Facebook as a Tool: Exploring the use of Facebook in Teaching and Learning

Mohd Nihra Haruzuan Mohamad Said, Lokman Mohd Tahir, Mohd Fadzli Ali Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia nihra@utm.my

Abstract— In this paper, we explore the use of Facebook as an alternative to learning management system for tertiary teaching and learning purposes in a Malaysian university context. Three embedded approaches for Facebook were implemented, namely for mixing information and learning resources, mixing expertise and mixing context of learning. Each of embedded approaches was analyzed through two ways: within and cross-case analysis. The results from cross-case analysis indicate that Facebook has the potential of mixing affordances of technical, social and pedagogical for teaching and learning, and thus can deliver positive tool for teaching and learning but can also be a negative tool if it is not appropriately utilize.

Keywords; Facebook; Social Networking Site, Tertiary Teaching and Learning

I. INTRODUCTION

In today’s climate, students entering university are no longer isolated learners [12]. Their engagement with digital learning resources and social networking sites (SNS) are strong forces in education today [12][13][14][15]. In fact, many of them have experienced social networking activities prior to entering the university and the tertiary classroom, which indirectly exposes them to the culture or ‘habitat’ of digital learner [17], whereby students contribute as much as they take [9]. These are often students who have grown up with technology in a world requiring them to be highly connected, such as Facebook [13].

In recent years, Facebook has been cited as the most popular SNS with more than 1 billion active users per month [8], [19]. In Malaysia, 13.3 million or 45. 5 per cent of the total population in the country is Facebook active users which put Malaysia on the 8th spot in Asia and 21st place in the world [3]. This is not surprising as more teenagers and youth joining Facebook in Malaysia are aged between 18 and 24 or 34.5 per cent of the total population [3], where they use Facebook platform to get together to broadcast information or status, sharing and tagging photos, and communicating their lifestyle.

Although, Facebook is not specifically designed for educational purposes, there is steadily growing number of studies that investigated the use of Facebook in education especially on the aspects of information sharing, and usage frequency [8], [19]. Recently, few studies have started to explore the use of Facebook in teaching and learning, where most of studies are reported within the context of tertiary education in which Facebook is used as formal instructional learning environment [1], [2], [11], [13], [16].

A study done by Noraffandy Yahaya et al. [11] reported that the postings on Facebook invited more immediate feedback from students and they were found to be more actively participating and collaborating in writing complex English tasks. Another similar study conducted by Abdullah [1] revealed that students interacting with practitioner designers in Facebook help improved their design work because of designers’ consistent feedback of which were troublesome to be carried out through university’s formal learning environment.

Nevertheless, some studies also reported negative aspects of Facebook, for example, unprecedented scale of information sharing on Facebook can link to undesirable outcomes as “jealousy, increase in social tension, social overload, isolation and even depression” [6, p.2]. Other studies indicate that Facebook users achieved a lower academic achievement (e.g. GPA) because of their time spent per week on Facebook were longer than studying compared to non-users [7].

Recent studies also indicate that Facebook has a mixture of pros and cons or can also be known as ‘double-edged sword’ for teaching and learning [8] [16]. It can be useful tool for teaching and learning but also can be catastrophic if it is not appropriately utilize. However, with the increasingly students as well as teachers are using Facebook, this study was intended to explore its potential as an alternative for learning management system within the tertiary teaching and learning context. Thus, this paper present cases which are drawn predominantly from Manca and Ranieri [8], namely mixing information and learning resources, mixing expertise and mixing context of learning via Facebook in teaching and learning.

II. METHODS

The research in this study employed interpretive methods with data collected from Facebook page was analyzed through two ways: within-case analysis and cross-case analysis, in order to reveal meaningful insight of how Facebook was used, what the perceived affordances were, and its limitations towards students’ learning.

III. PARTICIPANTS

The students participating in the research were Malaysian undergraduate full-time pre-service teachers, namely Science and Computer with Education (Mathematics) (SPT) and Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL); and part-time in-service teachers from Islamic Studies (SPI) and Sport Science (SPS). The students in each programme were in the final year of their study and were enrolled in a Computer

2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering

978-1-4799-3592-5/14 $31.00 © 2014 IEEE

DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2014.29

120

Education course known as Teaching Methods in Computer Science, which was conducted under the Department of Sciences, Mathematics and Creative Multimedia, Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (see Table 1).

Table 1 Background of participants

Characteristics NProgramme of

studyFull-time Mathematics (SPT)

Full-time TESL (SPL)Part-time Islamic Studies (SPI)Part-time Sport Science (SPS)

18182222

Gender FemaleMale

5327

Ethnicity MalayChineseIndian

62144

Age 19-23 years24-30 years

1529

31 years and above 36Education level Undergraduate- Final Year 80

IV. TEACHING APPROACHES The teaching and learning of Teaching Methods in

Computer Science consisted of conventional face-to-face lectures together with Facebook participation. The course ran for 15 weeks, comprised of 13 weeks of lectures, and one week each of mid-semester break and study week. During the course, students in each programme were formed into groups of 4-6 students. The Facebook group activities were designed to enable groups in each programme to participate online and be involved in discussion. The designed Facebook page and related activities for the course are explained as in Table 2.

Table 2 Facebook page related activities

Design Descriptions Type of assessment Ways Weeks

Approach1

Mixing information and learning resources.All lectures notes and course materials were made available through Facebook page similar to learning management system (LMS). The essence of approach 1 is to use Facebook as alternative to LMS.

Sharing information and referencesAssignment submission Article reports

� FB announcement and notification

� FB contents channel� FB info channel

1-3

Approach2

Mixing expertise.Approach 2 is specifically designed to foster peripheral and emergent interactions occurring on Facebook through different actor, such as different users or teachers and as well as other practicing professionals. The essence of approach 2 is to move away from closed inter-group discussion but encourage open discussion that can be viewed and access by public users. Hence to invite more feedback.

Open debate and discussion

� Within group (open to students of similar programme)

� Across group (open to all students in the course)

4-7

Approach3

Mixing context of learning.Approach 3 is designed to enable students share their personal and academic interests and aspirations, thus mixing different contexts of learning, social and personal life. The essence of approach 3 is to allow students to post on Facebook page or their wall related to affective communication (e.g. group reinforcement, encouragement and support).

Peer feedback and comment

� Within group (open to students of similar programme)

� Across group (open to all students in the course)

10-12

V. THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDYThe purpose of this study was to explore the use of

Facebook in teaching and learning as well as identifying itspotentials and limitations. In addition, this study also aimed to answer question regarding ‘what are the perceived affordances and limitations of Facebook in tertiary teaching and learning?’

VI. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS This study collected data from multiple resources,

namely students’ post entries on Facebook page, interviews and survey. Data were analyzed using within-case and cross-

case analysis where within-case analysis describing how Facebook was used within individual cases and the perceived affordances by students. In individual case, Wolfram Alpha [20] was used to get an overall overview of Facebook page usage. Wolfram Alpha is a comprehensive expert-level computational engine that analyze data and generate reports across thousands computer domain including social networking sites i.e. Facebook [20]. Report generates from wolfram Alpha for Facebook comprises personal analytics data such as status, photo, post and structure of friend network [20].

For overall findings, cross-case analysis was conducted to summarize the common findings from individual cases

121

and inform the affordances of Facebook in terms of technical, social and pedagogical that generally recognized from the cases. Table 3 illustrates an outline of the cases for data analysis.

Table 3 An outline of cases for data analysis

Case Description Approach Sources1 Mixing

information and learning resources

Course FB posts, Wolfram analysis, interviews,

surveys

2 Mixing expertise Group FB posts, Wolfram analysis, interviews,

surveys3 Mixing context of

learningProgramme FB posts, Wolfram

analysis, interviews, surveys

VII. FINDINGS

A. Case 1: Mixing information and learning resources In this case, several channels were used to deliver course

contents and learning resources. These channels were created using Facebook group facilities but using different labels such as learning resources, assignments and discussion.Although, this resembles traditional learning management system (LMS) format, however, contents uploaded were not only from teacher but also from students’ contributions. As reported by student A, “from the notification... and if we got any message [due to] lot of assignment... my friends will

create a group in FB [and] then we use FB to discuss [give idea] and [give] information”. The information delivered in Facebook page was not limited to pre-defined contents but also from various sources as well as from students’ inputs. This is supported by student B stated, “…like last time, when we got task for coursework, we will find it online and present [share] in FB…”

Wolfram Alpha analysis (Fig. 1) visualizes the connected network of Facebook page between students of different programme of studies. The analysis shows that full-time students such as SPT and SPL were quite distant from part-time students from SPI and SPL, in terms of blending their information and resources. This is supported by student C, who said, “…their information and resources sometimes quite funny, for example their label name for the group…Adam Hawa…although we have same activities, we just look at how they conducted their activities in FB”. Full-time students also stated that they felt uncomfortable blending their information and uploaded contents with part-time students due to the fact that it can be easily misguided. Student D stated, “I felt uncomfortable because it was so messy and difficult to identify info…”

By mixing information and contents, some students also concerned that their shared contents for the course can be seen or downloaded by their Facebook friends, although they had been informed with the open policy of the course. They felt unsafe and preferred their work to be in private or close channel. Student E explained, “…need to adjust in terms of sharing [contents]…some of it must be in private...”

Figure 1 Analysis of Facebook network

B. Case 2: Mixing expertise In this case, Facebook page and group facilities were

used to explore the affordances of open discussion at two levels: within students’ group of studies and across group of studies. The aim of discussion activities were to foster different roles of interactions and to move away from traditional forum-based closed discussion to more open

discussion where it can be viewed and accessed by public users. Based on Wolfram Alpha analysis, more than half of total students in the course (based on the roles of social neighbors and social gateways, the terms that were produced by Wolfram Alpha to denote different social roles in Facebook network) did not have connection with other student in other programme of studies while only four students which were known as social connectors had

SPL

SPT SPI

SPS

122

connection with other students in different programme. Also, 28 students were found to have more than 500 friends. The highest recorded number of friends in the network was 3155 and the lowest was six. These students were known as social outsiders (see Table 4).

Table 4 Facebook roles

Roles Descriptions NSocial Insiders

A social insider is a friend who shares a large of number of friends.

28

Social Outsiders

A social outsider is someone who shares at most one friend.

3

Social Connectors

A social connector is someone who connects together groups of friends.

4

Social Neighbors

A social neighbor is someone with a small number of out-of-networks.

40

Social Gateways

A social gateway is someone with a large number of out-of-network friends.

5

Total 80

In traditional forum-based discussion in which students have a clear defined role and a certain kind of expectations in completing the discussion, in open-based Facebook discussion, some students were seen to go beyond closed discussion into sharing and tagging their member of network into their discussion activities using the share and tag buttons. Also the perceived interesting and good comments or ideas can be identified through the total number of likesreceived. As stated by student B, “…the number of like you received for post indicated that the post somehow interesting or worth it to be share and also it can boost confident…”

C. Case 3: Mixing context of learning In this case, Facebook page was used to host different

presentation of the students’ works. Although the idea of presentation in Facebook might resembles classroom presentation, the different was students were required to post on Facebook page or their wall related to affective communication (e.g. group reinforcement, encouragement and support) of related presentation. Based on analysis of 258 of total Facebook wall posts using Wolfram Alpha, 43 or 17 per cent of total postings were using affective words followed by social words (126 or 49 per cent of total words) and emotional words (87 or 34 per cent of total words) (see Table 5).

Table 5 Types of communication

Type Descriptions NAffective words e.g. group reinforcement,

encouragement and support43

Social words e.g. joke, humor and off-topics

126

Emotional words e.g. greeting, please, thanking and the use of emoticon

87

Total 258

It is interesting to note that students used less affective words compared to social and emotional words in Facebook page wall. Social words consists of joke, humor and funny way of expressing ideas and emotional words using emoticon were evidenced across all comments and feedbacks. Students also were seen to take informal conversation approach although the activities were related to formal academic assessment. As highlighted by student D, “I think yes… because posting in FB should be more public meaning informal…” This is also supported by student E that said, “I believe… just let it go and we will be able to see more things [comments]…I think we can see more natural things [comments] occur… in a discussion…”

VIII. DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to explore the use of Facebook in teaching and learning leading to understanding its potentials and limitations for teaching and learning. Some common affordances of Facebook based on the analysis of previous cases are addressed next.

A. Technical affordances In terms of technical aspects of using Facebook, most of

students did not have any problem at all because the students were familiar with the environment due to the fact that they were existing Facebook users. However, some students reported difficulties in finding and locating certain functions or information in the course Facebook wall due to Facebook did not support traditional threaded forum discussions.

An important issue raised by students was to keep their academic contents safe and secure. This is because Facebook page was accessible to anyone in their network or their mutual friends, so the concern was genuinely in protecting their academic works prior to the evaluation of the teachers. Some students also did not want their network friends to see their comments in the course and highlighted the importance of privacy or confidentiality of certain aspect of activities (e.g. discussion).

The students also raised some issue regarding advertisement of certain product that they can see in their Facebook page wall shared by students in the course. Although the course encouraged open policy, the need of some restrictions especially on third-party programs (e.g. games and products) should be taken seriously to avoid distractions on learning and misuse by students.

B. Social affordances In terms of social affordances of Facebook that

evidenced in the course and mentioned by students were the sharing, tagging and like button functions of Facebook that fostered informal interactions and learning in the course. By blending the formal and informal aspects of learning, students felt the activities were natural and welcoming for them to make posting without any hesitation or worry to make mistake. Such interactions were clearly evident in Case 2 and 3, where some students tagging their other friends for help and support. Also some students provided additional

123

resources as in Case 1 by sharing other learning resources that were not limited to pre-defined contents in the course.

C. Pedagogical affordances In terms of pedagogical affordances of Facebook for

teaching and learning that were identified in this study resembled the traditional learning management system but with exception that Facebook allows more natural reflection from students through its informal nature of interactions through postings and sharing. Facebook also promotes different way of thinking for teaching where traditional teaching and learning in formal education tend to separate the aspect of ‘life’ from ‘studying’ and ‘home’ from ‘lectures’, and teachers’ who use Facebook for teaching are appeared to unconsciously replicating and reinforcing these roles in their teaching [16]. The affordances offer by Facebook for blending students’ personal and academic interests provides a new level of thinking for teachers to utilize it and translate it into appropriate learning activities.

IX. CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study was to explore the use of Facebook in teaching and learning leading to understanding its potentials and limitations for teaching and learning. It is appeared that Facebook has the potential of mixing affordances of technical, social and pedagogical for teaching and learning although Facebook is designed for socialization through creating friends network. Eventhough, Facebook has many potential benefits for teaching and learning, it also has several concerns that need to be considered when planning it in teaching. Facebook’s nature of informal interactions might contradict to the formal nature of teaching and learning, and thus need careful thinking. This research indicates that Facebook can be positive tool for teaching and learning but can also be a negative tool if it is not appropriately utilize.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors would like to thank Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and Ministry of Education (MoE) Malaysia for their support in making this project possible. This work was supported by the Fundamental ResearchGrant Scheme (Vote No.4F171) initiated by UTM and MoE.

REFERENCES

[1] Abdullah, Z. (2011). Collisions of two communities: Developing higher education student teacher’ creativity in design through a social networking collaboration with professional designers.Nottingham, UK: School of Education, University of Nottingham.

[2] Baran, B. (2010). Facebook as a formal instructional environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), E146-E149.

[3] Borneo Post. (2013). 13.3 million M’sians are Facebook users. Retrieved from http://www.theborneopost.com/2013/06/16/13-3-million-msians-are-facebook-users/.

[4] Duffy, P. (2011). Facebook or Faceblok: Cautionary tales exploring the rise of social networking within tertiary eduction. In M. J. W. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds). Web 2.0-base e-learning: Appling social

informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 284-300). Hershey, PA:IGI Global.

[5] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2007), The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12: 1143–1168. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x

[6] Krasnova, H, Wenninger, H., Widjaja, T. & Buxmann, P. (2013). Envy on Facebook: A Hidden Threat to Users’ Life Satisfaction? 11th International Conference on Wirtschafts informatik, Leipzig, Germany.

[7] Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in human behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245.

[8] Manca, S. and 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 Computer Assisted Learning. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12007

[9] Mason, & Rennie, F. (2008). E-learning and social networking Handbook: Resources for higher education. New York, USA: Routledge.

[10] Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2009). The effects of teacher self-disclosure via Facebook on teacher credibility. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 175-183.

[11] Noraffandy Yahaya, Shufianah Puteri Yusof, Noor Dayana Abd Halim (2013). Students’ participation in social networking writing tasks, 5thWorld Conference on Educational Sciences, Rome Italy, 5-8February 2013.

[12] Said, M. N. H M. (2013). Online collaborative learning in tertiary ICT education to enhance students' learning in Malaysia.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.

[13] Said, M. N. H. M., Forret, M., & Eames, C. (2013). Online Collaborative Learning in Tertiary ICT Education: Constraints and Suggestions for Improvement. Informatics and Creative Multimedia (ICICM’13), pp.153,158. doi: 10.1109/ICICM.2013.33

[14] Said, M. N. H. M. & Lokman Mohd Tahir (2013). Towards Identification of Students’ Holistic Learning Process through Facebook in Higher Education. 9th International Conference on Cognitive Science, 27-30 August 2013, Kuching, Malaysia.

[15] Said, M. N. H. M., Hassan, J., Idris, A. R., Zahiri, M. A., Forret, M., Eames, C. (2013). Technology-enhanced classroom learning community for promoting tertiary ICT education learning in Malaysia. In K. M. Yusof, M. Arsat, M. T. Borhan, E. de Graff, A. Kolmos, F. A. Phang (Eds.), PBL across cultures (pp. 326-334). Aalborg University Press.

[16] Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: exploring students' education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157-174.

[17] Wenger, E. C., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. CPsquare.

[18] Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[19] Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T. (2012). A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3), 203-220.

[20] Wolfram Alpha (2013). Computational Knowledge Engine. Retrieved from http://www.wolframalpha.com/.

124