Remodeling the educational usage of Facebook in smart-mobile age

Abstract

Overwhelming popularity of Facebook as a social network site (SNS), especially among students, has shown growing interests of using it as a tool for education in and out of the classroom. However, despite concerted efforts from educationists, Facebook has hitherto unincorporated as a promising pedagogical tool. Influencing factors for such a use has already modeled structurally and validated, yet, the “increasing smart mobile usage to access Facebook” and its interactivity received insufficient attention in those models. Hence, our aim was to extend the existing structural model for two factors, namely mobility and interactivity. The structural equation modeling was applied to identify factors including mobility and its interactivity that may stimulate students to adopt Facebook for educational purposes. Online survey data were gathered from a sample of 510 undergraduate students using a structured and adapted questionnaire. Results of the present study revealed that in the extended model educational usage of Facebook was significantly related to its purpose and less significant to its adoption. Mobility was a significant factor in predicting the adoption in the extended model, even more than the social influence, while interactivity is significantly affecting the educational usage of Facebook. The extended model reconfirms the purpose of using Facebook is mainly for social relations. Similarly, community identification is the most significant factor for Facebook adoption and mobility seems to be further improving it. In conclusion, incorporating mobility and interactivity into the already existing model can better explain the pedagogical use of Facebook in the smart mobile age.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Alhazmi, A. K., & Rahman, A. A. (2013). Facebook in higher education: Students' use and perceptions. Advances in Information Sciences and Service Sciences, 5(15), 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bahner, D. P., Adkins, E., Patel, N., Donley, C., Nagel, R., & Kman, N. E. (2012). How we use social media to supplement a novel curriculum in medical education. Medical Teacher, 34(6), 439–444. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.668245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bicen, H., & Cavus, N. (2011). Social network sites usage habits of undergraduate students: Case study of Facebook. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 943-947), Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.174.

  4. Bicen, H., & Uzunboylu, H. (2013). The use of social networking sites in education: A case study of Facebook. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 19(5), 658–671. https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-019-05-0658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models (Vol. 154). Sage Publications.

  6. Cavus, N., & Uzunboylu, H. (2009). Improving critical thinking skills in mobile learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 434–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chu, S. K., & Du, H. S. (2013). Social networking tools for academic libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 45(1), 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000611434361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dabner, N. (2012). ‘Breaking Ground’in the use of social media: A case study of a university earthquake response to inform educational design with Facebook. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M., & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. (1988). Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics, 44(3), 837–845. https://doi.org/10.2307/2531595.

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Deng, L., & Tavares, N. J. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students' motivation and experiences in online communities. Computers & Education, 68, 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. K. (2004). A social influence model of consumer participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2003.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2011). Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society, 13(6), 873–892. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Forkosh-Baruch, A., & Hershkovitz, A. (2012). A case study of Israeli higher-education institutes sharing scholarly information with the community via social networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Forkosh-Baruch, A., & Hershkovitz, A. (2014). Teacher-Student Relationship in the Facebook Era. The Evolution of the Internet in the Business Sector: Web 1.0 to Web 3.0 (pp. 145–147). IGI Global.

  17. Fox, R. J. (1983). Confirmatory factor analysis. In John Wiley & Sons ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gabarre, S., Gabarre, C., Din, R., Shah, P. M., & Karim, A. A. (2013). Using mobile Facebook as an LMS: Exploring impeding factors. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 13(3), 99–115.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gebauer, J. (2008). User requirements of mobile technology: A summary of research results. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 7(1,2), 101–119.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gliem, J. A., & Rosemary, G. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, (pp. 82-88).

  21. Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.2307/249689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Grosseck, G., Bran, R., & Tiru, L. (2011). Dear teacher, what should I write on my wall? A case study on academic uses of Facebook. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1425–1430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Irwin, C., Ball, L., Desbrow, B., & Leveritt, M. (2012). Students’ perceptions of using Facebook as an interactive learning resource at university. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7), 1221–1232. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Junco, R. (2012a). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(1), 162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Junco, R. (2012b). Too much face and not enough books: The relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Karpinski, A. C., & Duberstein, A. (2009). A description of Facebook use and academic performance among undergraduate and graduate students. In Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Calif: San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kent, M. (2013). Changing the conversation: Facebook as a venue for online class discussion in higher education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 546–565.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kim, J. Y. (2016). Digital Dividents overview-world development report. Washington: World Bank Group.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kim, S., & Garrison, G. (2009). Investigating mobile wireless technology adoption: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Frontiers, 11(3), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-008-9073-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kwon, H. S. (2000 January). A test of the technology acceptance model: The case of cellular telephone adoption. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 7–15). Hawaii : IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2000.926607

  32. Lampe, C., Wohn, D. Y., Vitak, J., Ellison, N. B., & Wash, R. (2011). Student use of Facebook for organizing collaborative classroom activities. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9115-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lawrence, I., & Lin, K. (1989). A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics, 45(1), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532051.

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lim, T. (2010). The use of Facebook for online discussions among distance learners. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11(4), 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lu, J., Yu, C. S., Liu, C., & Yao, J. E. (2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless internet. Internet Research, 13(3), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240310478222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mazman, S. G., & Usluel, Y. K. (2010). Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers & Education, 55(2), 444–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., & Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook groups as LMS: A case study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49(3), 581–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mulaik, S. A., Larry, J. R., Alstine, J. V., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Naidu, S. (2005). Learning & teaching with technology: Principles and practices. In Psychology press.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Nowak, M., & Spiller, G. (2017, June 27). Two billion people coming together on Facebook. Retrieved from Facebook newsroom: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/06/two-billion-people-coming-together-on-facebook/

  42. Oldmeadow, J. A., Quinn, S., & Kowert, R. (2013). Attachment style, social skills, and Facebook use amongst adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1142–1149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ozdamli, F., & Cavus, N. (2011 Jan). Basic elements and characteristics of mobile learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 937-942). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.173.

  44. Perry, D. (2003). Handheld computers in schools. ICT Research: Becta.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ractham, P., & Firpo, D. (2011). Using social networking technology to enhance learning in higher education: A case study using Facebook. International Conference on IEEE In System Sciences (HICSS), (pp. 1–10). Hawai. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2011.479.

  46. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Roth, A. (2009). Following Plato’s advice: Pedagogy and technology for the Facebook generation. Journal of Philosophy and History of Education, 59(1), 125–128.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sáncheza, R. A., Cortijo, V., & Javed, U. (2014). Students' perceptions of Facebook for academic purposes. Computers & Education, 70, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sarapin, S. H., & Morris, P. L. (2015). Faculty and Facebook friending: Instructor–student online social communication from the professor's perspective. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students' education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880902923622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Seppälä, P., & Alamäki, H. (2003). Mobile learning in teacher training. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 330–335. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00034.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Sharples, M. (2000). The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning. Computers & Education, 34(3), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00044-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005, October). Towards a theory of mobile learning. In Proceedings of mLearn (Vol. 1, pp. 1–9).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Stutzman, F. (2006). An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities. Journal of the International Digital Media and Arts Association, 3(1), 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. American Psychological Association.

  56. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.2307/249443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2003). Structural equation modeling. In John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Yousuf, M. I. (2007). Using experts’ opinions through Delphi technique. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(4), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. K. Salinda Premadasa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Appendix

Appendix

The following table represents the questionnaire survey.

Adoption
Perceived Usefulness (PU)
 PU-1 Facebook allows me to communicate with more people in a short time period.
 PU-2 Facebook allows me to share more in a short time period.
 PU-3 Facebook makes it easier to establish and maintain personal relationships.
 PU-4 Facebook allows me to have more control over my relationships.
 PU-5 In general, the use of Facebook improves my personal relationships.
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)
 PEU-1 I became a Facebook member with ease.
 PEU-2 My interaction with Facebook is clear and understandable.
 PEU-3 I don’t have any problems learning about Facebook features on my own.
 PEU-4 I find it easy to use Facebook features.
 PEU-5 In general, I find it easy to use Facebook.
Social Influence (SI)
 SI-1 I use Facebook because my friends recommended that I do.
 SI-2 I pay more attention to the Facebook features used by my friends/contacts
 SI-3 I use Facebook to communicate and share information with people around me.
 SI-4 I use Facebook because many people I know expect me to use it.
 SI-5 I use Facebook mostly to fit in since many people I know use it.
 SI-6 I use Facebook because my friends recommended that I do.
Facilitating Conditions (FC)
 FC-1 I find necessary resources to use Facebook with ease.
 FC-2 Anyone can help me use Facebook.
 FC-3 Facebook offers technical support when needed.
 FC-4 I can get technical support by email if I have problems using Facebook.
 FC-5 I can connect to Facebook where ever there is Internet connectivity.
 FC-6 Facebook is similar to other social networks I use (msn, e-mail, online forums).
 FC-7 In general, Facebook offers appropriate support.
Community Identification (CI)
 CI-1 Using Facebook, I can create groups to share information with others that have the same interests.
 CI-2 Using Facebook, I can join groups that I am interested in.
 CI-3 Facebook allows the creation of groups of people who share the same interests and needs.
 CI-4 I use Facebook to work as a team with the other members of the groups I joined
Mobility (MO)
 MO-1 I use my mobile device to connect Facebook most of times than personal computer
 MO-2 Mobile device helps to connect Facebook anytime and anywhere
 MO-3 Features of mobile device (taking photos, video recording) are motivated me to connect Facebook for sharing images and videos quickly
 MO-4 I would like to connect Facebook with my mobile device because, I need to make phone calls and send SMSs to my friends in the same time
Purpose
Social Relations (SR)
 SR-1 I use Facebook to locate friends I haven’t been in touch with for a while.
 SR-2 I use Facebook to find new friendships.
 SR-3 I use Facebook to communicate with my friends.
 SR-4 I use Facebook to share information and resources with my friends.
 SR-5 I use Facebook to join groups to communicate about common interests.
 SR-6 I use Facebook to be updated on the events of my previous school and former classmates
Work Related (WR)
 WR-1 I use/would use Facebook to communicate with my classmates about homework and group projects of the university.
 WR-2 I use/would use Facebook as a resource to increase my performance in my courses at university.
Daily Activities (DA)
 DA-1 I use Facebook to get up to date information and news about my contacts.
 DA-2 I use Facebook to find out what is new and innovative.
Educational Usage
Communication (CM)
 CM-1 The use of Facebook improves communication between classmates.
 CM-2 The use of Facebook improves communication between the teacher and the students.
 CM-3 The use of Facebook improves classroom discussions.
 CM-4 The use of Facebook improves the delivery of course content and resources.
 CM-5 The use of Facebook improves the communication of announcements about courses, classes or school.
 CM-6 Facebook provides resources to support students when doing their homework.
Collaboration (C)
 C-1 The use of Facebook encourages the creation of academic groups (communities) of people with the same interests and needs.
 C-2 Facebook is an appropriate platform to exchange course related information.
 C-3 The use of Facebook improves student group work.
Resource/Material Sharing (RMS)
 RMS-1 Facebook provides the resources to share a wide variety of resources and learning materials.
 RMS-2 Facebook provides rich multimedia resources and media support to improve the educational experience.
Interactive (IR)
 IR-1 Facebook make an interactive learning environment than traditional e-Learning Systems (LMS) in educational activities (Discussions, image & video sharing, academic notifications & updates, event news, uploading & downloading lecture notes, etc.) through the mobile device
 IR-2 Facebook chatting provides personal communication among selected friends (peers/teachers/lecturers) to exchange educational information while engaging Facebook wall in public.
 IR-3 Using Facebook via mobile device makes me interactive and encourages me for self-learning at any time anywhere
 IR-4 Interactive notifications in Facebook updates, coming into my mobile device is motivated me to check whether it is an educational activity

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Salinda Premadasa, H.K., Kapila Tharanga Rathnayaka, R.M., Waruni Thiranagama, A. et al. Remodeling the educational usage of Facebook in smart-mobile age. Educ Inf Technol 24, 41–61 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9759-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Facebook
  • Higher education
  • Social media
  • Educational tools