Using Social Media to Foster Learning Connections

Sharon Stoerger and Dylan BarthDTL Information SessionFriday, August 5, 2011

Overview

• Who are today’s students?• Social media in education• This study

– Part I: English composition course & Facebook– Part II: Social media & PLNs

• Findings, conclusions, & implications

Who are today’s students?

• Prolific tech users– Internet accounts– Social media users

• Email?• Personal lives – yes• Academic lives – not so much

• Device preferences– Laptops– Handheld devices

Learning in 2011

• Social interaction• Active participation• Engagement• Communication

– Blended/online courses– Social media solutions?

Current Concerns in Education• “Crisis of significance” (Wesch, 2008)

• Student-instructor communication– Use of social media up– 97% of students use (ECAR, 2010)

– Email replacement? (Roblyer et al., 2010)

• Lecture alternatives– Better learning (Saville et al., 2006)

– Lecture = least effective (Butler, 1991)

Community-peer Networks

• Greater satisfaction• National Survey of

Student Engagement (NSSE) – Positive educational

behaviors– Positive view of campus

environment

• Social media

Social Media & Educational Theories

• Edtech theories– Behaviorism– Cognitivism– Constructivism– Lacking?

• Technology changes– New theory needed?– Connectivism (Siemens, 2004)

This Study: Part I

• English 102: Introduction to Research Writing – Blended course– Structured around seven two-week modules – 24 students to start, 22 at the end– Students divided into two groups that met on

alternating days• Facebook search “UWMEnglish102”

Asynchronous Discussion Forums• Four online, asynchronous discussion forums

– Two in Facebook– Two in Desire2Learn

• Two groups of 12 students– Alternated between FB and D2L

• Discursive forums– Discuss scholarly and popular articles– Discuss a sample student portfolio– Discuss course goals

Asynchronous Discussion Forums

• Required 250+ word initial post and two 125+ word responses

• Instructor presence purposefully waned as the semester progressed

• Students could opt-out and join the D2L group or write an equivalent essay

Why experiment with the Facebook discussion tool?

• Meet students “where they live”• Expand beyond instructor-driven site to create

a peer network for research• Coordinate more dynamic and engaging

online conversations

Findings

• No qualitative difference between student responses in Facebook and D2L

• Discussions were no better, but no worse• Students did not seem to participate more on

the Facebook site

Findings

• Facebook application shortcomings– Lack of threaded discussion– Lack of gradebook and rubric integration– Lack of ability to rearrange forums– Lack of “__ per page” function– Lack of export function for in-class use – Lack of support and sustainability

Other Considerations

• Need to solicit student feedback• Experiment with other types of forums? • Synchronous, in-class Facebook discussion

– Michael Wesch’s “The Machine is Us/ing Us”

This study: Part II

• Instructional Technologies– 23 students, graduate– K-12 teachers, librarians, info techs– Fully online– CMS

– D2L– Walled garden

• Social Media

Why Social Media?

• Reach beyond the classroom

• Interact with “experts”

• Teacher-centered student-centered

Developing a PLN via social media

• Find people you want to know• Find conversations• Expand the surface area – explore!

• See also Jane Bozarth (2010)

Stages of the Learning Experience in a Connectivist Environment

(adapted from Pettenati & Cigognini, 2007)

The Activity

• Select a social media tool• Started with ~4 resources• Expand network – 20+ people/ideas• Semester-long project• Reflection (Herring, Oliver, & Reeves, 2003)

• Instructor role = “informed co-traveler” (Dron & Anderson, 2009).

Guiding Questions

• How do students make connections/PLNs?

• How do students use social media in a course?

• For an online course…– What are the positives?

– What are the negatives?

Data Collection

– Student interactions– Surveys– Reflections

Social Media & PLNs: Findings

Connectivism and Student’s PLNs

Students’ Network Connections

Student Reactions: Positive• Enthusiastic (e.g., blogs)

• “Technology is not just something that teachers and administrators work into their curriculum when they find the time or expertise needed. It is an essential part of our world today.”

• Technology = instant access to information

• Technology banning• “Schools cannot lead students to believe technology is bad

and forbid its use. It’s our job to teach them the educational benefits.”

Student Reactions: Negative

• Non-linear, “uncourse” (Hirst, 2009)

• The information– Overwhelming/fear

• “I was eager to try Twitter because everyone else has, so why shouldn’t I…Then, a few days passed and I became literally scared to open the site.”

– Quality & self-promotion• “I find it hard to believe that so many people continue to

follow contributors who so often self-congratulate, plead for support for online awards, or make frequent reference to their availability for hire as a consultant or guest speaker.”

Final Student Comments

• “We’re not going to be replaced by machines, but individual teachers will, I believe, be replaced by communities of learners. In those communities everyone will be a teacher and everyone will be a learner. We might not even distinguish between them.”

• “I feel optimistic a paradigm shift is happening in education.”

Future Research

• What do students contribute to their PLN?• How do students create connections? What is

their path?• What device(s) do students use to create

connections?

Conclusions

• Innovation – Risky– Students reluctant at first

• Technology skills• Active learning• Social media = learning experience glue

• Key = listen to your students

Thank You!

• Questions? • LTC@uwm.edu

• Sharon Stoerger– stoerger@uwm.edu

• Dylan Barth– djbarth@uwm.edu