Date Presented 04/06/19
This study examined the lived experiences of lifelong learning with mobile devices for individuals in addiction recovery. Findings include recognizing the valuable impact of education occupations on personal recovery and the positive influences of mobile technology on developing performance patterns related to lifelong learning that support personal recovery goals.
Primary Author and Speaker: Brad Egan
Contributing Authors: Monifa Beverly
PURPOSE: The purpose of this descriptive phenomenological study was to qualitatively explore the lived experiences of adults in addiction recovery who use mobile technology to support their lifelong learning needs. Moreover, this study aimed to explore how education occupations with mobile devices supported self-reflection practices and how individuals leveraged these learning experiences to develop habits and routines that aligned with long term recovery goals. Current literature on mobile lifelong learning has focused primarily on technological features and structures rather than users’ experiences (Arrigo et al., 2013). The description of the lived experiences addressed this gap and provided a deeper understanding of the intertwined nature of lifelong learning and personal recovery (Griffiths & Ryan, 2008).
DESIGN: This study used a descriptive phenomenological approach. Participants were purposefully selected and included adults who self-identified as both an individual in addiction recovery and a lifelong learner who uses mobile technology to support his or her lifelong learning process. A total of six individuals participated in this study.
METHOD: In-depth, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with all consented participants were conducted, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. An interview guide was reviewed by a panel of experts and included questions focused on the lived experiences of mobile lifelong learning in addiction recovery. The interviews lasted between 46 and 59 minutes and yielded 97 single-spaced pages of interview transcripts. To complete data analysis, Moustakas’ (1994) modified van Kaam method of phenomenological analysis was applied to each transcript. Interview data was reviewed through two cycles of coding. In Vivo coding was used as a first cycle method to reduce data to short verbatim codes in the participants’ own words. A second cycle method utilized axial coding to eliminate redundant and overlapping codes, identify dominant codes, explore key properties and structures of mobile lifelong learning in addiction recovery, and classify categories and subcategories. Axial coding approaches also served to reintegrate the data by relating the most phenomenologically relevant themes and concepts.
RESULTS: Specific themes emerged consistently throughout all of the interviews. Two main categories of data consisting of 8 major themes were identified. The categories identified were: descriptions of experiences doing mobile lifelong learning and perceived impact of mobile lifelong learning on personal addiction recovery. The 8 major themes were: (a) it is a daily kind of thing, (b) it just kind of happens, (c) it has a lot to do with mindset, (d) it has to do with exploring different options and ways of doing things, (e) it has to do with asking myself questions (f) it helps me hold myself accountable, (g) it helps me see the changes and believe the progress, and (h) it helps me no longer feel like recovery is a separate part of life.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that the phenomenon of mobile lifelong learning is a critical and positive process that supports personal addiction recovery. In this way, mobile devices were considered to be important recovery tools. The findings also revealed that participation in lifelong learning supported participants in developing habits and daily routines that were helpful in doing the work of recovery (Le Boutillier et al., 2014).
References
Arrigo, M. , Kukulska-Hulme, A. , Arnedillo-Sanchez, I. & Kismihok, G. (2013). Meta- analyses from a collaborative project in mobile lifelong learning. British Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 222-247.
Griffiths, C.A. & Ryan, P. (2008). Recovery and lifelong learning: Interrelated processes. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 13(1), 51-56.
Le Boutillier, C., Leamy, M., Bird, V.J., Davidson, L.,Williams, J., & Slade, M. (2014). What does recovery mean in practice? A qualitative analysis of international recovery-oriented practice guidance. Psychiatric Services, 62, 1470-1476.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
