Effects on student participation and learning

L. Larson, N. Hurt, M. Camus, & L. Prevost

Based on papers in International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (2012) and College Teaching (in press)

Introduction

As course loads and enrollments rise, how do we encourage students to actively engage with classmates and course materials?

Particularly problematic for online courses

Possible solution: Meet students where they are.

Why Facebook?

As of September 2015, Facebook has 1.6 billion active users around the world (Facebook, 2015)

About 97% of college students have a Facebook account (Smith & Caruso, 2010).

Despite rumors that “Facebook is dead,” numbers suggest otherwise:

Why Facebook?

Facebook is obviously widely utilized by college students, but how does it affect students’ academic performance?

Arguments that Facebook is a distraction?

Arguments for Facebook as a potential teaching and learning tool?

Research Goals

Compare Facebook to a conventional, university-sponsored online learning management system (eLC)…

Research Question: How does participation affect:

Students’ preferences (perceptions, attitudes, perceived learning) for each online discussion forum

Outcomes (participation/engagement, demonstrated learning outcomes, overall performance) associated with each online discussion forum

Research Methods Online discussion assignment (worth 8% of total

grade) in 2 sections of 2 different courses (about 30 students per class, mostly 1st or 2nd year)

Introduction to Women’s Studies (WMST)

Introduction to Philosophy (PHIL)

1 section in each course used Facebook groups, the other used eLC discussion threads

Prior to implementation, we administered trainings to model forum functionality and address potential concerns regarding fear of privacy invasion and information sharing

Facebook Interface

Instructor

Student 2

Student 3

Student 1

eLC Interface

Research Methods Phase 1 (Preferences): Pre & post-course surveys

Background information on students and previous experiences using internet-based technologies

Identify preferences for, attitudes, toward, and perceived learning associated with online discussion in both eLC and Facebook

Phase 2 (Outcomes): Student participation (and associated outcomes) in Facebook & eLC discussion groups

Multiple coders read student responses after the semsesterand assess different aspects of engagement, learning outcomes, and performance

About the Sample

61.5% of participants have a smart phone Ease of navigation* = 6.29 ± .25

97.5% of participants use eLC Ease of navigation* = 5.53 ± .22

98.3% of participants have a Facebook account Ease of navigation* = 6.32 ± .21

Facebook Group eLC Group

Total # of Students 57 61

Gender (% Female) 64.9 67.2

Year (% Freshmen & Sophomore) 78.9 70.5

Mean GPA 3.17 ± .09 3.30 ± .10

Majors Represented 37 39

% Taken Class w/ Online Discussion 47.5 65.0

Navigation Scale ranged from 1=very uncomfortable to 7=very comfortable

About the Sample Facebook = most frequently used online tool

0 20 40 60 80

Personal Email

eLC

Facebook

Technology Use Frequency

4+ times/day

1-3 times/day

< Once/day

Never

% of Students Using

N = 118

BEST Discussion StrategiesStrategy LIKE the Most LEARN the Most

In-class discussion led by professor 91.5 % 94.0 %

In-class small group work 29.9 % 36.8 %

In-class discussion led by peers 26.5 % 28.2 %

Journal writing 17.9 % 10.3 %

Online discussion generated by professor 15.4 % 17.1 %

Strategy LIKE the Least LEARN the Least

Out-of-class small group work 60.7 % 47.0 %

Journal writing 36.8 % 37.6 %

Online discussion generated by professor 32.5 % 28.2 %

Online discussion generated by peers 26.5 % 41.9 %

In-class small group work 26.5 % 29.9 %

WORST Discussion Strategies

Note: Students could select 2 in each category

Note: Students could select 2 in each category

Results: Student Preferences

ATTITUDES Toward Online Discussions

VALUE of Online Discussions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

When I contribute, it helps ME learn

When my peers contribute, it helps ME learn

When I contribute, it helps MY PEERS learn

AgreeDisagree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Online discussions should be part of every course

I enjoy participating in online discussions

Disagree Agree

Results: Student Preferences

Preferred

Discussion Format

Percentage of

Student Responses

Classroom/in-person 71.4%

Online 23.5%

Group work outside class 5.0%

One-on-one with instructor 1.7%

Open-ended responses

Students who preferred online liked the fact that is was comfortable, convenient and anonymous. They also liked the absence of time constraints (more time to think).

Results: Student Preferences

Discussion Format Facebook Group eLC Group

In-class discussion led by

professor+0.41 -0.17

In-class discussion led by peers +1.23*** +0.34

Out-of-class small group work +1.54*** +0.27

Online discussion boards

(formal, instructor generated)+1.73*** -0.74

Online discussion boards

(informal, peer generated)+1.86*** -0.70

Pre-post Score Changes in Comfort Level Ratings for Different Discussion Strategies by WMST Students (n = 45)

Results: Student Preferences

*,**,*** denote significance of paired t-test at alpha = 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively.

NOTE: Significant differences were only observed in 1 category for PHIL: Students

in eLC became more comfortable with formal, instructor-generated online

discussion boards

Student Ratings of Perceived Outcomes, by Course and Treatment Group

Results: Student Preferences

Conclusions – Phase 1 Students often respond negatively to online discussion

Facebook can help alter this dynamic by…

Capitalizing on a forum that is familiar and convenient

Generating a positive social interactions and affective responses… in some contexts! (e.g., WMST, but not PHIL)

Potential concerns to consider:

Work and play shouldn’t mix (some view Facebook as distraction from scholarly work)

Ambiguous boundaries between personal and professional relationships (unanticipated or undesired interactions)

Privacy settings and security

Results: Outcome Assessment

Outcome #1: Participation

Total Posts, Length of Post

Type of Post (instructor initiated, novel student-initiated, response to student, post acknowledging previous discussion, post prompting further discussion, extracurricular); not mutually exclusive

eLC Facebook

Total # of Posts 498 1056

Effective Sample Size for Student Posts

446 819

Length of Post (mean no. of words) 174 80

Novel student-initiated posts (%) 5% 23%

Direct responses to instructor (%) 75% 17%

Direct responses to students (%) 21% 71%

Acknowledged previous discussion (%) 46% 85%

Prompted further discussion (%) 22% 69%

Online Discussion Participation in WMST

Note: All Χ2 difference tests significant at α = 0.05)

Results: Outcome Assessment

Outcome #2: Achievement of Learning Goals

Dialogue – ability to interact with others in civil and constructive manner

Application – ability to use knowledge to craft compelling argument

Integration – ability to connect course material to situations not discussed in class

eLC* Facebook*

WMST n=28 n=24

Dialogue 0.40 0.72

Application 0.78 0.67

Integration 0.80 0.71

PHIL n=35 n=32

Dialogue 0.55 0.78

Integration 0.75 0.34

Application 0.87 0.54

*Means reflect average scores for all posts by each individual student in the course.

Each post was coded as: 1=achieved learning goal, 0.5=partially achieved learning goal,

0=did not achieve learning goal.

All t-tests significant at α = 0.05.

Achievement of Learning Goals Linked to Each Forum

Results: Outcome Assessment

Outcome #3: Overall Course Performance

Online discussion grade

Overall course grade

eLC* Facebook*

WMST n=28 n=24

Online Discussion Grades (out of 40) 32 37

Overall Course Grades (out of 100) 82 89

PHIL n=35 n=32

Online Discussion Grades (out of 40) 32 32

Overall Course Grades (out of 100) 87 85

*Means reflect average grades across all individuals in each course section.

For WMST, both t-tests significant at α = 0.05. For PHIL, no significant differences.

Across both courses, student’s overall course grades increased by

0.18 to 0.39 percentage points with every online post.

Overall Course Performance Linked to Each Forum

Conclusions – Phase 2 Facebook more effective at encouraging peer dialogue

and engagement, cultivating classroom community

eLC more effective at encouraging direct communication with instructor, fostering application and integration of course content

Recommendations when selecting discussion forum:

Consider primary goals of online discussion

Consider role instructor intends to play in the forum

Consider content of course

Acknowledgments

For more information, see: Camus, M., Hurt, N., Larson, L., & Prevost, L. (in press). Facebook as an

online teaching tool: Effects on student participation, learning, and overall course performance. College Teaching. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2015.1099093

Hurt, N., Moss, G., Camus, M., Bradley, C., Larson, L., Lovelace, M., Prevost, L., Riley, N., & Domizi, D. (2012). The ‘Facebook’ effect: An investigation of college students’ perspectives regarding online discussions in the age of social networking. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 6(2), 2-14.

UGA Center for Teaching & Learning

Drs. Denise Domizi & Paul Quick

Entire 2009-2010 UGA Future Faculty Program Cohort