These new technologies are certainly already changing teaching and learning, but I think that there is no single trend that we can see. People in different countries use technology differently, such as different smart phone apps being popular in different countries.

The idea of student-centered active learning suggests that when education uses technologies that the students already use for social purposes, they are often more receptive and engaged. On the other hand, research shows that technology that the students perceive as unfamiliar and hard to learn will often demotivate them.  

So I think that education needs to follow the students when it comes to the kinds of technologies used. But the other side of this coin is using technologies that do a good job of addressing the educational goals of the course. That means educators need to understand the affordances provided by various technologies which are already familiar to students and create their instructional designs to fulfill the outcomes goals. 

The new technologies are in all reality tools and will be increasingly used to deliver content to students.

How organizations choose to deliver content is subject to a number of variables which includes the availability of resources to both produce and manage the content particularly in the online setting.

Despite the hype about MOOCs, so far most students are opting for conventional courses which are delivered via established educational providers. One important aspect of signing up for a recognised course is that one achieves some form of certification, which more importantly is recognised by employers. I am not sure MOOCs have enough standing as yet to provide individuals with a form of credentialling which assists with employment prospects. I hope others comment on this.

Similar to the other respondents, I would say that 4 of them have already started changing Education (AI & Robotics have a little, but in very niche areas). However, whether they will change Learning is an entirely different question - and one that is much harder to answer.

I was recently on a train and a student opposite me was using lots of mobile technology, yet at the same time complaining that she didn't have the skills to use the PC in her labs sessions - I blogged about it at https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/telteam/2014/12/02/mobile-learning-digital-capabilities-a-view-from-a-train/. The main point from this, in my view, was that the world isn't mobile-ready and may never be in some disciplines and we may be doing students a disservice by putting too much emphasis in that area.

https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/telteam/2014/12/02/mobile-learning-digital-capabilities-a-view-from-a-train/

This is more of a hope, than something I think will happen.  What I hope is that there will be significant conceptual reversal away from education as serving up content, since so much content will be (and already is) readily available.  This helps make way to the deeper education of working collaboratively on problems.  This in turn can put attention on the concept that value arises from talented, experienced, and skilled people working and learning together.  The regime of scarcity shifts from people, problems, and content (none of which are scarce) to the effectiveness of actual learning and its application via better mechanisms to bring these together.

it's based on how much we are using it? and then how we are using it ? all the people using those social media and mobile for their entertainment only it's the big problem for that big technology

Thanks for sharing this interesting article. I agree with Deborah on the subject of MOOCs (massive open online course). I read an article recently (see the link below), which argued that we (especially conventional schools and universities) really need MOOTs (massive open online textbook) rather than MOOCs. In my opinion, the five factors above are all related to MOOTs. A MOOT's components can be stored in the cloud; parts of it can be shared via the popular social media channels. As a result, the MOOT will be suitable for mobile devices. The users and their activities can also be analyzed. Users can also update the content, and the MOOT may even also be adaptive and intelligent by improving and continuing to build up. Anyway, the second link below would be an example of a MOOT. In summary, I think all of these five factors can be a major research question on its own. Looking forward to seeing more answers here!... 

http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/09/we-need-moots-not-moocs.html

http://www.columbia.edu/~rsb2162/bigdataeducation.html

The traditional paradigm was that schools develop curriculum (that is, content, at what ever levels) to meet specific and immediate needs of eventual employment in industry.

The emerging paradigm is that schools design pedagogies of the curriculum to ensure employment for jobs yet to be invented. In other words, the shift is towards not what they learn, but how they do so.

This is reflected obliquely in the world by Levy and Murnane (see Fig 1 of link and pdf file) in which there is a downward demand for skills which are routine. Students which such outcomes are usually taught in the traditional instructivist teacher-centric way.On the other hand, the skill sets where employers are demanding are the experts (analytical non-routine, complex, expertise). What is insightful is not what content is taught but how, and how students are learning towards lifelong learning.

Today, we read of rising undergraduate unemployment. Some attribute this to structural changes in the economies, with slow growth and hence low demand. When asked, employers are saying that they are looking for graduates, but they lack the skills needed.

So, to get to my point, what will affect education is not so much the technologies, but how we train our students to think, analyse and be lifelong learners with abilities to look for information, gain insight, make sense and communicate or apply that effectively. It will be such soft skills that they develop as outcomes of learning that will make education useful, relevant and purposeful. This is central, with technologies in the peripheral, supporting and enabling students to become thinkers and master users of what technology can empower them.

http://dupress.com/articles/the-future-of-the-federal-workforce/

http://d2mtr37y39tpbu.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/DUP118_GovCloud.pdf

While I follow the Boyer characterization of higher educators, I still tend to generally conceive of my roles as educator, researcher, and other (primarily service).  The answer to your question is a bit different for each of these roles. 

Education: Thirty years ago, none of my students brought a cell phone, tablet or portable computer to class.  Now it is the norm.  It enables the students (and I) to double check information by referring to Internet sources. Most of the course support is now online. My students take tests on computers, I use automatic grading AI to speed up my task and a social network so that my graders and I can reach consensus on grading, course support is done on a website, students turn in assignments online, etc. It is very frustrating when a tool (such as Bb) is not accessible across technologies.

Research: Big data analytic tools are becoming more common.  This trend started with meta analysis, but has continued to evolve. Most journals now have an online submission process, articles are accessible online, and so on. Clearly the existence of research gate further suggests that social networks matter.  In many ways, research adapts to new technology faster than teaching. There are more research journals documenting this evolution than there are teaching journals. 

Service: This seems to be are area adapting most slowly to emerging technologies.. though this may just be my perspective. 

Dear,

Please go through this and analyze the impact of social media usage among university students.

best,

thusi

https://globaljournals.org/GJCST_Volume14/5-Influence-of-Facebook-in-Academic.pdf

Here is our paper about the influence that social media have on learning and education

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2015.1036273?src=recsys#.Vaiw-3gia6Q.