pp 1–9 | Cite as

Like or Tweet: Analysis of the Use of Facebook and Twitter in the Language Classroom

  • Alyssia M. MillerEmail author
  • William Justin Morgan
  • Bryan Koronkiewicz
Original Paper


Social media has become a daily activity in today’s technological age, and with this development, educators are met with another possible tool to facilitate language learning. This study was conducted to examine the use of social media, in particular Facebook and Twitter, as a pedagogical instrument in beginning level Spanish courses. Two university-level, beginning Spanish courses were analyzed for student preference and academic impact of the incorporation of social media as a course component – one using Facebook while another using Twitter. Equivalent semester-long assignments were implemented into both the Facebook and Twitter classes. Results show that students exhibited an overall positive perception of skill increase and an awareness of Spanish-speaking countries and current events. Results further indicate that students viewed social media as a valuable learning tool for cultural awareness and target language usage. These findings support the use of social media as a pedagogical resource for the twenty-first century language classroom.


Social media Pedagogy Second language acquisition Technology Perceptions Web 2.0 Foreign language learning 



The authors would like to thank Jessica Hubickey-Botha for allowing us to implement this project in her Spanish classes.


  1. Abe, P., & Jordan, N. A. (2013). Integrating social media into the classroom curriculum. About Campus, 18(1), 16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed, M. (2015). The effect of Twitter on developing writing skill in English as a foreign language. Arab World English Journal, 2, 134–149.Google Scholar
  3. Alm, A. (2015). Facebook for informal language learning: Perspectives from tertiary language students. The EuroCALL Review, 23(2), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atakli, F. (2012). The role of multi-media in the foreign language (Russian) classroom. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70(1), 795–798.Google Scholar
  5. Atenos-Conforti, E. (2016). Micro-blogging on Twitter: Social networking in intermediate Italian classes. In L. Lomicka & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Online collaboration in foreign language learning (vol. 8, pp. 59–90). CALICO Monograph Series, San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
  6. Aubry, J. (2013). Facebook-induced motivation shifts in a French online course. TechTrends, 57(6), 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aydin, S. (2014). EFL writers’ attitudes and perceptions toward E-portfolio use. TechTrends, 58(2), 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Belz, J. A. (2001). Institutional and individual dimensions of transatlantic group work in network-based language teaching. ReCALL, 13(2), 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blankenship, M. (2011). How social media can and should impact higher education. The Education Digest, 76(7), 11–12.Google Scholar
  10. Blattner, G., & Fiori, M. (2009). Facebook in the language classroom: Promises and possibilities. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1), 17–28.Google Scholar
  11. Blattner, G., & Fiori, M. (2011). Virtual social network communities: An investigation of language learners’ development of sociopragmatic awareness and multiliteracy skills. CALICO Journal, 29(1), 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blattner, G., & Lomicka, L. (2012). Facebook-ing and the social generation: A new era of language learning. Alsic (Apprentissage des langues et systèmes d’information et de communication), 15(1) n.p.Google Scholar
  13. Blattner, G., Lomicka, L., & Dalola, A. (2016). Twitter in foreign language classes: Initiating contemporary language variation. In V. Wang (Ed.), The handbook of research on learning outcomes and opportunities in the digital age (pp. 769–797). Hershey: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Borau, K., Ullrich, C., Feng, J., & Shen, R. (2009). Microblogging for language learning: Using Twitter to train communicative and cultural competence. Proceedings from International Conference on Web-based Learning (ICWL 2009) (pp. 78–87). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the grounded theory. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397–412). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  16. “Company.” (2017). Twitter.
  17. Damayanti, I. L. (2016). From storytelling to story writing: The implementation of reading to learn (R2L) pedagogy to teach English as a foreign language in Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 232–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dizon, G. (2016). A comparative study of Facebook vs. paper-and-pencil writing to improve L2 writing skills. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1249–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dogoriti, E., & Pange, J. (2014). Instructional design for a “social” classroom: Edmodo and Twitter in the foreign language classroom. Proceedings from ICICTE 2014 (pp. 154-165).Google Scholar
  20. Dressler, R., & Dressler, A. (2016). Linguistic identity position in Facebook posts during second language study abroad: One teen’s language use, experience, and awareness. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2, 22–43.Google Scholar
  21. Ducate, L. C., & Lomicka, L. L. (2008). Adventures in the blogosphere: From blog readers to blog writers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(1), 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.Google Scholar
  23. Hattem, D. (2014). Microblogging activities: Language play and tool transformation. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 151–174.Google Scholar
  24. IBM SPSS statistics software (2018); IBM Corp. Version 24.Google Scholar
  25. Jones, N., Blackey, H., Fitzgibbon, K., & Chew, E. (2010). Get out of MySpace! Computers & Edcuation, 54(1), 776–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer and R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice, (pp. 1–19). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kessler, G. (2009). Student-initiated attention to form in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 79–95.Google Scholar
  29. Kessler, G., Bikowski, D., & Boggs, J. (2012). Collaborative writing among second language learners in academic web-based projects. Language Learning & Technology, 16(1), 91–109.Google Scholar
  30. Lantz-Andersson, A., Vigmo, S., & Bowen, R. (2013). Crossing boundaries in Facebook: Students’ framing of language learning activities as extended spaces. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 293–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee, L., & Markey, A. (2014). A study of learners’ perceptions of online intercultural exchange through Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 26(3), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leier, V., & Cunningham, U. (2016). ‘Just facebook me’: A study on the integration of Facebook into a German language curriculum. In S. Papadima-Sophocleous, L. Bradley, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), CALL communities and culture – Short papers from EUROCALL 2016 (pp. 260–264). Dublin: Scholar
  33. Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2012). A tale of tweets: Analyzing microblogging among language learners. System, 40(1), 48–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2016). Social networking and language learning. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology (pp. 255–268). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Mills, N. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement and a shared repertoire. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 345–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nvivo qualitative data analysis software (2018); QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 11.4.2.Google Scholar
  38. O’Dowd, R. (2005). Negotiating sociocultural and institutional contexts: The case of Spanish-American telecollaboration. Language and Intercultural Communication, 5(1), 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. “Our Mission.” (2018). Facebook.
  40. Pellettieri, J. (2010). Online chat in the foreign language classroom: From research to pedagogy. MEXTESOL Journal, 34(1), 41–57.Google Scholar
  41. Pinkman, K. (2005). Using blogs in the foreign language classroom: Encouraging learner independence. The JALT CALL Journal, 1(1), 12–24.Google Scholar
  42. Reinhardt, J., & Zander, V. (2011). Social networking in an intensive English program classroom: A language socialization perspective. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 326–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shams, S. (2014). Efficacy of online social networks on language teaching: A Bangladeshi perspective. The IAFOR Journal of Education, 2(2), 117–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. “Social Media Use in 2018.” (2018). The Pew Research Center.
  45. Solmaz, O. (2017). Autonomous language learning on Twitter: Performing affiliation with target language users through #hashtags. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 204–220.Google Scholar
  46. Terantino, J. (2012). Student perceptions on language learning with Facebook: An exploratory study of writing-based activities. In A. Shafaei (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2011 International Online Language Conference (IOLC 2011) (pp. 230–240). Boca Raton: Universal Publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Tess, P. (2013). The role of social medua in higher education classes (real and virtual) – A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), A60–A68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tozcu, A., & Coady, J. (2004). Successful learning of frequent vocabulary through CALL also benefits reading comprehension and speed. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(5), 473–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wang, S., & Kim, D. (2016). Incorporating Facebook in an intermediate-level Chinese language course: A case study. The IALLT Journal, 44(1), 37–78.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Languages and LinguisticsUniversity of TampaTampaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Modern Languages and ClassicsThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations