Social media

Running head: Social Media Use in Higher Education 1

Social Media Use in Higher Education

Michael Wilder

University Of Nevada, Las Vegas

Michael Wilder UNLV EPY 718 Summer 2010

SOCIAL MEDIA USE IN HIGHER EDUCATION 2

Introduction

Working on campus, I often witness students engaged in a variety of online

social media activities. I see students texting on cell phones in the student union,

chatting in class on their laptops and checking their Facebook pages in the

library. My curiosity leads me to wonder how many students at any given

moment are engaged in such traditional educational activities as reading articles,

searching library archives, and writing scholarly papers, while simultaneously

sharing cognitive attention and concentration with recreational use of Facebook

wall posts, online chat, and multimedia sharing. In the past, for example, a casual

walkthrough of the Lied Library computer lab has revealed numerous computer

monitors with Facebook or MySpace pages visible onscreen. Is this a

coincidence or a typical behavior? Ultimately, what is it about social media that

is so attractive to students and could the motivational drive of social media for

connectivity be used for positive educational purposes?

Purpose

As a microcosm of higher education student life in general, the primary

purpose of this study is to explore why students in university library computer

labs spend time engaged in online social activities while also working on other

educational tasks.

Contemporary social media technologies like Twitter, Facebook, and Myspace

afford students the opportunity to remain connected with peers, family and

acquaintances while continuing to task switch with more serious class-related


work. This study seeks to explore the social media phenomena within an

educational setting.

Methods

The intersection of online social media and higher education is relatively new

to the world of academic research. In order to witness previously unobserved

cultural behaviors through open-minded exploration, this study lent itself to

qualititative research methods. Rather than conduct surveys or questionnaires

focused on only one aspect or another, a qualitative series of observations,

interviews and data analysis provided an opportunity to identify new

generalizable concepts (Glesne, 1992).

As a result, this study began with three half-hour observations on Wednesday,

June 9, 2010, from 6:00 p.m. until 6:30 p.m., on Friday, June 11, 2010, from 3:30

p.m. to 4:00 p.m. and again on Thursday, June 17, 2010, from 12:30 p.m. to 1:00

p.m. In terms of the university instructional calendar, these three days occurred

during second session summer school in the second and third weeks (out of

four). While the library and computer labs were not quite as at maximum

capacity, there were still at least 60 participants on any day. Although I only

observed during half-hour increments, there seemed to be a steady flow of

students both arriving and departing the computer areas.

Field notes were handwritten during observations. Interviews were recorded

to a handheld digital audio recorder and transcribed. Permission to record was

obtained prior to all interviews.


Setting

Observations were conducted in the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Lied

Library computer areas. Per Spradley (1980), my initial observation was a grand

tour. Not only did I explore and note the setting most intently on this visit, I also

traveled non-computer areas of the library in order to find specific places that

would yield the most amount of relevant data. Later visits could be considered

mini tours (Spradley, 1980) since I focused my attentions only on previously

identified high-data-yielding computer areas.

As opposed to typical university computer labs enclosed in separated rooms,

the Lied Library main computer areas are open and integrated with study areas

and library holdings. The library itself is five stories high and constructed atrium

style with a central area open to all five floors. The ground floor contains the main

computer area with twelve tables each equipped with eight computer

workstations (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Main floor seating - overhead

To the north of the main ground floor is a second computer area with eleven

tables also equipped with eight computer workstations each (Figure 2). Being out


of the atrium space, this upper computer area has lower ceilings and open tables

for study groups.

Figure 2. Upper level seating – overhead Computer tables in both areas are constructed of a solid dark wood and

arranged so that students sit four to a side. Each individual computer area is

enclosed with low divider walls for privacy. All workstations have the Windows

Vista operating system installed, and all students must log in with authorized

accounts in order to use these computers. Although there is a potential for a

maximum capacity of 184 computers, at least fifteen of these workstations were

either not functional/out of order or occupied by printers, scanners or other

peripherals.

The open layout and large computer monitors of these computer areas

allowed quiet, non-participative observations. With a notebook, pen and

textbooks, I could easily walk up and down the aisles, blend in with other

students, and discreetly record onscreen behavior.

Participants

Participants were undergraduate and graduate students at the University of

Nevada, Las Vegas. There were an equal amount of female and male

participants, and there were a mixed variety of African American, Asian,


Hispanic, and Pacific Islander ethnicities represented by the participants. While

there were one or two older students (between forty to sixty years old), almost all

of the participants were undergraduates between the ages of eighteen to twenty-

three (as indicated by appearance and dress). Most were dressed casually in

jeans and t-shirts, and many young males wore baseball hats. While the majority

of students worked individually at their workstations, groups of two or three

students often sat together either to socialize or to study online material.

Access

As a preliminary step toward gaining access, I approached library

"gatekeepers" (Glesne, 1992) in the form of reference librarians. I spoke with two

reference librarians (each on duty during different observation times) and

explained the nature of my study. They found my research question interesting

and provided me with valuable information and insight (as explained in the

interview section below). As long as I wasn't bothersome or intrusive into student

work, they gave me approval to continue my study.

Focus

My initial focus as a researcher was to identify whether my casual

assessment of social media use in the library was correct. As a result of three

observations, I determined that many students (approximately one student in ten)

were engaged in some form of online social media activity while also performing

traditional educational tasks. Once my suspicions were confirmed, however, the

focus of my study changed. The percentage of students using social media

become less important than why students felt compelled to engage in using


social media while studying or working. The answer to why students checked

Facebook or Twitter while in the library could not be identified through casual

observation. Direct face-to-face interviews needed to be conducted.

Role of the Researcher

Initially, I believed myself to be a non-participant in this study. While it is true

that I never spend time working in the university library computer lab (since I

have my own computer and network connection at both work and home), I am a

student that engages in social media activities while performing educational

tasks. During the process of interviewing other students, I found myself relating

to behaviors and motives they shared.

While every effort has been made to keep this study fair and balanced, it

would be deceptive not to disclose my personal background, interests and

perspectives in regard to the topic. For the last two years I’ve not only studied the

use of social media in education, I’ve also trained dozens of university faculty to

incorporate Web 2.0 technologies into classroom practices. I personally believe

that online education in particular can leave students feeling isolated and not part

of a “community of learning.” My suspicion is that students are already engaged

in online social activities while performing coursework, and if harnessed properly

for education, social media can be a powerful motivator. I think that the

affordances of social media, if incorporated into distance education effectively,

can reintroduce a sense of togetherness and collaboration often found in face-to-

face classroom experiences.


I’m also currently beginning research toward my dissertation on the use of

social media in education, and I am beginning to encounter a theoretical

framework based on the connectivism theory of learning. The connectivist theory

of learning posits that “knowledge is distributed across a network of connections,

and therefore that learning consists of the ability to construct and traverse those

networks” (Downes, 2007). Connectivism brings together basic elements of

constructivism, humanism and social learning theory, and provides a

contemporary Web 2.0 perspective to education.

Techniques

On Wednesday, June 9, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. I began my observation of the

UNLV Lied Library from the entrance of the main computer area. From my

perspective, I could see straight down two rows of computer tables and partly

down two more. I took note of the overall participant physical characteristics

(such as age, gender, ethnicity), and the immediate environment.

From where I sat, I could see several computer screens and proceeded to

make some initial activity categories (such as YouTube, word processing, e-mail,

etc.).

Once my preliminary observations were complete, I walked up and down the

aisles of the computer lab. I tried to observe non-intrusively and nonchalantly.

Almost immediately I realized that holding a tablet of paper and pen and

scribbling frantically while looking at someone's computer screen would draw

attention. As a result, I kept my arms to my sides and walked purposely, as if on

the way to an open seat. I would keep mental note of what activities participants


were engaged in until I reached the end of an aisle. At that point I would find a

comfortable location and note my observations. I continued this process until I

had observed all computer stations in the main floor computer area.

I repeated my observations again in the upper areas of the library using the

same techniques. I tried to keep on the go as much as possible, stopping

occasionally to make notes and make myself unobtrusive.

Data Analysis

Taxonomy

Initially, my intent was to classify observation of computer-based behavior into

two categories: educational activities and recreational activities. Almost

immediately it became clear that these initial categories would be inadequate. A

casual glance at what was on a computer monitor was not enough to determine

whether an activity fit into one or the other category. For example, I witnessed

one student watching a recent Laker game sports video. My immediate reaction

was to categorize this activity as recreational. How could I know, however, that

watching a basketball game wasn't part of an authorized curricular activity? In

what category would I place e-mail? E-mail is an activity that can be educational,

recreational or both. Furthermore, I found several cases of students engaged in

multitasking/rapid task switching activities with multiple windows open, some of

which were educational and some or which were recreational. As a result, I

rejected these simplistic categories.


Instead, these activities were classified into five main categories based upon

taxonomic analysis: information finding, information processing, artifact creation,

interaction, and knowledge assessment (Figure 3).

During the course of conducting observations, it became clear that some

students were engaged in multiple activities at the same time. A student might

have a browser window open to a class Web site for textual instructions while

typing up a research paper at the same time, for example. Another student might

have a browser window open to Facebook chat while reading an online article.

The intersection of any two or more activity types identified above represents

student multitasking or rapid task switching.

Figure 3. Five main activity classifications

Information Finding

Information Processing

Artifact Creation Interaction

Knowledge Assessment


Information finding is any activity that involves searching for knowledge (Figure

4). Examples of activities in this category include searching local library holdings,

Google, Bing, online maps, Wikipedia, or university related registration

information.

Figure 4. Information finding category

Information Finding

Search Engines

Google Bing Wikipedia

Library Holdings Maps

Google Earth

Google Maps

University Info


Information processing is any activity that involves reading text, viewing videos,

or listening to audio--such as reading printed books, Web sites, or watching

YouTube videos (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Information processing category

Information Processing

Videos

YouTube Non‐Youtube

Text

Educational Reading

Wikipedia PowerPoint WebCT

Recreational Reading

Comic Books

Audio

iTunes


Artifact creation is any activity that involves the development of a new product

such as word processing, spreadsheet or presentation document authoring, or

making architectural diagrams (see Figure 6).

Figure 6. Artifact creation category

Artifact Creation

Word Processing

MS Word

Spreadsheet

Excel

Presentation

PowerPoint

Page Layout

InDesign


Interaction is any activity that involves the communication or collaboration of

multiple minds such as sending e-mail, chatting, or viewing Twitter posts or

Facebook wall posts (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Interaction category

Interaction

E‐mail Social Media

Facebook

Chat Discussion Talking/Socializing

Online Dating

File Transfer


Knowledge assessment involves any activity that involves testing mastery of

concepts, such as online testing (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Knowledge assessment category

The current model of education includes a process involving multiple steps

including researching, processing of information, proving mastery through artifact

creation, and assessment. Computer activities in the library mirror this process.

As is the case with many educational environments, often this process also

involves communication and collaboration among students.

Domain Analysis

In terms of a domain analysis, the focus of this study is upon the observed

computer-based activities of students in a university library. It seems logical,

therefore, to analyze the observational data from that perspective. For this

reason, I chose the strict inclusion semantic relationship taking the form of "X is a

kind of Y" (Spradley, 1980).

Knowledge Assessment

Online Testing

Kaplan WebCT


Table 1

Domain Analysis

Included terms Semantic relationship Cover Term

Checking social media

Chatting

Reading or sending e-mail

Talking

Is a kind of social interaction

Searching Google, Wikipedia,

or Bing

Writing papers

Reading online curriculum

Taking tests

Is a kind of educational activity

Reading online comic books

Shopping online

Watching non-educational

sports videos

Playing computer games

Is a kind of entertainment

In addition to the categories identified in the taxonomical analysis above,

behaviors observed during this study could also be broken down into three main

types of activities. These activities are social interactions, educational activities,

and entertainment.

Interviews

Several questions arose from the initial observations that required face-to-

face interviews. On each of the three observations, in comparison to traditional

educational activities (such as researching, typing papers, or reading articles) I

found that a number of students were also engaged in social media activities.

How often does an average social media-using student check a social media


Web site? How often do these students keep social media Web sites active

while simultaneously working on educational tasks? Do students that use social

media perceive any negative effects on their educational performance?

Ultimately, what is it about social media--and Facebook in particular--that make it

attractive enough to warrant repetitive viewing?

In order to obtain initial answers to these questions, I selected five individuals

in the Lied Library computer areas to interview. Four of these individuals were

students that I observed viewing their Facebook or Twitter accounts while in the

library. For a different perspective, I also interviewed a reference librarian

regarding her perceptions of social media use in the library. In order to obtain

informed consent (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992), I explained that their participation

was completely voluntary and that they could stop at any time, I explained the

nature of my study, and I assured them that their remarks would be confidential

and anonymous.

Every one of the students that I spoke with stated that they check their

Facebook or Twitter accounts frequently while studying. Often these students

have automatic alerts set up to notify them via cell phone whenever new

information is posted (such as new comments, new photos or new friendship

requests). "I check my Facebook every thirty minutes," participant one said. "It

depends on if I get a notification on my phone…then I'll go check." Another

student, participant two, stated that she checks her Facebook page at least five

times in a sitting.


Several students commented that they kept social media Web site windows

active while simultaneously engaging in traditional educational activities,

especially while writing papers. "Facebook is usually on the entire time I'm writing

a paper," explained participant three. "I use it as a kind of break in between

paragraphs…a little escape from the homework." The notion that using social

media as a form of mental escape came up repeatedly during my interviews.

"Facebook for me is a way out of school," revealed participant four. "It's an

escape. You can forget about school work for a moment, focus on something

else, because it feels like that all I do."

Although most students felt that social media was a distraction, few perceived

any negative effects on their own educational performance. Participant three's

comment is representative of most that I interviewed: "I started getting into

Facebook last year, and I'm pretty much getting straight A's, so I haven't seen

any adverse effects to my studying since I've used it." Participant one, however,

recognized the distracting effect that checking social media sites can have on

nearby peers in a face-to-face class: "There's a girl who sits in front of me right

now. She's always on her Facebook, updating and chatting with people. It's not

only distracting for the student, but for people around that see what that person's

doing."

Students identified a variety of reasons why social media was attractive.

Participant one appreciated learning inside information about celebrity lifestyles

and activities. He appreciated seeing the human side of entertainment

celebrities. By far, however, the majority of Facebook users enjoyed the


connectivity they felt with friends. "My friends are readily available," participant

three said. "I can interact with them right on the spot instead of having to call

them or having to meet up with them." "I feel connected," said participant two,

"even though I'm stuck in the library, not having a life." Social media applications

are great communication tools, observed the reference librarian on duty:

"They're very youth oriented in many ways. You can put your own page up and

invite all your friends to join."

Cross Case Analysis

There are a number of similar studies that shed light upon this research.

Selwyn (2009), for example, conducted an in-depth qualitative analysis of

Facebook wall activity of 909 undergraduate students in a UK university. His data

analysis showed that students' education-related use of Facebook could be

categorized into four main group:

• the post-hoc critiquing of learning experiences and events,

• the exchange of logistical or factual information about teaching and

assessment requirements,

• instances of supplication and moral support with regards to assessment or

learning,

• the promotion of oneself as academically incompetent and/or disengaged

(Selwyn, 2009).

Selwyn's research concludes that rather than necessarily enhancing or eroding

students' engagement with formal studies, Facebook appears to provide a secure

space where relationships with university work, teaching staff, academic


conventions and expectations "can be worked through in a relatively closed

'backstage' area" (Selwyn, 2009).

A dissertation on the uses and gratifications of Facebook (Foregger, 2008)

sought to understand the appeal of interactive media. The study found nine

factors of Facebook use:

• Passing time,

• Connection,

• Sexual attraction,

• Utilities and upkeep,

• Establishing and maintaining old ties,

• Accumulation,

• Social comparison,

• Channel use,

• Networking (Foregger, 2008).

Based on the responses from participants in this study, students seem to see

Facebook as a communication tool, an information provider, and entertainment

source.

Findings

Patterns emerge from the taxonomic and domain analyses, interviews, and

cross case analysis. From the observations, student online activity in the library

can be broken down into five main taxonomic categories: information finding,

information processing, artifact creation, knowledge assessment, and interaction.

While these activities are often accomplished one after the other, sometimes they


are accomplished simultaneously. At least four observed students, for example,

were engaged in rapid task switching--conducting one activity while another was

visible onscreen, ready to switch. Ten percent of students observed during this

study were engaged in social media activities at any given time. A domain

analysis identified three main types of activities: social interactions, educational

activities, and entertainment.

Face-to-face interviews yielded valuable information regarding why

students use social media in education settings. For the most part, students are

engaged in traditional education activities. Students work hard, however, and

often that work is isolating. As a result, students seek out ways to make a

connection with family and friends to overcome this sense of isolation. In some

cases, talking or texting on cell phones, sending e-mail, or talking in face-to-face

study groups satisfies the human need to interact and feel a part of a community.

In other cases, checking and posting on social media Web sites fills that need.

Students also feel that social media provides them with a momentary

mental "escape" from the stresses of extended educational concentration. Taking

a temporary social break from writing a paper or reading articles provides an

opportunity to refresh their creative energies while reconnecting with peers.

Social media also provides access to inside information that cannot be

found elsewhere, such as insight into expert (or celebrity) lifestyles and

resources.


Cross case analysis provided additional perspectives regarding the

specific use of Facebook and how students perceive Facebook as a

communication tool, information provider, and entertainment source.

Discussion

As a preliminary experience, this study provided valuable insight into the

activities of higher education students in university library computer labs.

While the half-hour observations were much too short to provide any detailed

data, important questions were raised and specific patterns were recognized. As

a short slice of reality, this information provided representative taxonomic

categories and behavioral themes. Interviews with students provided useful

reasons why students engage in social media and perhaps whether social media

has any negative effects on student academic performance.

Limitations

There were several limitations to my technique of observation. In four cases,

an onscreen Web site would be completely unknown to me (and thereby

unclassifiable). In three cases, the site being viewed by the student was in a

foreign language. Each student was observed over a very short period of time (in

most cases under a minute). I suspect I could have returned ten minutes later

and witnessed entirely different activities.

Three half-hour observations definitely did not yield enough information for

any serious study. Such a short period of time could only provide a thin slice of

reality, and this study acknowledges that. Furthermore, many of these activities

represent a variety of behavioral processes that cannot be observed in a


moment. Nevertheless, this experience can be useful as a pilot study to get a

quick glimpse into the use of social media on campus and identify some basic

patterns.

Future Directions

Instead of trying to gather data on the activities of hundreds of students at any

given moment, a future study could perhaps observe five or ten students for

longer periods of time to determine how many online activities students engage

in and what kind of activities are they. Additionally, it would be interesting to see

how many students are actually engaged in rapid task switching as opposed to

serial task engagement.

Additional research should be conducted into how social media could be

effectively incorporated into educational content. It would be interesting to know

whether students would accept or reject interactions with fellow students and

teaching staff in social media environments.

Conclusion

The need to interact and feel connected is a primary characteristic of our

society. As educators, we can capitalize upon this drive for connectivity by

building opportunities for communication and collaboration in our online

curriculum. Too often education is isolating. If we can incorporate social media

techniques in our online courses, perhaps we can engage students in a

networked community of learning. Otherwise, our students will feel the need to

be connected elsewhere.


References

Downes, S. (2007). What Connectivism Is. Connectivism Conference forum.

Retrieved June 13, 2010, from http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/02/what-

connectivism-is.html

Foregger, S. (2008). Uses and Gratifications of Facebook.com. (Doctoral

dissertation, Michigan State University, 2008).

Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An

Introduction. New York: Holt, Longman.

Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: exploring students' education-related use of

Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157 - 174.

Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and

Winston.

Social media

Education

Transcript of Social media