- Email: [email protected]
Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning
Accepted Manuscript Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning Shelley Rap, Ron Blonder PII:
S0360-1315(17)30150-1
DOI:
10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.014
Reference:
CAE 3205
To appear in:
Computers & Education
Received Date: 30 November 2016 Revised Date:
18 June 2017
Accepted Date: 20 June 2017
Please cite this article as: Rap S. & Blonder R., Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning, Computers & Education (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.014. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning Shelley Rap & Ron Blonder Weizmann Institute of Science Rehovot 7610001 Israel +972-8-934-2586
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
[email protected] +972-8-934-2451
RI PT
[email protected]
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning
RI PT
Abstract
Facebook is the most commonly used Social Network Site (SNS) in the world. In this paper we explore students' attitudes towards the use of SNSs as a platform for
SC
learning chemistry and provide recommendations based on students' preferences
regarding what should be done in the Facebook groups and what the teachers should
M AN U
not do (Thou shall nots) in an educational Facebook group with their students. We evaluated the extent to which students use SNSs in general and their attitudes toward the presence of a medium for learning chemistry in their SNS in particular. We found that the active Facebook groups for learning chemistry are perceived overall as a
TE D
contributing experience for students' learning, and there was a positive correlation between the chemistry learning activity in the groups and the attitudes of students toward using Facebook groups for learning chemistry. Both parameters have
AC C
EP
gradually increased over the two-year study period.
Keywords: SNS, Facebook, Students' attitudes, Chemistry education, High school.
1. Introduction
Currently, Facebook is the most commonly used Social Network Site (SNS) in the world. According to Facebook reports, and as of December 2015, the number of active users using Facebook worldwide was 1.59 billion people per month. In Israel, the number of active Facebook users is estimated to be 4.4 million (Nekuda, 2015).
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT However, its use for academic and learning purposes is still rather limited. According to Hew (2011), Facebook has been mainly used for administrative purposes (e.g., for uploading schedules and class tasks) rather than for pedagogical purposes. This use is also referred to in the literature as Learning Management Systems (LMS) (Kurtz,
RI PT
2011). Several studies have examined the possibility of utilizing Facebook's network for learning purposes (e.g., Schroeder & Greenbowe, 2009; Kurtz, 2011; Meishar-Tal, Kurtz, and Pitresa, 2012; Manca & Ranierit, 2013). Usually, these studies found that
SC
Facebook groups have potential to be used as LMS. Nevertheless, other studies have indicated that students perceive Facebook as a suitable environment for learning
M AN U
purposes as well (e.g., Qureshi, Raza & Whitty, 2015; Erdem & Kibar, 2014). While acknowledging the importance of the pedagogical content, teachers' ability, and the applicability of the technology for teaching purposes (Authors, 2015), we feel that it is also important to explore students' views regarding the use of SNSs for educational
TE D
purposes. Identifying and responding to students' voices may facilitate reducing the alienation that some students feel regarding their schooling (Jenkins, 2006). The purpose of this research is to examine whether and how the Facebook
EP
environment can be used for learning chemistry by evaluating students' attitudes
AC C
toward the use of Facebook as a learning platform. We posed two research questions: 1) What are students' needs and expectations from the Chemistry Learning Facebook Groups (CLFG)?
2) What are students' attitudes toward using Facebook for chemistry learning?
In particular to what extent did they perceive that the CLFG contributed to their chemistry learning?
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The research described in this paper contributes to the body of knowledge about Facebook, as an example of a SNS and its use for learning purposes, by looking at this topic from the students' point of view. The innovation of the study is its focus on students' needs from an online learning environment. In addition, this research
students toward using SNSs for teaching purposes.
RI PT
explores the benefits of online learning to promoting more positive attitutdes of
Before we present our study regarding students' perception of Facebook teaching
2. Theoretical Background
M AN U
SC
groups, we will first describe the literature in this area.
Nowadays internet and social media applications play an important role in education (e.g. Guzmán-Simón, García-Jiménez, & López-Cobo, 2017). Various studies have
TE D
explored students' attitudes regarding the integration of SNS in a learning context. Prescott, Wilson, and Becket (2013) found that UK university students perceive SNSs, in particular, Facebook, as more of a social tool, and that the majority of them
EP
do not want Facebook to be used for formal learning. The explanation provided by the
AC C
authors is that the fear of being unprofessional on Facebook deters students from using the SNS for formal learning purposes. However, using Facebook for informal learning (e.g., peer support) is recommended by the authors (Prescott, Wilson, and Becket, 2013). Similarly, Madge, Meek, Wellens, and Hooley (2009) found that preregistered students in a British university thought Facebook should be used mostly for social reasons (e.g., making new friends at the university), and not for formal teaching, although it was sometimes used for that purpose. Moreover, one of the most important aspects that contributes to students joining and continuing to use online
3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT social networks, such as Facebook, is the perception of a high social presence, i.e., the ability to communicate with others (Flanagin & Metzger, 2001; Tess, 2013), as well as having a profound introspect of oneself (Chou & Edge, 2012). Additionally, this could potentially lead to better academic performance (Ainin, Naqshbandi,
RI PT
Moghavvemi & Jaafar, 2015; Naqshbandi, Ainin, Jaafar, & Shuib, 2017).
Nevertheless, the literature suggests that the contribution of Facebook teaching groups extends beyond the social aspect (Erdem & Kibar, 2014; Towner & Munoz,
SC
2011). Since students already use Facebook on their smartphones, it is much more available to them, and therefore, their motivation to use Facebook for purposes other
M AN U
than just social networking, e.g., formal learning, is increased (Aydin, 2014; Erdem & Kibar, 2014). This is further supported by Towner & Munoz (2011), who found that students communicate in their Facebook teaching groups not only about social events, but also about courses and experiences. About half of the students in that study
TE D
indicated that they use Facebook for formal learning purposes (e.g., assignments and exams) (Towner & Munoz, 2011). Similar findings were reported by Mao (2014) for high school students in the USA (Mao,2014).
EP
A few examples of the beneficial attributes of Facebook groups as a formal
AC C
learning tool can be derived from recent studies. Yunus and Salehi (2012) found that university students perceived Facebook groups to be helpful in promoting their writing skills. In particular, the authors concluded that Facebook allows students time to think about what they want to comment and to get positive feedback through the "like" feature. About 53.5% of the students agree that they prefer Facebook discussions as opposed to about 46.5% that prefer classroom discussions (Yunus & Salehi, 2012). Hamid, Waycott, Kurnia and Chang (2015) reported similar findings among a focus group of Malaysian and Australian students. They found that students
4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT perceived the use of online social networks as beneficiary to engagement, improvement of skills and mastery of course content, enriching knowledge development of critical thinking and analytical skills, among others (Hamid, Waycott, Kurnia & Chang, 2015). Milosevic, Zivkovic, Arsic and Manasijevic (2015), Sobaih,
RI PT
Moustafa, Ghandforoush and Khan (2016) and Gikas and Grant (2013) reported similar findings for Serbian, Egyptian and American students, respectively. Greenhow (2011) summarized that the use of SNSs for learning promotes a more student
SC
centered approach to learning (Greenhow, 2011)
One crucial aspect, which makes Facebook an appealing tool for students, is
M AN U
the immediate feedback, instant communication, and interaction that it provides (Erdem & Kibar, 2014). Facebook is perceived by the students as a convenient means of communication for on-need assistance (Hershkovitz and Forkosh-Baruch, 2013). The immediacy of communication that Facebook provides further promotes its
TE D
advantages as a learning platform.
Despite the fact that students perceive Facebook as a place for young people, and not adults (including teachers) (Istrategylabs, 2014), there is evidence that
EP
students have positive attitudes toward befriending their teachers on Facebook
AC C
(Mazer, Murphy and Simonds, 2007). However, for this to be successful, teachers must be skilled and knowledgeable in the ways they approach their students (Hershkovitz and Forkosh-Baruch, 2013; Towner & Monuz, 2011; Mao, 2014). Nonetheless, there are also some references in the literature that indicate
negative attitudes and negative influences of Facebook teaching groups. For example, Gettman & Cortijo (2015) found that college students in the USA had negative attitudes toward the presence of their professors in the Facebook group, and in particular, they found it uncomfortable befriending their professors through these
5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT groups. In addition, this study found that students who used Facebook for academic purposes did not actually take a better stance toward Facebook compared with students who did not use Facebook for academic purposes (Gettman & Cortijo, 2015). Smith (2016) found that undergraduate students in Canada perceived the use of social
RI PT
media for learning as a "double-edged sword that both informs and distracts, having the potential to both help and hinder learning" (Smith, 2016; p.44)
Rasiah (2014) recently provided a good summation of these findings. This
SC
study examined the effectiveness of using Facebook for learning purposes from the students' perspective. This research's findings can be divided into five constructs.
M AN U
These constructs illustrate the students' perceptions of the beneficial aspects of Facebook as a teaching and learning tool. They refer to Facebook as a medium for (a) discussion and communication – in particular, for fostering closer rapport among students and between them and the lecturer, (b) knowledge sharing and acquisition –
TE D
e.g., easily accessing and sharing videos, ideas, articles, and helping each other find online resources, (c) achieving a sense of belonging, which galvanizes quieter students to open-up and participate, (d) achieving learning experiences, and (e)
EP
building competence, specifically communicative competences, team-work, and
AC C
discipline-specific knowledge.
The use of Facebook, as an example of an SNS, for learning purposes, can be
based on the conceptual framework of a Community of Inquiry (CoI) (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000). According to CoI, a virtual community can become a fruitful platform for learning when it comprises three dimensions: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. According to Garrison et al. (2000), cognitive presence can be defined as the extent to which learners can construct meaning and reaffirm it through continuous participation and discourse within the community. This
6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT dimension refers to the students and their role in a virtual learning community. Social presence can be defined as the ability of the participants in the inquiry community to present themselves socially and emotionally as "real" people through the communication medium. The social dimension is also related to students' actions in a
RI PT
virtual environment; it refers mostly to the social comments and the interpersonal relations. The third dimension is teaching presence, which refers to the design, promotion, and management of the cognitive and social processes. This dimension is
SC
linked and mostly related to the teacher's roles in the process of teaching and learning. When all three dimensions mentioned above appear in an online learning community,
M AN U
learning can occur. Of these three, this paper focuses on the social presence. In previous studies that we conducted, the cognitive and teaching presence were assessed in Israeli high-school Facebook learning groups. We explored the activities observed in CLFG established voluntarily by chemistry teachers for students
TE D
majoring in chemistry. We identified and analyzed the different interactions that had occurred in these groups, and most importantly, we determined that learning can actually occur in such groups (Authors, 2016).
EP
Seven types of interaction were observed in the CLFG. The most common
AC C
interaction was the Learning Management System (LMS) (48%). Social interactions and file uploading interactions accounted for 20% of the total interactions. Also observed were interactions of the following types: calls for discussion, enrichment, and links to relevant materials. The learning interaction type accounted for 22% of the total interactions (Authors, 2016). These learning interactions were further examined. We found three types of learning interactions occurring in the CLFGs. This classification was based on the theoretical framework of commognitive learning (Sfard, 2008). We found that
7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT wherever a commognitive conflict exists, it could be transformed into a learning event, i.e., a change in the students' discourse or viewpoint. The identified learning interactions that were observed in the Facebook groups illustrate the potential of SNS to serve as an additional tool for teachers to advance
RI PT
their students’ learning of chemistry (Authors, 2016). In another publication (Authors, 2015), the Teachers’ TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) and the self-efficacy beliefs in these Facebook learning groups were assessed. The results
SC
of this study showed that teachers had a clear perception of the definition of learning in such groups from the very beginning and were able to improve their abilities in
M AN U
utilizing Facebook for teaching as their mastery experience improved (Authors, 2015). In attempting to complete the viewpoints regarding the Israeli chemistry learning Facebook groups, this study examines the third perspective, namely, students'
3. Methodology
TE D
attitudes towards using SNS as a chemistry learning environment.
3.1 Population
EP
The research population included 707 students (grades 10th to 12th; ages 16-17
AC C
years old) majoring in chemistry. Questionnaires were administered during two years 2013 and 2014. Students' participation in the groups was voluntary, and no obligatory assignment was given exclusively in the Facebook group. The students completed the questionnaire before participating in the activity in the groups (PRE) and at the end of the activity (POST). For three of the classes that participated in this research the POST questionnaire was administered twice: once at the end of the first year (POST1) and once at the end of the second year (POST2). More details regarding the students' population are presented in Table 1.
8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE]
3.2 Research Tools and Data Analysis
RI PT
The research consisted of a mixed method study that integrates qualitative and quantitative tools (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Using quantitative tools, we measured students' attitudes with regard to the CLFGs at different times. The
regarding the group's function and contribution.
M AN U
3.2.1 Attitude questionnaire
SC
qualitative parts assisted us in understanding students' attitudes and their preferences
A Likert-type questionnaire (five point scale) examining attitudes toward the Facebook platform and its integration into chemistry learning was developed. The development of the questionnaire was based on other questionnaires examining
TE D
attitudes toward Facebook and included 18 items (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman & Witty, 2010; Kabilan, Ahmad & Abidin, 2010; Sturgeon & Walker, 2009). The questionnaire was validated by four experts from the Department of Science
EP
Teaching. Prior to the analysis, the categories were generated and their reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. The first set of categories was found to have
AC C
Cronbach's alpha < 0.7, and therefore, we performed factor analysis and recategorized the items. The new categories scored obtained a Cronbach's alpha ≥ 0.7 (as presented in Table 2). We included in the analysis only those students that had paired data (for both
pre and post time frames). In addition, we divided the classes that participated in the study into two groups based on the presence of learning interactions: one research group ("the active group") in which learning was extensively demonstrated in the
9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT CLFG, and another in which the extent of learning in the CLFG was little to none ("the non-active group") (Authors, 2016). The questionnaire examines four aspects reflected in the new categories, as presented in Table 2, each describes students' attitudes towards a different aspect:
RI PT
a. The importance of Facebook
b. The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment c. The cognitive influence of the CLFG
SC
d. The affective influence of the CLFG
M AN U
[INSERT TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE]
3.2.2 The "Tips for the effective group" question
An additional open question was integrated into the questionnaire to capture
TE D
students' needs in the Facebook environment (PRE): "If you have an opportunity to impact your CLFG, what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" In the post questionnaire this question was modified in
EP
order to learn how the CLFG contributed to the students learning (POST). We asked:
AC C
(a) "Did you find that the group contributed to your chemistry learning?", and (b) "if so, describe the contribution?" The first question, "You have an opportunity to impact your CLFG; what tips
would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" was answered by 196 students (Table 1). The students' answers were sorted into categories using a bottom-up approach (Chi, 1997). Each answer included several statements and could be associated with more than one category. The following categories emerged: group climate, learning management systems (LMS), sharing 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT files, availability, links, learning discourse, activity, and general enrichment. About 15% of all answers were randomly forwarded to a science teaching expert and full agreement was obtained over the chosen categorization. Table 3 presents the categories and sample statements.
RI PT
The statistical tests were chosen according to the variables' distribution. Correlations between categorical variables were examined using the Chi-Square test. Correlations between categorical and continuous variables were examined using a t-
SC
test for dependent samples.
3.2.3 Differences between the active and non-active CLFGs
M AN U
In order to assess the extent of the difference in the distribution of interactions between the active and non-active groups, we used the Odds Ratio test. This test provides a relative estimate of an observable effect when comparing an intervention group and a control group. An odds ratio value greater than 1 indicates an advantage
TE D
for the intervention over the control group.
In all statistical analyses performed, a p-value of 0.05 or less was considered
AC C
4. Results
EP
as statistically significant.
As mentioned, an "active group" in the context of this research was a CLFG in
which learning was extensively demonstrated, and a "non-active group" was one in which the extent of learning in the CLFG was little to none. A detailed description of the learning that occurs in an active CLFG is presented elsewhere (Authors, 2016). In order to compare the two types of groups, we examined whether the groups showed differences in the pre questionnaire before the students used the CLFG. No significant differences were found in the responses to the attitudes questionnaire between the
11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT active and the non-active groups. Most importantly, the average score for both groups regarding "The importance of Facebook" category did not show a significant difference. We were also interested in exploring whether students had different suggestions regarding the purpose of the CLFG. This was examined through the
RI PT
question, "You have an opportunity to impact your CLFG; what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" From the total of 350 students that answered the pre questionnaire (see Table 1), this question was answered
SC
by 196 students, of whom 96 belonged to an active group, and 100 students belonged to a non-active group. Students' answers were sorted into the research categories (see
M AN U
Table 3). We calculated the frequency of each category and performed an Odds Ratio analysis to compare the two groups. The analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups in the pre-questionnaire, indicating a similar starting point for
TE D
the two groups.
[INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE]
EP
Interestingly, students not only suggested what they are interested to have in the CLFGs—they also indicated what they wished they would not have in them. We
AC C
explored these responses and summed them up in the "Ten Commandments" for a chemistry teacher embarking on establishing a CLFG (see Figure 1)
[INSERT FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE]
After one year of using the CLFG, differences in students' attitudes were assessed. The average scores of the four categories were compared between the pre and post for each research group (active and non-active). As shown in Table 4, among the active groups, there is only a significant difference in the attitude toward the presence of
12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT formal learning in the Facebook environment. Among the non-active groups, we observed a significant negative difference in the cognitive and affective aspects.
RI PT
[INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE]
The same analysis was repeated for the active groups that participated in the study for two years (POST2 at the end of the second year) (Table 5). The results indicate
SC
significant changes in the attitudes of those students who participated in the CLFG for
M AN U
two years in four out of the five categories in the attitude questionnaire.
[INSERT TABLE 5 ABOUT HERE]
In order to determine whether students perceived the CLFG as a platform that contributed to their learning, we compared the proportion of students who indicated
TE D
the platform as contributing within each group and between the two groups (Figure 2). A chi-square test showed a significant difference within the active group (χ2 = 56.18, df = 1, p < 0.0001), and between the two groups (χ2 = 16.32, df = 1, p < 0.0001). No
AC C
EP
significant difference was observed in the data of the non-active group.
[INSERT FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE]
Furthermore, students' responses to the question "how did the CLFG
contribute to you as a student?" were analyzed. Two hundred and five students out of 210 responded to the question. Students' answers were categorized according to the same research categories (Table 2) that were used to analyze the students' tips for an effective group in the pre questionnaire. Both active and non-active groups reported that the CLFG had contributed to the learning aspect, as shown in Table 6. It is 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT interesting that the non-active groups did not mention at all the group climate aspect, as opposed to the active groups that did mention it.
[INSERT TABLE 6 ABOUT HERE]
RI PT
5. Discussion
According to the Community of Inquiry theory of Garrison et al. (2000), social presence is one of the critical dimensions in an online community. Bielaczyc (2006)
SC
suggested that in order to develop a learning environment, one should also address cultural beliefs. This theoretical basis motivated us to explore students' attitudes
M AN U
toward CLFGs and the learning that occurs within them. As indicated in this study, students' perceptions and attitudes regarding CLFG is an important factor when designing educational programs using SNS or when determining a policy for integrating SNS into educational settings. We will discuss the results of the study
TE D
according to the research questions that will accompany the discussion by mentioning relevant implications for education:
EP
1) What are students' needs and expectations from the CLFG?
AC C
In the pre-questionnaire, students were asked: "If you have an opportunity to impact your CLFG, what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" Several needs were raised by the students: Students described the group climate that can support their learning in the CLFG. They expected to have a learning discourse together with a supportive social climate. They also suggested using the CLFG as a LMS in which the teacher can post formal announcements, although they insisted that the teacher should not neglect her presence in an actual classroom. The students mentioned the availability of the CLFG,
14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT which encourages them to upload questions, links, and files, with no dependence on when or where the students are. The different needs described by the students were observed in the actual activities of the CLFGs (Authors, 2016). This suggests that students' needs, as
RI PT
indicated in their pre-activity questionnaires, actually materialize in the group activities as they progress. In addition, the categories observed in relation to the students' needs are compatible with the components required in the CoI (Garrison et
SC
al., 2000) for establishing an online learning community. The cognitive presence mentioned by Garrison et al. (2000) includes learning discourses, links to relevant
M AN U
sites, and students' suggestions for sharing files. The social presence includes the social discourses and the enrichment activities. And the teaching presence includes LMS, links to relevant sites, sharing files, general enrichment, and learning discourses. According to Garrison et al. (2000), identifying all three presences is
TE D
essential for supporting learning in an online community of learners. The students not only described their needs and requirements pertaining to the CLFG, but also provided the "Don'ts", which they found to be equally important.
EP
These were summed up as the "Ten Commandments" for the teacher, and provide a
AC C
meaningful tool for educators who wish to use SNS as a supportive learning environment. Some students' conclusions follow: The students do not want their chemistry teacher to be their friend, they do not want the teacher to use the Facebook slang, and they want the teacher to give them their homework in class and not only through the CLFG. In other words, the students want their teacher to remain as their classroom teacher, even in the informal SNS environment.
15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2) What are students' attitudes toward using Facebook for chemistry learning? In particular to what extent did they perceive that it contributed to their chemistry learning? We will explore the results concerning this question on two separate levels. (a)
RI PT
The first concerns the students' attitudes toward the cognitive and affective influence of the CLFG, the perception of the CLFG's importance, and the perception of the formal learning presence within the CLFG. (b) The second level concerns to what
SC
extent the students perceived that the CLFG contributed to their learning experience.
(a) The results of the first part are related to the comparison of the delta
M AN U
differences between the active and non-active groups after one year. These results show a significant increase in positive attitudes regarding the presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment. Students who participated in an active CLFG perceived the formal learning that occurred in the group more positively than did
TE D
those students who participated in the non-active groups. Moreover, for the non-active groups we found a significant decrease regarding the affective and cognitive influence of the CLFG, as presented in Table 4.
EP
Moreover, it was found that while students who participated in the study for
AC C
two years perceived Facebook as less important for them, they more appreciate the presence of formal learning in Facebook and the cognitive influence of the CLFG. However, this finding was not significant for active groups that participated for only one year. This difference could indicate that having positive attitudes toward CLFG and using them for learning purposes are gradually developed. Therefore, one might consider the usefulness of tracking students' perceptions of the CLFG over time that is longer than one year. It is possible that students who hold more positive stances toward the CLFG, either regarding the cognitive or affective aspects or perceive its
16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT importance as greater, are more motivated to participate in the groups, and therefore, feel that that the CLFGs facilitate learning within those groups. (b) Concerning the perception of overall contribution of the CLFGs, the results of the Chi-square test indicate that students in active groups perceived the
RI PT
CLFG platform as more contributing, compared to students in the non-active groups (Figure 2). The Chi-square analysis illustrates the correlation between the learning
SC
activity in the CLFG and the perception of its contribution.
When exploring the explanations students provided to the CLFGs contribution
M AN U
to learning, we found that there was no significant difference in perception of any component by the students between the groups (active and non-active, Table 6), despite the fact that only the active groups had actually experienced learning. It is possible that students' perceptions regarding the contribution of the CLFG are
TE D
determined to a lesser extent by the experience of learning interactions and to a greater extent by the mere experience of using a CLFG. Support for this view was obtained from previous studies that indicated that students who accessed their
EP
teacher's Facebook website had higher levels of motivation and affective learning and
AC C
had experienced a more positive classroom climate (e.g., Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007) regardless of the teachers' activity. When zooming in to the contribution's dimensions, in the non-active groups
we find no reference to the contributing effect of the group climate category. This finding is in line with the CoI theory (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000), suggesting that in order for an online community of inquiry to be successful, all three components (cognitive, pedagogical, and social) must exist. According to the results,
17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT if students do not perceive the social components as a contributing factor in the CLFG, the learning in that group is negatively affected. Note that a decrease in students' attitudes regarding the importance of Facebook was recorded after two years of activity in the CLFG, as shown in Table 5.
RI PT
This result identifies a general change in the way high-school students use Facebook (Istrategylabs, 2014); this trend was obtained and explained in a different study that examined the CLFG from teachers' perspectives (Authors, 2015). Facebook is only
SC
one example of a modern means of social media, and other SNSs can also serve as candidates for teaching chemistry. We chose to focus on Facebook in our research,
M AN U
when the study was conducted, given its broad use, its relative availability, and its advanced features for integrating chemistry teaching. However during the two years of the study the activity of high school students in Israel has shifted to other SNS (e.g., Whatapp) and this trend is reflected here too (Istrategylabs, 2014). There are
TE D
other SNSs also worth exploring, such as Edmondo in the context of higher education (e.g. (Duark, 2017)). Exploring other platforms, such as "Whatsapp", which is gradually replacing Facebook, or others may be considered in future research. One
EP
should note that perhaps instead of chasing technology that is fashionable and rapidly
AC C
changing, we might want to consider adopting and improving educational-oriented SNSs, in accordance to local needs and culture.
6. Implications
Several implications can be identified from the current study. First, students should be engaged prior to the establishment of an online learning group in order to assess their needs and expectations. Second, with regards to those needs of students from the social network learning environment, we recommend that before using a
18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT SNS in educational settings, teachers should undergo adequate training that includes a workshop in which they are exposed to students' needs that arouse from the study. It is worthwhile to raise teachers' awareness of the three components that are imperative for maintaining an online learning community (Garrison et al., 2000).Therefore, it is
RI PT
important to stress that teachers should not ignore the social aspects of a CLFG, as part of a social network. Students feel that they have gained more when all three aspects, including the social presence, are present in the SNS.
SC
Third, our study demonstrates that groups in which learning occured promote higher positive attitudes of students. Therefore, teachers should strive to engage
M AN U
students in the group in a way that facilitate learning (i.e., become more active) in order to make them more effective for teaching purposes.
7. Conclusions
TE D
This study focused on the utilization of online learning groups on SNSs from the point of view of students. The study highlights the importance of engaging students in the process and sheds light on their needs and expectations in order to
EP
facilitate an effective experience with online learning. In particular, we found that
AC C
there is a significant correlation between the weather the Facebook group is active or not and the way students perceive the Facebook group as contributing experience for their learning.
This study has a several limitations. First, the study was performed in Israel
and is subjected to cultural biases that might not be present in other countries. Second, this study is focused on Facebook as an example of a SNS utilized for learning purposes. The field of SNSs is rapidly changing and one might consider other types of SNSs as possible candidates for study. In addition, the fact that the social network
19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT environment among youth is rapidly changing, places teachers in a difficult position, because they have to catch up with the fast changing trends. Therefore, we propose that future research will examine learning in other types of SNSs, such as "WhatsApp", and also in other cultural settings and different
References
SC
Authors (2015). Education and Information Technologies.
RI PT
countries. These studies will help to solidify the findings and enable generalization.
Authors (2016). Journal of Science Education and Technology.
M AN U
Ainin, S, Naqshbandi, M M, Moghavvemi, S, & Jaafar, NI . (2015). Facebook usage, socialization and academic performance. Computers & Education, 83, 64-73. Aydin, S. (2014). Foreign language learners' interactions with their teachers on Facebook. System, 42, 155-163.
TE D
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: a practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
EP
Chou, H. T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). "They are happier and having better lives than I
AC C
am": the impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others' lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2), 117-121. Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3-14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X031004003 Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2 ed.). U.S.A: SAGE.
20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Durak, G. (2017). Using Social Learning Networks (SLNs) in Higher Education: Edmodo Through the Lenses of Academics. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(1). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2623
RI PT
Erdem, M., & Kibar, P. N. (2014). Students' opinions on facebook supported blended learning environment. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1): 199-206.
SC
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 153-181.
M AN U
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2001.tb00779.x
Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 87-105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
TE D
Gettman, H. J., & Cortijo, V. (2015). “Leave Me and My Facebook Alone!” Understanding College Students’ Relationship with Facebook and its Use for Academic Purposes. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching
EP
and Learning, 9(1).
AC C
Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social
media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.
Greenhow, C. (2011). Youth, learning, and social media. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(2), 139.
21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Guzmán-Simón, F., García-Jiménez, E., & López-Cobo, I. (2017). Undergraduate students’ perspectives on digital competence and academic literacy in a Spanish University. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 196-204. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.040
RI PT
Hamid, S., Waycott, J., Kurnia, S., & Chang, S. (2015). Understanding students'
perceptions of the benefits of online social networking use for teaching and learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 1-9.
SC
Hershkovitz, A., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2013). Student-teacher relationship in the Facebook era: the student perspective. International Journal of Continuing
M AN U
Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 23(1), 33-52. doi: 10.1504/IJCEELL.2013.051765
Hew, K.F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behaviour 27(2), 662-676. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020
TE D
Istrategylabs (2014, January 15). 3 Million teens leave Facebook in 3 years: The 2014 Facebook demographic report. Retrieved from: http://istrategylabs.com/2014/01/3-million-teens-leave-facebook-in-3-years-
EP
the-2014-facebook-demographic-report/
AC C
Jenkins, E. W. (2006). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42(1), 49-88. doi:10.1080/03057260608560220
Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179-187. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003
22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Kurtz, G. (2011). Assimilation of ICT in Israel: challenges and implementation. In D. Chen, & G. Kurtz (Eds.), ICT, Learning and Teaching (pp. 11-32). Or Yehuda: The Center for Academic Studies. (in Hebrew) Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration
RI PT
and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 141-155. doi: 10.1080/17439880902923606
SC
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2013). Is it a tool suitable for learning? A critical review of the literature on Facebook as a technology‐enhanced learning environment. Journal of
M AN U
Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 487-504
Mao, J. (2014). Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 213-223.
TE D
Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on ‘Facebook’: the effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication
EP
Education. 56(1), 1-17. doi: 10.1080/03634520601009710
AC C
Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., & Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook groups as LMS: A case study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning,
13(4), 33-48.
Milošević, I., Živković, D., Arsić, S., & Manasijević, D. (2015). Facebook as virtual classroom–Social networking in learning and teaching among Serbian students. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 576-585.
23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Naqshbandi, M., Ainin, S., Jaafar, N. I., & Shuib, N. L. M. (2017). To Facebook or to Face Book? An investigation of how academic performance of different personalities is affected through the intervention of Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 167-176.
RI PT
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.012
Nekuda (2016, March 1). Data on the use of Facebook in Israel in 2015. Retrieved from http://www.nekuda.co.il/facebook-israel-2015/ (in Hebrew)
SC
Prescott, J., Wilson, S., & Becket, G. (2013). Facebook use in the learning
environment: do students want this?. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(3),
M AN U
345-350. doi:10.1080/17439884.2013.788027
Qureshi, I. A., Raza, H., & Whitty, M. (2015). Facebook as e-learning tool for higher education institutes. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), 6(4), 440-448.
TE D
Rasiah, R. R. V. (2014). Transformative higher education teaching and learning: Using social media in a team-based learning environment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 369-379. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1435
EP
Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010).
AC C
Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 134-140. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002
Schroeder, J., & Greenbowe, T. (2009). The chemistry of Facebook: using social networking to create an online community for the organic chemistry. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(4), Retrieved from: http://gator.uhd.edu/~williams/AT/ChemOfFB.htm
24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, E. E. (2016). “A real double-edged sword:” Undergraduate perceptions of social media in their learning. Computers & Education, 103, 44-58.
RI PT
Sobaih, A. E. E., Moustafa, M. A., Ghandforoush, P., & Khan, M. (2016). To use or not to use? Social media in higher education in developing countries.Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 296-305.
SC
Sturgeon, C. M., & Walker, C. (2009). Faculty on facebook: Confirm or deny?
Proceedings from the14th Annual Instructional Technology Conference,
M AN U
Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tenneesse, (March 2009). Retrieved from: http://www.efmasia.info/pdf/deny/7.pdf Tess, P. A. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual)–A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), A60-A68.
TE D
Towner, T., & Muñoz, C. (2011). Facebook and education: A classroom connection. Educating educators with social media: Cutting edge technologies in higher education. Bingley, U, K.: Emerald, 1, 33-57.
EP
Yunus, M. M., & Salehi, H. (2012). The effectiveness of Facebook groups on
AC C
Teaching and Improving Writing: Students’ perceptions. Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 1(6), 87-96.
25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 1 Number of participating students according to group type at the different study stages (PRE/POST)
group
active
RI PT
Total
Non-
group
Attitude questionnaire (PRE)
350
184
166
Attitude questionnaire (POST)
319
181
138
Tips for effective group (PRE)
196
96
100
Contributed (POST)
210
139
71
How it contributed (POST)
205
SC
Type of questionnaire
Active
137
68
AC C
EP
TE D
questionnaire (PRE only)
M AN U
Need analysis and expectations
707
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 2 Attitudes questionnaire for the students: Aspects and sample statements Aspect
Cronbach's
Sample statement
alpha The importance of
0.76
routine."
The presence of formal
0.69
the CLFG
linked with Facebook."
M AN U
The cognitive influence of
"I think my studying should be
SC
learning in Facebook
RI PT
Facebook
"Facebook is part of my daily
0.74
"The use of Facebook can help me better understand different issues."
AC C
EP
the CLFG
0.78
TE D
The affective influence of
"I would feel more comfortable in the classroom if we had a Facebook group."
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 3 Categories and sample statements - questionnaire to identify students' needs and expectations Sample statement "(I hope that) there will be a fun environment"
Learning discourse
"Mostly for preparing for exams so that anyone who has questions in preparing for an exam can present them and the teacher will answer for the benefit of the whole group"
LMS – Learning Management System
"To write the homework assignments, reminders for exams and quizzes, and the hand-in paper"
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Category Group climate
Sharing files
"Uploading materials, presentations, and exercises before the exams"
Links
"Publishing video clips or animations that illustrate the learned materials"
Activity
AC C
EP
Enrichment
"Immediately answering questions"
TE D
Availability
"Active, daily participation of the teacher and the students" "(I hope that) interesting stuff will be published, not necessarily related to the learned material to create interest"
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4 Delta difference in the average scores of the active and non-active groups regarding four aspects (paired students).
PRE
3.053 0.133
n.s.
3.072
3.044 0.279***
<.0001
The cognitive influence of the CLFG
TE D
3.165 -0.089
3.189 -0.075
AC C
EP
The affective influence of the CLFG
3.121
M AN U
The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment
∆
0.223*
SC
P value
PRE The importance of Facebook
∆
Non-Active (N=121) P value 0.013
RI PT
Active (N=148)
0.078
n.s.
n.s.
3.235
-0.355***
0.0001
n.s.
3.035
-0.267***
0.001
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 5 Delta difference in the average scores of the four aspects for active classes with two "POST" time frames (N=41) POST2
∆
P value
The importance of Facebook
3.472
2.992
-0.48**
0.0025
The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment
2.858
3.315
0.457**
0.006
The cognitive influence of the CLFG
2.881
3.263
AC C
EP
SC 0.382*
M AN U
TE D
The affective influence of 3.042 the CLFG
RI PT
PRE
3.244
0.202
0.0167
n.s.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 6 Distribution of contribution categories as indicated by the students in the active and non-active groups
Category
n(%)
41(57.7)
Learning discourse
Availability
21(29.6)
Files
Links Group climate
8(11.3)
Enrichment
0(0)
EP
69(49.6)
Availability
29(20.8)
M AN U
13(18.3)
TE D
Files
AC C
88(63.3)
SC
Learning discourse
LMS – Learning 16(22.5) Management System
Active (N=139)
RI PT
Non Active (N=71) n(%)
Category
0(0)
LMS – Learning 21(15.1) Management System Links Group climate
18(12.9)
Enrichment
4(2.8)
7(5)
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Figure 1 Ten Commandments of don't's for the teacher in the CLFG.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Figure 2 The platform as contributing within each group and between the two groups
SC
RI PT
***
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
***
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT •
This study explores students' perceptions of using Facebook for chemistry learning
•
Maintaining formal conduct of the teacher in the SNS is preferable by students
•
Teachers should maintain their classroom presence even when using SNS for
•
RI PT
teaching Active learning correlates with positive students' attitudes toward learning in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
SNS
S0360-1315(17)30150-1
DOI:
10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.014
Reference:
CAE 3205
To appear in:
Computers & Education
Received Date: 30 November 2016 Revised Date:
18 June 2017
Accepted Date: 20 June 2017
Please cite this article as: Rap S. & Blonder R., Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning, Computers & Education (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.014. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning Shelley Rap & Ron Blonder Weizmann Institute of Science Rehovot 7610001 Israel +972-8-934-2586
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
[email protected] +972-8-934-2451
RI PT
[email protected]
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Thou shall not try to speak in the Facebook language: Students' perspectives regarding using Facebook for chemistry learning
RI PT
Abstract
Facebook is the most commonly used Social Network Site (SNS) in the world. In this paper we explore students' attitudes towards the use of SNSs as a platform for
SC
learning chemistry and provide recommendations based on students' preferences
regarding what should be done in the Facebook groups and what the teachers should
M AN U
not do (Thou shall nots) in an educational Facebook group with their students. We evaluated the extent to which students use SNSs in general and their attitudes toward the presence of a medium for learning chemistry in their SNS in particular. We found that the active Facebook groups for learning chemistry are perceived overall as a
TE D
contributing experience for students' learning, and there was a positive correlation between the chemistry learning activity in the groups and the attitudes of students toward using Facebook groups for learning chemistry. Both parameters have
AC C
EP
gradually increased over the two-year study period.
Keywords: SNS, Facebook, Students' attitudes, Chemistry education, High school.
1. Introduction
Currently, Facebook is the most commonly used Social Network Site (SNS) in the world. According to Facebook reports, and as of December 2015, the number of active users using Facebook worldwide was 1.59 billion people per month. In Israel, the number of active Facebook users is estimated to be 4.4 million (Nekuda, 2015).
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT However, its use for academic and learning purposes is still rather limited. According to Hew (2011), Facebook has been mainly used for administrative purposes (e.g., for uploading schedules and class tasks) rather than for pedagogical purposes. This use is also referred to in the literature as Learning Management Systems (LMS) (Kurtz,
RI PT
2011). Several studies have examined the possibility of utilizing Facebook's network for learning purposes (e.g., Schroeder & Greenbowe, 2009; Kurtz, 2011; Meishar-Tal, Kurtz, and Pitresa, 2012; Manca & Ranierit, 2013). Usually, these studies found that
SC
Facebook groups have potential to be used as LMS. Nevertheless, other studies have indicated that students perceive Facebook as a suitable environment for learning
M AN U
purposes as well (e.g., Qureshi, Raza & Whitty, 2015; Erdem & Kibar, 2014). While acknowledging the importance of the pedagogical content, teachers' ability, and the applicability of the technology for teaching purposes (Authors, 2015), we feel that it is also important to explore students' views regarding the use of SNSs for educational
TE D
purposes. Identifying and responding to students' voices may facilitate reducing the alienation that some students feel regarding their schooling (Jenkins, 2006). The purpose of this research is to examine whether and how the Facebook
EP
environment can be used for learning chemistry by evaluating students' attitudes
AC C
toward the use of Facebook as a learning platform. We posed two research questions: 1) What are students' needs and expectations from the Chemistry Learning Facebook Groups (CLFG)?
2) What are students' attitudes toward using Facebook for chemistry learning?
In particular to what extent did they perceive that the CLFG contributed to their chemistry learning?
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The research described in this paper contributes to the body of knowledge about Facebook, as an example of a SNS and its use for learning purposes, by looking at this topic from the students' point of view. The innovation of the study is its focus on students' needs from an online learning environment. In addition, this research
students toward using SNSs for teaching purposes.
RI PT
explores the benefits of online learning to promoting more positive attitutdes of
Before we present our study regarding students' perception of Facebook teaching
2. Theoretical Background
M AN U
SC
groups, we will first describe the literature in this area.
Nowadays internet and social media applications play an important role in education (e.g. Guzmán-Simón, García-Jiménez, & López-Cobo, 2017). Various studies have
TE D
explored students' attitudes regarding the integration of SNS in a learning context. Prescott, Wilson, and Becket (2013) found that UK university students perceive SNSs, in particular, Facebook, as more of a social tool, and that the majority of them
EP
do not want Facebook to be used for formal learning. The explanation provided by the
AC C
authors is that the fear of being unprofessional on Facebook deters students from using the SNS for formal learning purposes. However, using Facebook for informal learning (e.g., peer support) is recommended by the authors (Prescott, Wilson, and Becket, 2013). Similarly, Madge, Meek, Wellens, and Hooley (2009) found that preregistered students in a British university thought Facebook should be used mostly for social reasons (e.g., making new friends at the university), and not for formal teaching, although it was sometimes used for that purpose. Moreover, one of the most important aspects that contributes to students joining and continuing to use online
3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT social networks, such as Facebook, is the perception of a high social presence, i.e., the ability to communicate with others (Flanagin & Metzger, 2001; Tess, 2013), as well as having a profound introspect of oneself (Chou & Edge, 2012). Additionally, this could potentially lead to better academic performance (Ainin, Naqshbandi,
RI PT
Moghavvemi & Jaafar, 2015; Naqshbandi, Ainin, Jaafar, & Shuib, 2017).
Nevertheless, the literature suggests that the contribution of Facebook teaching groups extends beyond the social aspect (Erdem & Kibar, 2014; Towner & Munoz,
SC
2011). Since students already use Facebook on their smartphones, it is much more available to them, and therefore, their motivation to use Facebook for purposes other
M AN U
than just social networking, e.g., formal learning, is increased (Aydin, 2014; Erdem & Kibar, 2014). This is further supported by Towner & Munoz (2011), who found that students communicate in their Facebook teaching groups not only about social events, but also about courses and experiences. About half of the students in that study
TE D
indicated that they use Facebook for formal learning purposes (e.g., assignments and exams) (Towner & Munoz, 2011). Similar findings were reported by Mao (2014) for high school students in the USA (Mao,2014).
EP
A few examples of the beneficial attributes of Facebook groups as a formal
AC C
learning tool can be derived from recent studies. Yunus and Salehi (2012) found that university students perceived Facebook groups to be helpful in promoting their writing skills. In particular, the authors concluded that Facebook allows students time to think about what they want to comment and to get positive feedback through the "like" feature. About 53.5% of the students agree that they prefer Facebook discussions as opposed to about 46.5% that prefer classroom discussions (Yunus & Salehi, 2012). Hamid, Waycott, Kurnia and Chang (2015) reported similar findings among a focus group of Malaysian and Australian students. They found that students
4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT perceived the use of online social networks as beneficiary to engagement, improvement of skills and mastery of course content, enriching knowledge development of critical thinking and analytical skills, among others (Hamid, Waycott, Kurnia & Chang, 2015). Milosevic, Zivkovic, Arsic and Manasijevic (2015), Sobaih,
RI PT
Moustafa, Ghandforoush and Khan (2016) and Gikas and Grant (2013) reported similar findings for Serbian, Egyptian and American students, respectively. Greenhow (2011) summarized that the use of SNSs for learning promotes a more student
SC
centered approach to learning (Greenhow, 2011)
One crucial aspect, which makes Facebook an appealing tool for students, is
M AN U
the immediate feedback, instant communication, and interaction that it provides (Erdem & Kibar, 2014). Facebook is perceived by the students as a convenient means of communication for on-need assistance (Hershkovitz and Forkosh-Baruch, 2013). The immediacy of communication that Facebook provides further promotes its
TE D
advantages as a learning platform.
Despite the fact that students perceive Facebook as a place for young people, and not adults (including teachers) (Istrategylabs, 2014), there is evidence that
EP
students have positive attitudes toward befriending their teachers on Facebook
AC C
(Mazer, Murphy and Simonds, 2007). However, for this to be successful, teachers must be skilled and knowledgeable in the ways they approach their students (Hershkovitz and Forkosh-Baruch, 2013; Towner & Monuz, 2011; Mao, 2014). Nonetheless, there are also some references in the literature that indicate
negative attitudes and negative influences of Facebook teaching groups. For example, Gettman & Cortijo (2015) found that college students in the USA had negative attitudes toward the presence of their professors in the Facebook group, and in particular, they found it uncomfortable befriending their professors through these
5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT groups. In addition, this study found that students who used Facebook for academic purposes did not actually take a better stance toward Facebook compared with students who did not use Facebook for academic purposes (Gettman & Cortijo, 2015). Smith (2016) found that undergraduate students in Canada perceived the use of social
RI PT
media for learning as a "double-edged sword that both informs and distracts, having the potential to both help and hinder learning" (Smith, 2016; p.44)
Rasiah (2014) recently provided a good summation of these findings. This
SC
study examined the effectiveness of using Facebook for learning purposes from the students' perspective. This research's findings can be divided into five constructs.
M AN U
These constructs illustrate the students' perceptions of the beneficial aspects of Facebook as a teaching and learning tool. They refer to Facebook as a medium for (a) discussion and communication – in particular, for fostering closer rapport among students and between them and the lecturer, (b) knowledge sharing and acquisition –
TE D
e.g., easily accessing and sharing videos, ideas, articles, and helping each other find online resources, (c) achieving a sense of belonging, which galvanizes quieter students to open-up and participate, (d) achieving learning experiences, and (e)
EP
building competence, specifically communicative competences, team-work, and
AC C
discipline-specific knowledge.
The use of Facebook, as an example of an SNS, for learning purposes, can be
based on the conceptual framework of a Community of Inquiry (CoI) (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000). According to CoI, a virtual community can become a fruitful platform for learning when it comprises three dimensions: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. According to Garrison et al. (2000), cognitive presence can be defined as the extent to which learners can construct meaning and reaffirm it through continuous participation and discourse within the community. This
6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT dimension refers to the students and their role in a virtual learning community. Social presence can be defined as the ability of the participants in the inquiry community to present themselves socially and emotionally as "real" people through the communication medium. The social dimension is also related to students' actions in a
RI PT
virtual environment; it refers mostly to the social comments and the interpersonal relations. The third dimension is teaching presence, which refers to the design, promotion, and management of the cognitive and social processes. This dimension is
SC
linked and mostly related to the teacher's roles in the process of teaching and learning. When all three dimensions mentioned above appear in an online learning community,
M AN U
learning can occur. Of these three, this paper focuses on the social presence. In previous studies that we conducted, the cognitive and teaching presence were assessed in Israeli high-school Facebook learning groups. We explored the activities observed in CLFG established voluntarily by chemistry teachers for students
TE D
majoring in chemistry. We identified and analyzed the different interactions that had occurred in these groups, and most importantly, we determined that learning can actually occur in such groups (Authors, 2016).
EP
Seven types of interaction were observed in the CLFG. The most common
AC C
interaction was the Learning Management System (LMS) (48%). Social interactions and file uploading interactions accounted for 20% of the total interactions. Also observed were interactions of the following types: calls for discussion, enrichment, and links to relevant materials. The learning interaction type accounted for 22% of the total interactions (Authors, 2016). These learning interactions were further examined. We found three types of learning interactions occurring in the CLFGs. This classification was based on the theoretical framework of commognitive learning (Sfard, 2008). We found that
7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT wherever a commognitive conflict exists, it could be transformed into a learning event, i.e., a change in the students' discourse or viewpoint. The identified learning interactions that were observed in the Facebook groups illustrate the potential of SNS to serve as an additional tool for teachers to advance
RI PT
their students’ learning of chemistry (Authors, 2016). In another publication (Authors, 2015), the Teachers’ TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) and the self-efficacy beliefs in these Facebook learning groups were assessed. The results
SC
of this study showed that teachers had a clear perception of the definition of learning in such groups from the very beginning and were able to improve their abilities in
M AN U
utilizing Facebook for teaching as their mastery experience improved (Authors, 2015). In attempting to complete the viewpoints regarding the Israeli chemistry learning Facebook groups, this study examines the third perspective, namely, students'
3. Methodology
TE D
attitudes towards using SNS as a chemistry learning environment.
3.1 Population
EP
The research population included 707 students (grades 10th to 12th; ages 16-17
AC C
years old) majoring in chemistry. Questionnaires were administered during two years 2013 and 2014. Students' participation in the groups was voluntary, and no obligatory assignment was given exclusively in the Facebook group. The students completed the questionnaire before participating in the activity in the groups (PRE) and at the end of the activity (POST). For three of the classes that participated in this research the POST questionnaire was administered twice: once at the end of the first year (POST1) and once at the end of the second year (POST2). More details regarding the students' population are presented in Table 1.
8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE]
3.2 Research Tools and Data Analysis
RI PT
The research consisted of a mixed method study that integrates qualitative and quantitative tools (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Using quantitative tools, we measured students' attitudes with regard to the CLFGs at different times. The
regarding the group's function and contribution.
M AN U
3.2.1 Attitude questionnaire
SC
qualitative parts assisted us in understanding students' attitudes and their preferences
A Likert-type questionnaire (five point scale) examining attitudes toward the Facebook platform and its integration into chemistry learning was developed. The development of the questionnaire was based on other questionnaires examining
TE D
attitudes toward Facebook and included 18 items (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman & Witty, 2010; Kabilan, Ahmad & Abidin, 2010; Sturgeon & Walker, 2009). The questionnaire was validated by four experts from the Department of Science
EP
Teaching. Prior to the analysis, the categories were generated and their reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. The first set of categories was found to have
AC C
Cronbach's alpha < 0.7, and therefore, we performed factor analysis and recategorized the items. The new categories scored obtained a Cronbach's alpha ≥ 0.7 (as presented in Table 2). We included in the analysis only those students that had paired data (for both
pre and post time frames). In addition, we divided the classes that participated in the study into two groups based on the presence of learning interactions: one research group ("the active group") in which learning was extensively demonstrated in the
9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT CLFG, and another in which the extent of learning in the CLFG was little to none ("the non-active group") (Authors, 2016). The questionnaire examines four aspects reflected in the new categories, as presented in Table 2, each describes students' attitudes towards a different aspect:
RI PT
a. The importance of Facebook
b. The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment c. The cognitive influence of the CLFG
SC
d. The affective influence of the CLFG
M AN U
[INSERT TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE]
3.2.2 The "Tips for the effective group" question
An additional open question was integrated into the questionnaire to capture
TE D
students' needs in the Facebook environment (PRE): "If you have an opportunity to impact your CLFG, what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" In the post questionnaire this question was modified in
EP
order to learn how the CLFG contributed to the students learning (POST). We asked:
AC C
(a) "Did you find that the group contributed to your chemistry learning?", and (b) "if so, describe the contribution?" The first question, "You have an opportunity to impact your CLFG; what tips
would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" was answered by 196 students (Table 1). The students' answers were sorted into categories using a bottom-up approach (Chi, 1997). Each answer included several statements and could be associated with more than one category. The following categories emerged: group climate, learning management systems (LMS), sharing 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT files, availability, links, learning discourse, activity, and general enrichment. About 15% of all answers were randomly forwarded to a science teaching expert and full agreement was obtained over the chosen categorization. Table 3 presents the categories and sample statements.
RI PT
The statistical tests were chosen according to the variables' distribution. Correlations between categorical variables were examined using the Chi-Square test. Correlations between categorical and continuous variables were examined using a t-
SC
test for dependent samples.
3.2.3 Differences between the active and non-active CLFGs
M AN U
In order to assess the extent of the difference in the distribution of interactions between the active and non-active groups, we used the Odds Ratio test. This test provides a relative estimate of an observable effect when comparing an intervention group and a control group. An odds ratio value greater than 1 indicates an advantage
TE D
for the intervention over the control group.
In all statistical analyses performed, a p-value of 0.05 or less was considered
AC C
4. Results
EP
as statistically significant.
As mentioned, an "active group" in the context of this research was a CLFG in
which learning was extensively demonstrated, and a "non-active group" was one in which the extent of learning in the CLFG was little to none. A detailed description of the learning that occurs in an active CLFG is presented elsewhere (Authors, 2016). In order to compare the two types of groups, we examined whether the groups showed differences in the pre questionnaire before the students used the CLFG. No significant differences were found in the responses to the attitudes questionnaire between the
11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT active and the non-active groups. Most importantly, the average score for both groups regarding "The importance of Facebook" category did not show a significant difference. We were also interested in exploring whether students had different suggestions regarding the purpose of the CLFG. This was examined through the
RI PT
question, "You have an opportunity to impact your CLFG; what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" From the total of 350 students that answered the pre questionnaire (see Table 1), this question was answered
SC
by 196 students, of whom 96 belonged to an active group, and 100 students belonged to a non-active group. Students' answers were sorted into the research categories (see
M AN U
Table 3). We calculated the frequency of each category and performed an Odds Ratio analysis to compare the two groups. The analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups in the pre-questionnaire, indicating a similar starting point for
TE D
the two groups.
[INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE]
EP
Interestingly, students not only suggested what they are interested to have in the CLFGs—they also indicated what they wished they would not have in them. We
AC C
explored these responses and summed them up in the "Ten Commandments" for a chemistry teacher embarking on establishing a CLFG (see Figure 1)
[INSERT FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE]
After one year of using the CLFG, differences in students' attitudes were assessed. The average scores of the four categories were compared between the pre and post for each research group (active and non-active). As shown in Table 4, among the active groups, there is only a significant difference in the attitude toward the presence of
12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT formal learning in the Facebook environment. Among the non-active groups, we observed a significant negative difference in the cognitive and affective aspects.
RI PT
[INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE]
The same analysis was repeated for the active groups that participated in the study for two years (POST2 at the end of the second year) (Table 5). The results indicate
SC
significant changes in the attitudes of those students who participated in the CLFG for
M AN U
two years in four out of the five categories in the attitude questionnaire.
[INSERT TABLE 5 ABOUT HERE]
In order to determine whether students perceived the CLFG as a platform that contributed to their learning, we compared the proportion of students who indicated
TE D
the platform as contributing within each group and between the two groups (Figure 2). A chi-square test showed a significant difference within the active group (χ2 = 56.18, df = 1, p < 0.0001), and between the two groups (χ2 = 16.32, df = 1, p < 0.0001). No
AC C
EP
significant difference was observed in the data of the non-active group.
[INSERT FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE]
Furthermore, students' responses to the question "how did the CLFG
contribute to you as a student?" were analyzed. Two hundred and five students out of 210 responded to the question. Students' answers were categorized according to the same research categories (Table 2) that were used to analyze the students' tips for an effective group in the pre questionnaire. Both active and non-active groups reported that the CLFG had contributed to the learning aspect, as shown in Table 6. It is 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT interesting that the non-active groups did not mention at all the group climate aspect, as opposed to the active groups that did mention it.
[INSERT TABLE 6 ABOUT HERE]
RI PT
5. Discussion
According to the Community of Inquiry theory of Garrison et al. (2000), social presence is one of the critical dimensions in an online community. Bielaczyc (2006)
SC
suggested that in order to develop a learning environment, one should also address cultural beliefs. This theoretical basis motivated us to explore students' attitudes
M AN U
toward CLFGs and the learning that occurs within them. As indicated in this study, students' perceptions and attitudes regarding CLFG is an important factor when designing educational programs using SNS or when determining a policy for integrating SNS into educational settings. We will discuss the results of the study
TE D
according to the research questions that will accompany the discussion by mentioning relevant implications for education:
EP
1) What are students' needs and expectations from the CLFG?
AC C
In the pre-questionnaire, students were asked: "If you have an opportunity to impact your CLFG, what tips would you like to give in order to make the group more effective and successful?" Several needs were raised by the students: Students described the group climate that can support their learning in the CLFG. They expected to have a learning discourse together with a supportive social climate. They also suggested using the CLFG as a LMS in which the teacher can post formal announcements, although they insisted that the teacher should not neglect her presence in an actual classroom. The students mentioned the availability of the CLFG,
14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT which encourages them to upload questions, links, and files, with no dependence on when or where the students are. The different needs described by the students were observed in the actual activities of the CLFGs (Authors, 2016). This suggests that students' needs, as
RI PT
indicated in their pre-activity questionnaires, actually materialize in the group activities as they progress. In addition, the categories observed in relation to the students' needs are compatible with the components required in the CoI (Garrison et
SC
al., 2000) for establishing an online learning community. The cognitive presence mentioned by Garrison et al. (2000) includes learning discourses, links to relevant
M AN U
sites, and students' suggestions for sharing files. The social presence includes the social discourses and the enrichment activities. And the teaching presence includes LMS, links to relevant sites, sharing files, general enrichment, and learning discourses. According to Garrison et al. (2000), identifying all three presences is
TE D
essential for supporting learning in an online community of learners. The students not only described their needs and requirements pertaining to the CLFG, but also provided the "Don'ts", which they found to be equally important.
EP
These were summed up as the "Ten Commandments" for the teacher, and provide a
AC C
meaningful tool for educators who wish to use SNS as a supportive learning environment. Some students' conclusions follow: The students do not want their chemistry teacher to be their friend, they do not want the teacher to use the Facebook slang, and they want the teacher to give them their homework in class and not only through the CLFG. In other words, the students want their teacher to remain as their classroom teacher, even in the informal SNS environment.
15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2) What are students' attitudes toward using Facebook for chemistry learning? In particular to what extent did they perceive that it contributed to their chemistry learning? We will explore the results concerning this question on two separate levels. (a)
RI PT
The first concerns the students' attitudes toward the cognitive and affective influence of the CLFG, the perception of the CLFG's importance, and the perception of the formal learning presence within the CLFG. (b) The second level concerns to what
SC
extent the students perceived that the CLFG contributed to their learning experience.
(a) The results of the first part are related to the comparison of the delta
M AN U
differences between the active and non-active groups after one year. These results show a significant increase in positive attitudes regarding the presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment. Students who participated in an active CLFG perceived the formal learning that occurred in the group more positively than did
TE D
those students who participated in the non-active groups. Moreover, for the non-active groups we found a significant decrease regarding the affective and cognitive influence of the CLFG, as presented in Table 4.
EP
Moreover, it was found that while students who participated in the study for
AC C
two years perceived Facebook as less important for them, they more appreciate the presence of formal learning in Facebook and the cognitive influence of the CLFG. However, this finding was not significant for active groups that participated for only one year. This difference could indicate that having positive attitudes toward CLFG and using them for learning purposes are gradually developed. Therefore, one might consider the usefulness of tracking students' perceptions of the CLFG over time that is longer than one year. It is possible that students who hold more positive stances toward the CLFG, either regarding the cognitive or affective aspects or perceive its
16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT importance as greater, are more motivated to participate in the groups, and therefore, feel that that the CLFGs facilitate learning within those groups. (b) Concerning the perception of overall contribution of the CLFGs, the results of the Chi-square test indicate that students in active groups perceived the
RI PT
CLFG platform as more contributing, compared to students in the non-active groups (Figure 2). The Chi-square analysis illustrates the correlation between the learning
SC
activity in the CLFG and the perception of its contribution.
When exploring the explanations students provided to the CLFGs contribution
M AN U
to learning, we found that there was no significant difference in perception of any component by the students between the groups (active and non-active, Table 6), despite the fact that only the active groups had actually experienced learning. It is possible that students' perceptions regarding the contribution of the CLFG are
TE D
determined to a lesser extent by the experience of learning interactions and to a greater extent by the mere experience of using a CLFG. Support for this view was obtained from previous studies that indicated that students who accessed their
EP
teacher's Facebook website had higher levels of motivation and affective learning and
AC C
had experienced a more positive classroom climate (e.g., Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007) regardless of the teachers' activity. When zooming in to the contribution's dimensions, in the non-active groups
we find no reference to the contributing effect of the group climate category. This finding is in line with the CoI theory (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000), suggesting that in order for an online community of inquiry to be successful, all three components (cognitive, pedagogical, and social) must exist. According to the results,
17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT if students do not perceive the social components as a contributing factor in the CLFG, the learning in that group is negatively affected. Note that a decrease in students' attitudes regarding the importance of Facebook was recorded after two years of activity in the CLFG, as shown in Table 5.
RI PT
This result identifies a general change in the way high-school students use Facebook (Istrategylabs, 2014); this trend was obtained and explained in a different study that examined the CLFG from teachers' perspectives (Authors, 2015). Facebook is only
SC
one example of a modern means of social media, and other SNSs can also serve as candidates for teaching chemistry. We chose to focus on Facebook in our research,
M AN U
when the study was conducted, given its broad use, its relative availability, and its advanced features for integrating chemistry teaching. However during the two years of the study the activity of high school students in Israel has shifted to other SNS (e.g., Whatapp) and this trend is reflected here too (Istrategylabs, 2014). There are
TE D
other SNSs also worth exploring, such as Edmondo in the context of higher education (e.g. (Duark, 2017)). Exploring other platforms, such as "Whatsapp", which is gradually replacing Facebook, or others may be considered in future research. One
EP
should note that perhaps instead of chasing technology that is fashionable and rapidly
AC C
changing, we might want to consider adopting and improving educational-oriented SNSs, in accordance to local needs and culture.
6. Implications
Several implications can be identified from the current study. First, students should be engaged prior to the establishment of an online learning group in order to assess their needs and expectations. Second, with regards to those needs of students from the social network learning environment, we recommend that before using a
18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT SNS in educational settings, teachers should undergo adequate training that includes a workshop in which they are exposed to students' needs that arouse from the study. It is worthwhile to raise teachers' awareness of the three components that are imperative for maintaining an online learning community (Garrison et al., 2000).Therefore, it is
RI PT
important to stress that teachers should not ignore the social aspects of a CLFG, as part of a social network. Students feel that they have gained more when all three aspects, including the social presence, are present in the SNS.
SC
Third, our study demonstrates that groups in which learning occured promote higher positive attitudes of students. Therefore, teachers should strive to engage
M AN U
students in the group in a way that facilitate learning (i.e., become more active) in order to make them more effective for teaching purposes.
7. Conclusions
TE D
This study focused on the utilization of online learning groups on SNSs from the point of view of students. The study highlights the importance of engaging students in the process and sheds light on their needs and expectations in order to
EP
facilitate an effective experience with online learning. In particular, we found that
AC C
there is a significant correlation between the weather the Facebook group is active or not and the way students perceive the Facebook group as contributing experience for their learning.
This study has a several limitations. First, the study was performed in Israel
and is subjected to cultural biases that might not be present in other countries. Second, this study is focused on Facebook as an example of a SNS utilized for learning purposes. The field of SNSs is rapidly changing and one might consider other types of SNSs as possible candidates for study. In addition, the fact that the social network
19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT environment among youth is rapidly changing, places teachers in a difficult position, because they have to catch up with the fast changing trends. Therefore, we propose that future research will examine learning in other types of SNSs, such as "WhatsApp", and also in other cultural settings and different
References
SC
Authors (2015). Education and Information Technologies.
RI PT
countries. These studies will help to solidify the findings and enable generalization.
Authors (2016). Journal of Science Education and Technology.
M AN U
Ainin, S, Naqshbandi, M M, Moghavvemi, S, & Jaafar, NI . (2015). Facebook usage, socialization and academic performance. Computers & Education, 83, 64-73. Aydin, S. (2014). Foreign language learners' interactions with their teachers on Facebook. System, 42, 155-163.
TE D
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: a practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
EP
Chou, H. T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). "They are happier and having better lives than I
AC C
am": the impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others' lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2), 117-121. Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3-14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X031004003 Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2 ed.). U.S.A: SAGE.
20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Durak, G. (2017). Using Social Learning Networks (SLNs) in Higher Education: Edmodo Through the Lenses of Academics. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(1). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2623
RI PT
Erdem, M., & Kibar, P. N. (2014). Students' opinions on facebook supported blended learning environment. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1): 199-206.
SC
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 153-181.
M AN U
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2001.tb00779.x
Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 87-105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
TE D
Gettman, H. J., & Cortijo, V. (2015). “Leave Me and My Facebook Alone!” Understanding College Students’ Relationship with Facebook and its Use for Academic Purposes. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching
EP
and Learning, 9(1).
AC C
Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social
media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.
Greenhow, C. (2011). Youth, learning, and social media. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(2), 139.
21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Guzmán-Simón, F., García-Jiménez, E., & López-Cobo, I. (2017). Undergraduate students’ perspectives on digital competence and academic literacy in a Spanish University. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 196-204. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.040
RI PT
Hamid, S., Waycott, J., Kurnia, S., & Chang, S. (2015). Understanding students'
perceptions of the benefits of online social networking use for teaching and learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 1-9.
SC
Hershkovitz, A., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2013). Student-teacher relationship in the Facebook era: the student perspective. International Journal of Continuing
M AN U
Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 23(1), 33-52. doi: 10.1504/IJCEELL.2013.051765
Hew, K.F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behaviour 27(2), 662-676. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020
TE D
Istrategylabs (2014, January 15). 3 Million teens leave Facebook in 3 years: The 2014 Facebook demographic report. Retrieved from: http://istrategylabs.com/2014/01/3-million-teens-leave-facebook-in-3-years-
EP
the-2014-facebook-demographic-report/
AC C
Jenkins, E. W. (2006). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42(1), 49-88. doi:10.1080/03057260608560220
Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179-187. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003
22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Kurtz, G. (2011). Assimilation of ICT in Israel: challenges and implementation. In D. Chen, & G. Kurtz (Eds.), ICT, Learning and Teaching (pp. 11-32). Or Yehuda: The Center for Academic Studies. (in Hebrew) Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration
RI PT
and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 141-155. doi: 10.1080/17439880902923606
SC
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2013). Is it a tool suitable for learning? A critical review of the literature on Facebook as a technology‐enhanced learning environment. Journal of
M AN U
Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 487-504
Mao, J. (2014). Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 213-223.
TE D
Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on ‘Facebook’: the effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication
EP
Education. 56(1), 1-17. doi: 10.1080/03634520601009710
AC C
Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., & Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook groups as LMS: A case study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning,
13(4), 33-48.
Milošević, I., Živković, D., Arsić, S., & Manasijević, D. (2015). Facebook as virtual classroom–Social networking in learning and teaching among Serbian students. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 576-585.
23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Naqshbandi, M., Ainin, S., Jaafar, N. I., & Shuib, N. L. M. (2017). To Facebook or to Face Book? An investigation of how academic performance of different personalities is affected through the intervention of Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 167-176.
RI PT
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.012
Nekuda (2016, March 1). Data on the use of Facebook in Israel in 2015. Retrieved from http://www.nekuda.co.il/facebook-israel-2015/ (in Hebrew)
SC
Prescott, J., Wilson, S., & Becket, G. (2013). Facebook use in the learning
environment: do students want this?. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(3),
M AN U
345-350. doi:10.1080/17439884.2013.788027
Qureshi, I. A., Raza, H., & Whitty, M. (2015). Facebook as e-learning tool for higher education institutes. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), 6(4), 440-448.
TE D
Rasiah, R. R. V. (2014). Transformative higher education teaching and learning: Using social media in a team-based learning environment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 369-379. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1435
EP
Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010).
AC C
Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 134-140. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002
Schroeder, J., & Greenbowe, T. (2009). The chemistry of Facebook: using social networking to create an online community for the organic chemistry. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(4), Retrieved from: http://gator.uhd.edu/~williams/AT/ChemOfFB.htm
24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, E. E. (2016). “A real double-edged sword:” Undergraduate perceptions of social media in their learning. Computers & Education, 103, 44-58.
RI PT
Sobaih, A. E. E., Moustafa, M. A., Ghandforoush, P., & Khan, M. (2016). To use or not to use? Social media in higher education in developing countries.Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 296-305.
SC
Sturgeon, C. M., & Walker, C. (2009). Faculty on facebook: Confirm or deny?
Proceedings from the14th Annual Instructional Technology Conference,
M AN U
Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tenneesse, (March 2009). Retrieved from: http://www.efmasia.info/pdf/deny/7.pdf Tess, P. A. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual)–A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), A60-A68.
TE D
Towner, T., & Muñoz, C. (2011). Facebook and education: A classroom connection. Educating educators with social media: Cutting edge technologies in higher education. Bingley, U, K.: Emerald, 1, 33-57.
EP
Yunus, M. M., & Salehi, H. (2012). The effectiveness of Facebook groups on
AC C
Teaching and Improving Writing: Students’ perceptions. Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 1(6), 87-96.
25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 1 Number of participating students according to group type at the different study stages (PRE/POST)
group
active
RI PT
Total
Non-
group
Attitude questionnaire (PRE)
350
184
166
Attitude questionnaire (POST)
319
181
138
Tips for effective group (PRE)
196
96
100
Contributed (POST)
210
139
71
How it contributed (POST)
205
SC
Type of questionnaire
Active
137
68
AC C
EP
TE D
questionnaire (PRE only)
M AN U
Need analysis and expectations
707
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 2 Attitudes questionnaire for the students: Aspects and sample statements Aspect
Cronbach's
Sample statement
alpha The importance of
0.76
routine."
The presence of formal
0.69
the CLFG
linked with Facebook."
M AN U
The cognitive influence of
"I think my studying should be
SC
learning in Facebook
RI PT
"Facebook is part of my daily
0.74
"The use of Facebook can help me better understand different issues."
AC C
EP
the CLFG
0.78
TE D
The affective influence of
"I would feel more comfortable in the classroom if we had a Facebook group."
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 3 Categories and sample statements - questionnaire to identify students' needs and expectations Sample statement "(I hope that) there will be a fun environment"
Learning discourse
"Mostly for preparing for exams so that anyone who has questions in preparing for an exam can present them and the teacher will answer for the benefit of the whole group"
LMS – Learning Management System
"To write the homework assignments, reminders for exams and quizzes, and the hand-in paper"
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Category Group climate
Sharing files
"Uploading materials, presentations, and exercises before the exams"
Links
"Publishing video clips or animations that illustrate the learned materials"
Activity
AC C
EP
Enrichment
"Immediately answering questions"
TE D
Availability
"Active, daily participation of the teacher and the students" "(I hope that) interesting stuff will be published, not necessarily related to the learned material to create interest"
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4 Delta difference in the average scores of the active and non-active groups regarding four aspects (paired students).
PRE
3.053 0.133
n.s.
3.072
3.044 0.279***
<.0001
The cognitive influence of the CLFG
TE D
3.165 -0.089
3.189 -0.075
AC C
EP
The affective influence of the CLFG
3.121
M AN U
The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment
∆
0.223*
SC
P value
PRE The importance of Facebook
∆
Non-Active (N=121) P value 0.013
RI PT
Active (N=148)
0.078
n.s.
n.s.
3.235
-0.355***
0.0001
n.s.
3.035
-0.267***
0.001
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 5 Delta difference in the average scores of the four aspects for active classes with two "POST" time frames (N=41) POST2
∆
P value
The importance of Facebook
3.472
2.992
-0.48**
0.0025
The presence of formal learning in the Facebook environment
2.858
3.315
0.457**
0.006
The cognitive influence of the CLFG
2.881
3.263
AC C
EP
SC 0.382*
M AN U
TE D
The affective influence of 3.042 the CLFG
RI PT
PRE
3.244
0.202
0.0167
n.s.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 6 Distribution of contribution categories as indicated by the students in the active and non-active groups
Category
n(%)
41(57.7)
Learning discourse
Availability
21(29.6)
Files
Links Group climate
8(11.3)
Enrichment
0(0)
EP
69(49.6)
Availability
29(20.8)
M AN U
13(18.3)
TE D
Files
AC C
88(63.3)
SC
Learning discourse
LMS – Learning 16(22.5) Management System
Active (N=139)
RI PT
Non Active (N=71) n(%)
Category
0(0)
LMS – Learning 21(15.1) Management System Links Group climate
18(12.9)
Enrichment
4(2.8)
7(5)
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Figure 1 Ten Commandments of don't's for the teacher in the CLFG.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Figure 2 The platform as contributing within each group and between the two groups
SC
RI PT
***
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
***
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT •
This study explores students' perceptions of using Facebook for chemistry learning
•
Maintaining formal conduct of the teacher in the SNS is preferable by students
•
Teachers should maintain their classroom presence even when using SNS for
•
RI PT
teaching Active learning correlates with positive students' attitudes toward learning in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
SNS