions of social interaction, content sharing, and collective intelligence (Alabdulkareem, 2015 ). Thus, the use of appropriate materials and tools in the teaching and learning is definitely helpful in making the process more meaningful (Rahamat et al., 2017 ).

It is undeniable that the tertiary students nowadays are acquainted with technologies and quite a number of surveys have been conducted by various researchers to identify the use of mobile technologies among university students. Nowadays, students own at least a mobile phone or other mobile devices such as an MP3 player, a laptop or a game station, and they are surrounded with technological gadgets which keep on changing at a very fast rate (Rahamat et al., 2017 ). However, most of the time, these devices are mainly used for socializing or entertainment (Ally, 2013 ). In 2014, there was a survey conducted by Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and it was found that the main users of the mobile phone are the young adults from the age group of 20-24 with 18.8% users while the second largest group was 25–29 years old which accounted for 16.3%. In terms of hand phone ownership in 2014, 66.8% of users carry only one hand phone 28.9% of users carry two, 4.3% users use three hand phones while 0.8% require four or more. With the growing number of mobile phone owners among the young adults, it is essential for the educators to look into the possibility of integrating m-learning into the university academic programmes. In relation to this, are the students ready to explore the new path of using these mobile technologies for learning? Thus the study aims to explore UTHM students’ readiness and motivation towards using mobile technologies for learning English in the university.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Mobile Phones in M-Learning

Mobile learning or m-Learning is commonly associated with the use of mobile technology especially the mobile phone (Naismith et al., 2004 ; Cavus et al., 2008 ; Rahamat et al., 2017 ). Traxler (2005 ) defines m-learning as ‘any educational provision where the sole or dominant technologies are handheld or palmtop devices’. Furthermore, m-Learning is regarded as wireless learning, a subset of e-Learning which focuses more on using personal computers such as desktop computers with Internet access to learn (Rahamat et al., 2017). The letter “m-”, which refers to “mobile” in m-learning, is only a mode of learning, and a mobile phone or tablet PC is only a tool to enhance the learning process (Hussin et al., 2012 ).

Based on the survey by Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) in 2014 it was reported that the main users of the mobile phones were those ranging in age of 20 to 29 years old. So, it is clear that mobile phones among other mobile devices are the most popular types of technology that are commonly owned and widely used by students. In addition to this, MCMC also reported that the survey aims to explore the importance of hand phone in the daily life of Malaysians. Hand phones are very important in 44.8% claimed that hand phones are very important in consumers’ day-to-day lives whereas 51.5% of them said hand phones are important and 3.7 percent said hand phones are not important in their daily life. With regards to m-learning and Malaysia, as reported by The Ambient Insight Comprehensive Report in 2011 which is globally, for the duration of 2010-2015, Malaysia is ranked the 9th highest Mobile Learning Five-year Growth Rates (Hussin et al., 2012 ).

Despite this, m-learning is still in its infancy as the focus in most projects or studies are still lingering on the idea of establishing foundation, theory, design, type of m-learning and activities supported by mobile technologies (Pollara and Broussard, 2011 ; Hussin et al., 2012 ). It was just after almost a decade since mobile technology was first introduced globally in the area of English language learning, but the pedagogical effects of integrating the m-learning in ESL courses especially in Malaysia is not well-known by the educators in Malaysian higher learning institutes (HLIs). According to Hussin et al. (2012 ) learning is a process whereby a learner or a student is expected to achieve an intended learning outcome within a given time frame and the learning outcome has to be measured in order to ensure that the learning has taken place. Educators play role as facilitators in assisting the students to learn and equipped with the learning resources such as books, lecture notes, learning materials, and communication tools, the teaching and learning process will become meaningful and dynamic for the educator and students to learn. Hussin et al. (2012 ) further added that the major focus of m-learning is the learning itself rather than the technology represented by the mobile phones. Having a mobile phone for m-learning does not necessarily guarantee that learning will take place but how the learning process is conducted will determine the effectiveness of learning. Tan and Liu (2004 ) mentioned that with the help of wireless technology and mobile devices, a ubiquitous learning environment can easily be constructed to support the goals of learning anywhere, anytime, and any form, which are not possible to achieve in conventional classroom learning. It was also supported by Ally (2013 ) that mobile and emerging technologies will allow seamless access to information and learning materials to the citizens of the world where “the learning space is moving away from the classroom at a specific time to anyplace”.

With the presence of mobile devices like smart phones, iPAD or tablets, the learning in a mobile environment will become more evocative and fascinating. These technologies have the communication facilities as well as computing facilities that enable users to communicate with other people, create documents, read data files, and access the Internet in a more practical way. By using mobile phone or smart phone, users can send or receive emails, instant messages in text forms or multimedia formats, lecture notes, and audio and video files in 3G/4G formats (Hussin et al., 2012 ). The learning process is not limited to conventional classroom learning as the users can simply search the information in the Internet and thus making the knowledge they acquired become more meaningful for them.

2.2. Teaching Language via Mobile Learning

Many researchers have begun to investigate language learning using various mobile devices such as mobile phones (Wong et al., 2010 ; Kim et al., 2013 ) pocket PCs (Wong and Looi, 2010 ) and Apple iPhones (Kim et al., 2013 ). Mobile phones are increasingly used for improving knowledge of vocabulary (Stockwell, 2010 ; Zhang et al., 2011 ; Kim et al., 2013 ) grammar, listening, and speaking (Kim et al., 2013 ) in both formal and informal settings (Demouy and Kukulska-Hulme, 2010 ; Kim et al., 2013 ). A study that proposed an m-learning model indicated that mobile technologies could help learners understand the lesson and it can also be used to enhance learners' motivation (Ciampa, 2014 ; Su and Cheng, 2015 ). Furthermore, much research has hypothesised that the mobile device acts as a mobile guide to assist the students to improve their science and geographical knowledge as well as their motivation to engage in learning activities (Zhang et al., 2011 ; Chiang et al., 2014 ; Su and Cheng, 2015 ).

In Higher Education there is a growing number of universities that integrate mobile phones or smartphones in everyday activities, whether they are used as a communication tool, a content delivering tool or a basis for collaborative learning activities (Chen and Denoyelles, 2013 ). According to Kim et al. (2013 ) the use of mobile technologies to support content with social communication features (e.g., the ability to review content and then leave comments) can empower students to participate in more collaborative learning environments. The use of mobile technologies requires that students exhibit digital literacy skills such as being able to access, manage, and evaluate digital resources. By doing so, students explore new experience in the mobile environment and thus the learning process will be meaningful to them. Moreover, the use of mobile learning among university students is seen as an alternative to increase the students’ interest and motivation in learning a particular course with regards to learn English in the university.

It is reported that the mobile learning could be adapted to four types of learning by the instructors which are Behaviorism, Constructivism, Informal Learning and Collaborative Learning (Hussin et al., 2012 ). Hussin et al. (2012 ) emphasized that there is a developing trend in information technologies that provide interactive mechanism among the learners, instructors and the learning materials. In order for an effective learning to take place, the learner or the student decides to engage himself actively and cognitively in the learning activities. However, teachers or instructors will be the guides to help them throughout the learning process.

2.3. Readiness and Motivation towards M-Learning

Numerous studies were conducted to determine on the students’ readiness towards mobile learning as readiness is seen as an important variable in this research field. Readiness takes account of students’ capability to adapt to “…technological challenges, collaborative training and synchronous as well as asynchronous self-paced training” (Rahamat et al., 2017 ). Based on a study piloted by Tagoe and Abakah (2014 ) the results showed positive feedback on the students’ m-learning readiness. About 73.1% of students own a mobile phones and keen to adopt m-learning in teaching and learning in their university distance education programme. A study conducted by Rahamat et al. (2017 ) stated that the students’ have readiness to use the mobile phone as a learning tool and 73.2% agreed that they would use the learning package designed on a mobile medium. This is further investigated by Hernando et al. (2014 ) who emphasized on the potential of using mobile learning and QR codes to enhance face-to-face communication in a virtual learning classroom. From the results, “the potential of mobile learning as an emergent educational tool is seen as capable of facilitating and fostering the teaching-learning process” (Ally and Prieto-Blázquez, 2014 ; Hernando et al., 2014 ).

In order to implement m-learning in higher institution, the students or learners need to be motivated and feel the excitement to utilise the mobile phones for educational purpose. Motivation refers to the fun or pleasure derived from using a technology. This is further discussed in another study who claimed that mobile phones had successfully improved the teaching and learning process and the mobile-learning activities were the “effective ways to motivate students and to foster interaction” (Nordin et al., 2010 ; Hussin et al., 2012 ). The findings obtained by Soleimani et al. (2014 ) on the students’ perception of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) have shown their positive attitudes towards MALL with highest scores. “This is an indication of the positive perception of the role of MALL in enhancing learners’ English through providing them with the opportunity to access various useful materials, to carry out different activities in English, and to communicate and interact with their friends and lecturers using English” (Soleimani et al., 2014). A study led by Barreh and Abas (2015 ) claimed that 43.15% agreed m-learning will motivate the learners and 45.06% attracted their interest in learning. It was assumed that the learners become motivated due to the sense of belonging as learners have minimal face-to-face interaction with their peers and tutors. A large percentage (49.98%) of the learners felt that m-learning would make learning even more flexible in education classroom. Moreover, younger students are more likely to achieve improvements in motivation when a shift is made from traditional instructions to cooperative learning activities (Su and Cheng, 2015 ).

Previous studies have also found that students have positive view and interest regarding m-learning (Taleb and Sohrabi, 2012 ). They believed that m-learning could be beneficial for their learning processes. Besides, the learners who used mobile technology had more motivation for learning than others (Taleb and Sohrabi, 2012 ). This is further supported by another study conducted using Mobile System Analysis and Design (MOSAD) to explore the satisfaction level towards mobile learning. Based on the results, the MOSAD application usability level was good and it could be a useful revision tool for the students of higher education (Hashim et al., 2011 ; Hussin et al., 2012 ). A study conducted by Choon Keong et al. (2013 ) indicated that the learners showed positive reaction on their readiness for mobile learning, and thus suggested that mobile learning in the university is recommended as a worthy investment. Therefore, based on the aforementioned studies, the students’ readiness, perceptions and motivation towards mobile learning have shown positive results in the teaching and learning process.

3. METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted using an online survey starting from November to December 2017. The questionnaire consists of five sections; Section A: Personal details; Section B: Mobile phone facilities; Section C: Skills and experience; Section D: Readiness on mobile learning and Section E: Motivation on mobile learning. The sample of questionnaire was adopted and adapted from a research survey conducted by Hussin et al. (2012 ). Participants were the first year undergraduate students who were randomly selected and taking English courses for this Semester 1, (2017/2018) in Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM). A total of one hundred and forty-eight students participated and answered the online questionnaire. The objective of this study is to explore the readiness and motivation of students in mobile learning in higher education which is UTHM in particular.

4. FINDINGS

4.1. Demographic Information

Out of the 148 respondents, 58% of them were female students and 42% were male students. For the ethnic group, majority of the respondents were Bumiputera (87%), Chinese (9%), followed by Indian (2%) and Others (Bumiputera Sabah, Iban) 2%. As for the age group, most of the respondents were in the range of 21-24 years old (76%), 21% of them were in the range of 17 to 20 years old and the rest were above 25 years old (3%) as in Figure 1.

Figure-1. Respondents’ Age

Source: Mizad (2018 )

Table-1. Respondents’ mobile phone facilities

 Source: Mizad (2018 )

4.2. Basic Readiness

The study focuses on the students’ readiness towards m-learning by considering at the mobile facilities they had. Based on Table 1, 99% of the respondents have a mobile phone, 88% with 3G service and 89% with 4G service. The 3G/4G format is useful for lecture notes and information seeking when doing a task, 95% have MMS service to read multimedia files, and 98% of them have Internet access via their mobile phone which was essential in implementing  m-learning in academic programme. Apart from that, positive responses were shown by the respondents in which their mobile phones can be used to read documents such as word, PDF, power point as well as to open audio, video and graphic files using a memory card which were crucial for the learners when completing a particular task/assignment through online applications given by the lecturer. Thus, based on the findings, it is proven that the majority of the respondents have already had the basic requirements and have readiness to participate themselves in the mobile learning environment.

4.3. Skills Readiness

In order to utilise the m-learning for academic programme in the university, the students need to have basic skills and experiences with the mobile technologies. Table 2 below displays the significant findings on the respondents’ skills readiness.

Table-2. Respondents’ skills and experiences

 Source: Mizad (2018 )

These remarkable percentages obtained from the findings indicated that the respondents are accustomed with the activities as mentioned in Table 2 above. It is not impossible for the m-learning to take place as the respondents obtained high scores for skills and experiences with mobile phone. The respondents are familiar with the freeware instant messaging like WhatsApp or Telegram with the highest percentage of 99%. Using mobile phone to send emails, read online news and convert files into 3G/4G format scored the second highest which is 98% to show that the respondents are ready for m-learning. As a matter of fact, they are feeling contented and ready to engage themselves in m-learning environment.

4.4. Psychological Readiness

In order for m-learning to be well-accepted by the respondents it is essential to determine their feedback on their understanding of m-learning both physically and emotionally. Table 3 below displays their psychological readiness for m-learning. Based on the findings, the respondents portrayed their positive perception on m-learning with high percentages as recorded for Statement 1, 2 and 5. Majority of the respondents (94%) agreed that they know what m-learning is all about, 92% wanted to know more about m-learning, 78% wanted to be involved in m-learning and 96% agreed that m-learning is good for working adults who are pursuing their higher education. 78% disagreed to Statement 3 that they did not know how to use 3G/4G facility which means they are familiar with the activities using the mobile phone.

Moreover, most of the respondents showed positive responses to Statements 14-19 on their readiness on m-learning. 89% agreed that m-learning will save their learning time and 97% agreed m-learning is an alternative to web based learning, 82% agreed that they need to learn how to use mobile phone for m-learning, 93% were looking forward to engage in m-learning, 77% would upgrade mobile phone if m-learning is going to be implemented in their course. In addition, they agreed that m-learning is an alternative to conventional learning (97%) but somehow they partially (50%) agreed with Statement 4 “I prefer conventional (traditional) learning than mobile learning”.

Even half of the respondents preferred conventional learning to m-learning however, when looking into the activities pertaining to m-learning, it was depicted that the percentages were high as in Statement 9 and 13. 83% of them would like the lecturer to integrate mobile learning in their class in addition to face-to-face meetings in class while 78% would like the lecturer to integrate m-learning in their class besides online forum in their course. Thus, they are ready to engage themselves in m-learning environment despite the classroom meetings with the lecturers.

Table-3. Respondents’ readiness on m-learning

 Source: Mizad (2018 )

With regards to the respondents’ feedback on the future class activities on m-learning, it seems like they welcomed m-learning as in Statement 7, where 75% disagreed that m-learning will make their life difficult. In fact, they are aware that m-learning is advantageous to them. Likewise, their feedback on readiness for m-learning if the university implements m-learning is moderate with 51% agreed their university is not ready for m-learning using mobile phone facility and 90% of them agreed that lecturers are already integrating mobile learning in their teaching. If the lecturers and students could engage themselves with activities on m-learning then, the teaching and learning process via mobile phone environment would be a success.

4.5. Budget Readiness

The use of mobile phone for learning activities will involve some cost to the students. So, in terms of budget readiness, the respondents somehow were uncertain as when it comes to money matters they might experience financial constraints. It is shown in Statement 6 that 51% agreed to pay extra money for m-learning while 49% disagreed to that statement. Hence, in Statement 10, they were unsure about the money they would spend on m-learning environment. 56% agreed they were afraid to spend more money on my mobile phone bill because of m-learning while 44% disagreed to that statement.

Considering the respondents’ readiness to m-learning in the future, they showed moderate response as in Statement 11, 53% agreed they are ready for m-learning after two years while 47% disagreed. This might be due to the cost that they have to bear paying the phone bills and Internet line. Also, as first year university students, they are staying off campus where the Wi-Fi connection in their respective colleges is not strong enough to support the Internet access. Hence, their perceptions on m-learning readiness might be influenced by the budget constraints. In contrast to Statement 8, 68% of them disagreed they are not ready if the university is implementing the m-learning now and 32% agreed. All in all, it shows that the students are unsure they are ready to for m-learning but obviously they welcomed m-learning environment in the university.

4.6. Motivation on M-Learning

For the students to be committed to m-learning engagement, the study also explores on their motivation to use mobile phone in language learning. Apparently, they showed positive responses on their m-learning motivation as shown in Table 4 below.

Table-4. Respondents’ motivation on m-learning

Source: Mizad (2018 )

Based on the results, 94% of the respondents agreed that mobile learning courses are interesting. When asked about the use of mobile phone for language learning as in Statement 2 and 3, both percentages were 95% in which they agreed that learning English through mobile phone is interesting, fun and entertaining. They agreed to Statement 4-6, that it is interesting to answer questions on English course using mobile phone (94%), to do assignments/tasks using online platform (Padlet, Edmodo, etc) via mobile phone (90%) and to take part in m-learning for learning English course (91%). Furthermore, they responded positively to Statement 8-12 where the percentages obtained for feeling motivated on m-learning were over 80% as stated below:

• Learning English using mobile phone in the class is always motivating to me.
• Learning English through mobile phone attracts me more than conventional learning.
• I become motivated to use mobile phone for learning English course.
• I become motivated when the lecturer integrates mobile learning in my English class.
• I feel motivated to learn English when the lecturer asks me to do the tasks/assignments online using mobile phone.

Besides, 92% of them agreed that the lecturer’s instructions on mobile learning for English course have attracted their attention. As a whole, the students are familiar with communication activities and are motivated for learning English via mobile phone.

5. DISCUSSION

With all the findings obtained from the survey, it is proven that students of UTHM who participated in this study are highly familiar with communication activities via mobile phone. Hence, even it was reported that half of the respondents were not ready for m-learning at the moment of time however, they would be ready to adopt m-learning after two years. Yet, we can claim that the respondents welcome the implementation of m-learning in education if not now but in future. Based on the findings, it is shown that the respondents are not certain to engage themselves in m-learning. Still, they perceived that it is significant to have the integration of blended learning through face-to-face interaction, online learning and m-learning should be maintained in the classroom settings.

Apart from that, this small scale study which focuses on students’ readiness and motivation is rather limited and somehow do not represent the whole population towards m-learning readiness. Hussin et al. (2012 ) emphasizes that in any research on readiness, it is rather incomplete to look into one group of respondents that is the student group. Other important groups such as administrators and educators or teachers, whose responses and feedback need to be considered too. As the integration of m-learning in the university will involve many parties, so we would encourage more studies to be done on other groups too as each group is interrelated with each other. Administrators have to be ready with a strong support system which provides facilities and Wi-Fi connection, ICT training for educators or lecturers, intensive modules/lesson plans for academic programmes and yearly budget for m-learning engagement in order to promote a better achievement in the implementation of m-learning at the universities. As a whole, based on this study, the UTHM students might seem to be ready for m-learning mode but might not with the administrators and teachers as more research have to be conducted.

Hence, in response to the students’ motivation to use mobile phone for language learning, the results indicated that these respondents are ready to use the mobile phones for learning English. Moreover, the findings are also beneficial for the educators or teachers in higher education to fully utilise the m-learning in the classroom as the students are familiar with the mobile learning activities. Rahamat et al. (2017 ) stresses that “the success of producing students as aimed at in the National Philosophy of Education relies on teachers’ pedagogical approach which would make lessons really engaging and meaningful”. This is supported by Hussin et al. (2012 ) where “educators too should be ready in terms of pedagogical techniques which offer innovative but appropriate way of using the mobile phone in their teaching for m-learning mode”. Since the data from this research shows that students have positive responses on readiness and motivation towards using mobile phone for learning English in particular, educators or teachers should take this opportunity to equip themselves with various teaching techniques that could trigger the students’ thinking, develop their communication skills and also promote collaborative as well as lifelong learning. In brief, the vast development of latest technologies in this era should be fully utilised for teaching and learning purposes that would benefit educators and learners in particular and the whole community as a whole.

6. CONCLUSION

The research has presented the verdicts on the students’ readiness and motivation to use mobile phone for learning English at Higher Learning Institution. Based on the survey, three aspects on readiness namely skills, psychological and budget were analysed and m-learning motivation were investigated. All in all, the respondents welcomed the integration of m-learning in the university and were motivated to take part in m-learning engagement for English course because they had experiences with communication activities using mobile phone. However, when it comes to budget, they were uncertain about the implementation of m-learning. Thus, more studies should be conducted on a bigger sample study in which the administrators and the educators from Malaysian higher learning institutes will have to participate for a greater perception, readiness and motivation on m-learning.

REFERENCES

Alabdulkareem, S.A., 2015. Exploring the use and the impacts of social media on teaching and learning science in Saudi. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182: 213-224. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.758.

Ally, M., 2013. Mobile learning: From research to practice to impact education. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(2).

Ally, M. and J. Prieto-Blázquez, 2014. What is the future of mobile learning in education? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 11(1): 142-151.

Barreh, K.A. and Z.W. Abas, 2015. A framework for mobile learning for enhancing learning in higher education. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3): 1-9.

Cavus, N., H. Bicen and U. Akçil, 2008. The opinions of information technology students on using mobile learning. Paper Presented at International Conferences on Educational Sciences, Eastern Mediterranean University, 23-25 June 2008, Magosa, North Cyprus.

Chen, B. and A. Denoyelles, 2013. Exploring students’ mobile learning practices in higher education. Educause Review, 7.

Chiang, T.H.-C., S.J. Yang and G.-J. Hwang, 2014. An augmented reality-based mobile learning system to improve students' learning achievements and motivations in natural science inquiry activities. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4): 352-365.

Choon Keong, T., L. Kean Wah and N. Shi Ing, 2013. Readiness for mobile learning at a public university in East Malaysia.

Ciampa, K., 2014. Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1): 82-96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12036.

Demouy, V. and A. Kukulska-Hulme, 2010. On the spot: Using mobile devices for listening and speaking practice on a french language programme. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 25(3): 217-232. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2010.511955.

Hashim, A.S., W.F.W. Ahmad and R. Ahmad, 2011. Mobile learning course content application as a revision tool: The effectiveness and usability. In: Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Robotics (ICPAIR), 2011 International Conference on. IEEE: pp: 184-187.

Hernando, M.M., C.G. Arévalo, M.G. Catasús and C.Z. Mon, 2014. Mobile learning: A collaborative experience using qr codes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 11(1): 175-191.

Hussin, S., M.R. Manap, Z. Amir and P. Krish, 2012. Mobile learning readiness among Malaysian students at higher learning institutes. Asian Social Science, 8(12): 276. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n12p276.

Kim, D., D. Rueckert, D.-J. Kim and D. Seo, 2013. Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3): 52-73.

Mizad, M., 2018. Survey on students' readiness and motivation on m-learning (Responses). Available from https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1H2GbKCD3Do7MmjKyV_eHYbivnAZDpTFYCq98h-ys3JY/edit?usp=sharing.

Naismith, L., P. Lonsdale, G. Vavoula and M. Sharples, 2004. Teaching and learning with mobile technologies-case studies. Available from http://www.futurelab.org.uk .

Nordin, M., M.A. Embi, R.M. Yasin, S. Rahman and M.M. Yunus, 2010. The mobile learning readiness of the post-graduate students. In: EABR & ETLC Conference and Proceedings.

Pollara, P. and K.K. Broussard, 2011. Student perceptions of mobile learning: A review of current research. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. pp: 1643-1650.

Rahamat, R.B., P.M. Shah, R.B. Din and J.B.A. Aziz, 2017. Students’readiness and perceptions towards using mobile technologies for learning the English language literature component. The English Teacher: 16.

Soleimani, E., K. Ismail and R. Mustaffa, 2014. The acceptance of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) among post graduate ESL students in UKM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118: 457-462. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.062.

Stockwell, G., 2010. Using mobile phones for vocabulary activities&58; examining the effect of platform. Language Learning and Technology, 14(2): 95-110.

Su, C.H. and C.H. Cheng, 2015. A mobile gamification learning system for improving the learning motivation and achievements. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(3): 268-286. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12088.

Tagoe, M.A. and E. Abakah, 2014. Determining distance education students' readiness for mobile learning at University of Ghana using the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 10(1): 91-106.

Taleb, Z. and A. Sohrabi, 2012. Learning on the move: The use of mobile technology to support learning for university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69: 1102-1109. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.038.

Tan, T.H. and T.Y. Liu, 2004. The mobile-based interactive learning environment (Mobile) and a case study for assisting elementary school English learning. In Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004. Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on. IEEE. pp: 530-534.

Traxler, J., 2005. Defining mobile learning. In IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning. pp: 261-266.

Wong, L.H., C.K. Chin, C.L. Tan, M. Liu and C. Gong, 2010. Students' meaning making in a mobile assisted Chinese idiom learning environment. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. International Society of the Learning Sciences, 1: 349-356.

Wong, L.H. and C.K. Looi, 2010. Vocabulary learning by mobile-assisted authentic content creation and social meaning-making: Two case studies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5): 421-433. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00357.x.

Zhang, H., W. Song and J. Burston, 2011. Reexamining the effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phones. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3): 203-214.