Social Media for the Social Classroom
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•1,481 vistas
Draft slides of Dr. Nick Bowman's talk at #UTSMW, the University of Tennessee's Social Media Week 2014. Dr. Bowman represents WVU on the panel "Using Social Media to Engage Students In and Out of the College Classroom" on Wednesday, April 2 at 9:05am. More information at: http://www.cci.utk.edu/social-media-week NOTE: All images in this presentation are attributed to their original source, in the "notes" section of the PPT file; images without attribution are the creation of Dr. Bowman.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Similar a Social Media for the Social Classroom
Similar a Social Media for the Social Classroom (20)
Más de West Virginia University - Department of Communication Studies
Más de West Virginia University - Department of Communication Studies (20)
Último
Último (20)
Social Media for the Social Classroom
- 1. SOCIAL MEDIA, SOCIAL CLASSROOM Bowman, N.D. 2 April 2014 #UTSMW Media and Interaction Lab
- 3. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Mass lectures are an historical and integral part of University experience… • …that often leave students disengaged and disenfranchised “…if the Professor has to use a mike, maybe that’s a sign…[of what?] ”
- 4. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Mass = one to many • Lecture = one-way delivery Join “Us” Mass lectures, as with mass networks are incredibly efficient at distributing information, but their structure does not foster engagement.
- 5. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Common complaints: – Lack of cognitive engagement – Lack of “attendance” – Lack of P2P connectedness • P2Peer & P2Professor
- 6. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • One way to supplement the mass lecture is to increase out-of-class contact, but: – Office hours & study sessions are corporeally restrictive (and can be cost-prohibitive) – e-mail is attentionally restrictive – Learning management systems are administrative, anti-social, and “artificial” to the Millenial(?)
- 7. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Facebook might address these by providing a persistent classroom – a „ready space‟ for engagement and relationships
- 8. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Given the (a) persistent nature and (b) natural usage of Facebook, the platform might serve as – Classroom Commons (Scharwtz, 2010) – “Third Places” (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006)
- 9. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Sample – N = 321 students in one mass lecture (195 male, 126 female; variety of majors) – Voluntary enrollment in supplemental Facebook page • Facebook Usage – 46% joined (n = 148) – Avg. of 6.88 posts (SD = 9.50, skew = 4.09); 1.88 responses per post – Heavy positive skewed, suggesting a few „super-posters‟ with many lurkers
- 10. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS Exam Review Admin Class- Related Links Peer Support Humor Affect Unrelated Links Instructor Support Random # posts 201 119 61 17 16 15 13 8 27 Avg # comments per post 3.60 2.47 1.46 3.41 2.74 .292 .288 .375 1.64 # posts initiated by Instructor 64a 60 39 0 3 1 5 8 13 Avg # of comments per post 3.66 1.22 .923 0 4.33 0 0 .375 2.92 # posts initiated by students 137b 59 22 17 13 14 8 0 14 Avg # of comments per post 3.54 3.71 2.00 3.41 1.15 4.39 3.75 0 .357 One student posted 81 times! 14 starts, 67 responses (final score = 81%)
- 11. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Cognitive learning – In-group: (M = 78.55%, SD = 8.54) – Out-group: (M = 72.64%, SD = 13.60) • “No” correlation between number of posts and grades – r = .158, p = .061 t(319) = 4.71, p < 001, eta-squared = .056
- 12. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Students‟ had more positive dispositions toward – each other • n = 133 “well-wishings” – the course • One of 283 student posts expressed negative commentary (test difficulty) • Of 17/96 negative comments about the course in eSEI, none referenced technology They also showed their Instructor a unique brand of … err … love.
- 13. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Students engaging class online scored higher on their exams – Increased contact with content – Increased contact with each other • A „double-dose‟ of (persistent) content, from multiple perspectives
- 14. SIX POSTS = SIX POINTS • Quasi-experimental design does not account for self-selection – “rich get richer” effect? • How accurate are the “super-users” – Invoking the jury theorem
- 16. TWEETING TO TEACHERS • Twitter is useful for: – enhance social presence in distance learning (Dunlap & Lowenthal, 2009) – Sharing knowledge nuggets “in the moment” (Skiba, 2008) Twitter can get a great way to engage students when a “teachable moment” hits, in particular one outside the classroom.
- 17. TWEETING TO TEACHERS • Early sample of tweets from #WVUCOM425 – Course on Computer-Mediated Communication – N = 34 in class (n = 13 involved on Twitter) – Course also used „combined‟ Facebook page
- 18. Can you identify the two-step flow process in the #wvucom425 map?
- 19. TWEETING TO TEACHERS Pros • Connects students in a meaningful way with extra-curricular content (and people) • Sustains conversations beyond the classroom • Data easy to trace Cons • Cognitive demanding (Bowman et al, 2013) • Exposes students (and their thoughts) to the general public • Open for “hijacking” • Data easy to trace
- 20. CONCLUSIONS • Social media can serve as a supplemental course activity • Aid in… (Keitzmann et al 2011) – Sharing of content – Conversations around content – Groups generating new content
- 21. CONCLUSIONS “His facebook page is awesome! It helps with studying for the test and getting general questions answered fast ...You could tell that he loves the subject and enjoys teaching it too.” ~ Blind Student Eval “Dr. Bowman would stay on almost all night helping students with last minute questions” But also….
- 22. …BUT A WARNING! • “Millenials” ≠ “teched” (Hargittai, 2014) • Not all tech is seen as easy to use (Bowman et al., 2012)
- 23. FOR MORE INFORMATION Nick Bowman, Ph.D. [CV] Twitter (@bowmanspartan) Skype (nicholasdbowman) nicholas.bowman@mail.wvu.edu Media and Interaction Lab http://comm.wvu.edu /fs/research/lab
- 24. COLLABORATORS • Mete Akcaoğlu • Megan Bryand • Lindsay Carr • Matt Martin • Keith Weber • Martin Hawksey • #WVUCOM105 • #WVUCOM425 • David Westerman • Elizabeth Cohen • Jaime Banks • Nicole Ellison
Notas del editor
- Photo credit: http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/06/16/03networking.h03.html (original article: http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/06/16/03networking.h03.html)
- ABSTRACT: Mass lecture courses are a mainstay in university instruction despite their limitations regarding student engagement and resultant learning outcomes. Out-of-class communications andlearning management systems have been developed to address these limitations, but the former is resource-intensive and the latter is often viewed as an administrative rather than pedagogical aid. Facebook groups have proven to be useful and persistent spaces for connecting individuals around innumerable topics of interest. In this study, a course-specific Facebook group was created for an introductory mass media course at a large mid-Atlantic university to serve as a supplemental (and voluntary) space for course content discussions. End-of-the semester grades of the Facebook group users were significantly higher than the non-users, t(319) = 4.71, p < 001. In terms of affective learning, an analyses of the student responses indicated that students generally felt positively about being a part of the Facebook group. Thematic analysis of the Facebook posts indicated that students mainly used this space to discuss exam-related matters. We discuss potential reasons for this outcome, and implications of current research for future research and practice.Photo credit: http://www.edudemic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/facebookclass.jpg
- Hollywood portrayals of the college classroom often invoke images of the stately professor standing behind a lectern “engaging” students in a crowded and chalky classroom theatre. Despite its wide acceptance, the mass lecture − while firmly rooted in the academy (Murphy, 1998) − is known to present many obstacles to instructors and students due largely to the immense size of the learning environment. Mass lectures favor efficiency of communication over careful attention to course content (Ware, 2011). In mass lectures, traditional instructional methods are favored that emphasize one-way communication between instructor and student, minimizing (and potentially marginalizing) the participation of the latter (Tyma, 2011). The colossal size of the mass lecture combined with the passive nature of learning encouraged in such an environment can make it difficult for all students to decode messages as they were intended (Geske, 1992; Jacques, 1997).Citations: Geske, J. (1992). Overcoming the drawbacks of the large lecture class. College Teaching, 40, 151-154.Jacques, D. (1997). Myths that must go. The Australian, Higher Education, 22, 41-42.Murphy, E. (1998). Has the mass lecture still got a place in university teaching? In Black, B. and Stanley, N. (Eds), Teaching and Learning in Changing Times, (pp. 228-232). Paper presented at the 7th Annual Teaching Learning Forum. Perth: UWA. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf1998/murphy-a.htmlTyma, A. (2011). Connecting with what is out there!: Using Twitter in the large lecture. Communication Teacher, 25(3), 175–181. doi:10.1080/17404622.2011.579911Ware, F. (2011). The development of a blended learning approach to delivering information skills training to large health related student audiences with limited staff resource. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 28(3), 230–6. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2011.00942.xPicture credit: http://www.compasseducationstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Seminar_Hall_8468434.jpg
- The main line of criticism on mass lectures is directed at the disadvantages caused by class size (as suggested by the name “mass”) and one-way delivery of knowledge from the instructors to the students (as suggested by the name “lecture”). Here, it might also be argued that the criticisms for the second reason (i.e., lecture) are caused by the first reason (i.e., mass), in that lectures are considered to be efficient ways of delivery information across large numbers of students (Chanock, 1999).The “join us” network is often typified by (a) broadcasting of information from (b) a centralized source that – while being open to feedback from members, tends to (c) minimize connections between members by design. Ina “join us” network, focus is implicitly and explicitly placed on the central hub. Citation: Chanock, K. (1999). One good thing about lectures : They model the approach of the discipline. The Journal of General Education, 48(1), 38–55.Image credit (“Join us”) network: http://socialmedia.wikispaces.com/file/view/networkstructures2sm.jpg/30268602/networkstructures2sm.jpgProfessor hat: http://rlv.zcache.com/warning_professor_hat-r1c4443e406284980b7d3b313edc50cf1_v9wfy_8byvr_512.jpgSleeping lecture hall: http://mathsimulationtechnology.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sleepingstudents.jpg
- Picture credit: http://metrics.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/take-a-number.jpg
- Learning management systems have gained popularity in collegiate environments as programs that provide students with persistent access to course documents, grade books, andother course materials. However, students often perceive these systems as spaces for instruction (e.g., access lecture notes) or administration (e.g., check grades), rather than social spaces toconnect with instructors and peers. Moreover, none of these spaces exist as natural parts of a student’s own media ecology, requiring students to occupy yet another technology as part of analready-crowded digital landscape (Watkins, 2009).Citation: Watkins, S. C. (2009). The young and the digital: What the migration to social-network sites, games, and anytime, anywhere media means for our future. Boston: Beacon.
- By contrast, Facebook (founded in 2004) began as a social network for individuals associated with academic institutions. As of May 2013, Facebook had over one billion users around the world (Smith, 2012), and is extremely popular with college students: as many as 97% of college students have accounts, and they actively use those sites for nearly two hours daily (Smith & Caruso, 2010; Junco, 2012). Today’s college students are what Prensky (2001) refer to as digital natives: individuals born into a technological age who are experts at using and adapting to technology for a variety of end goals, including a preference for communicating through technological devices. Facebook is free of cost, easy to use, and is readily accessible to students who own computers or phones with Internet access, and many incoming college students indeed have established Facebook accounts from high school and report few encumbrances using the technology (Bowman, Claus, & Westerman, 2012).Citations: Bowman, N. D., Westerman, D. K., & Claus, C. J. (2012). How demanding is social media: Understanding social media diets as a function of perceived costs and benefits–A rational actor perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2298-2305.Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5): 1-6.Smith, A. (2012, October 4). Facebook reaches one billion users. CNNMoney.com. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/4/technology/facebook-billion-usersSmith, S. D., & Caruso, J. B. (2010). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
- The “join in” network is often oriented around a central hub, but not focused on it. Rather, information is generated by hubs (communities) and filtered to the larger community through a centralized point. In this way, focus is implicitly and explicitly placed on the group as a whole. Citations:Schwartz, H. L. (2010). Facebook: The new classroom commons? Education Digest, 75(5), 39-42. Steinkuehler, C. A., & Williams, D. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “Third Places” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 885-090. Picture credit: http://socialmedia.wikispaces.com/file/view/networkstructures2sm.jpg/30268602/networkstructures2sm.jpg
- Data for this study came from students who were attending a freshman-level mass media mass lecture course at a large, mid-Atlantic university (n = 321). While 60% of the participantswere male (n =195), the remaining 40% of the students were female (n = 126). Students were not directly surveyed (all data is culled from behavioral observation) but students represented abroad distribution of grade levels and majors – consistent with the composition of most University-level mass lecture courses.
- Looking more closely at the comments made by users, a total of N = 477 unique posts were made to the Facebook wall, with each receiving an average of M = 1.81 responses per post. Just under 60 percent (n = 283) of all posts were made by students, who posted an average of M = 6.88 posts, SD = 9.05. Thematic analysis of the of posted comments identified nine unique categories of content: exam review (n = 201), administrative (n = 119), class-related external links (n = 61), peer support (n = 17), humor (n = 16), affect for instructor or class (n = 15), nonclass- related external links (n = 8), and a group of non-classifiable comments (n = 27). This data shows a clear dominance of exam review (basic content questions) and administrative-type comments (questions about course policies) on the group discussion wall, with a nearly 2:1 ratio of exam review comments to administrative ones. Of these 201 exam review questions, only 64 were initiated by the course instructor, with 137 being initiated by students in the Facebook group - in both cases, each post was accompanied by an average of about four responses (Table 1). These patterns of discussion suggest that the primary use of the class Facebook group was to discuss course content.
- In terms of cognitive learning, students who were members of the class Facebook group performed significantly better in the class (M = 78.55%, SD = 8.54) than students who were notin the group (M = 72.64%, SD = 13.60), t(319) = -4.71, p < 001. For students in the Facebook group, there was no significant association between the number of times an individual posted inthe Facebook group and their attendance (r = .124, p = .144) or their course grade (r = .158, p = .061). This data suggest that membership in the group was the primary influence on thewitnessed effects rather than the frequency, intensity or type of involvement (active: posting/commenting, vs. passive: reading) in the group. Put another way, our data suggest that students who were passively involved (i.e., read the comments of others) benefitted as much as the ones who preferred to active involvement (i.e., post and seek answers to their questions). Such an effect is similar to in-class discussions by which all students can learn from the answers to one student’s question.
- Considering affective learning, we analyzed the tone and content of Facebook comments. Of the 283 total posts initiated by students, only one was coded as having a negative tone (astudent complaining about the perceived difficulty of the final exam). Conversely, we found 30 unique expressions (11 percent) of positive instructor affect and 53 posts (19 percent) related tostudent support (45 of these related to the final exam). When students responded to these comments, they did so an average of 2.48 times, with posts in the instructor affect (M = 4.39),external links (M = 3.75) and student support (M = 3.41) categories receiving the most comments in response. The most prominent student response comments were related to the examreview category (n = 133), with students wishing each other luck and/or congratulating each other for knowing the answers to different exam review questions.
- We interpret these results to suggest that, broadly, students in the mass lecture course saw the use of Facebook as a positive aspect of the class. Looking just at Facebook users, we see students engaging in an ample amount of student support communication, particularly with collaborating to study for course exams. Cursory overview of students’ comments shows them to be in line with various course lessons, thus indicating students were not only discussing course-pertinent information but were discussing it accurately - an interpretation further collaborated by the increased exam scores earned by Facebook group users.
- Image credit: http://www.statisticalconsultants.co.nz/weeklyfeatures/WF8.html
- Photo credit: http://www.yiyinglu.com/failwhale/images/Homer_the_New_Fail_Whale_by_edwheeler.jpg
- Citations: Dunlap, J. C. & Lowenthal, P. R. (2009). Tweeting the night away: Using Twitter to enhance social presence. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2)Skiba, D. J. (2008). Can you post a nugget of knowledge in 140 characters or less? Nursing Education Perspectives, 29(2), 110-112. Picture credit: http://www.amplify.com/assets/viewpoints/teaching-moments-through-tweeting.jpg
- Citation: Kietzmann, J.H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I.P., & Silvestre, B.S. 2011. Social Media? Get Serious! Understanding the Functional Building Blocks of Social Media. Business Horizons, 54, 241-251.
- Using the rational actor perspective as a guiding frame, this exploratory study examined individuals’ social media diet (i.e., amount, frequency, and duration of use) as a function of task load and expected goal attainment. Surveys were distributed (N = 337) focusing on Twitter and Facebook usage for informational and relational purposes, respectfully. Increased task load – conceptualized as a cognitive cost – directly negatively influenced Twitter use but only indirectly influenced Facebook use as a function of perceived benefits. Across conditions, perceived self-efficacy was negatively associated with perceived task load and positively associated with goal attainment, and goal attainment was a significant correlate of increased social media usage. Interpreted, we see that a transparent technology such as Facebook has no cognitive costs associated with its use, while an opaque technology such as Twitter seems to have a salient cognitive cost element. Further, we found that older users of Facebook were more likely to judge the channel as more cognitively demanding and themselves as having lower self-efficacy in using it. Finally, results indicated that for both Facebook and Twitter, males perceived both channels as more cognitively demanding than females. Theoretical and practical explanations and applications for these findings are presented.“For Facebook use, we found older users to be significantly more likely to judge the program as increasingly cognitively demanding and, relatedly, they were less likely to use Facebook. For Twitter users, we found age to correlate negatively with perceived self-efficacy. Given the extreme restriction of range in our study as noted above – 95% of our sample fell between the ages of 18 and 22 – these associations are striking. One explanation is that while the absolute difference in age is only 4 years, these 4 years might fall on decidedly different time points on the technology adoption (Rogers, 1962). Especially given the relatively short time-span for both of these programs – 7 years for Facebook, 5 years for Twitter – this is a logical conclusion to draw. We feel that these findings are both compelling and more than mere sampling error, and should be considered in future research.”Citations:Bowman, N.D., Westerman, D. K., & Claus, C. J. (2012). How Demanding is Social Media? Understanding Social Media Diets as a Function of Perceived Costs and Benefits - a Rational Actor Perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2298-2305. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.037Hargittai, E. (2014, March 27). What do they know? Dismissing a viral presumption about millenials. Huffington Post. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eszter-hargittai/millennials-viral-technology_b_5043673.html