Advertisement

Examining the Effects of Social Media in Co-located Classrooms: A Case Study Based on SpeakUp

  • María Jesús Rodríguez-Triana
  • Adrian Holzer
  • Luis P. Prieto
  • Denis Gillet
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9891)

Abstract

The broad availability of mobile computing devices has prompted the apparition of social media applications that support teaching and learning. However, so far, there is conflicting evidence as to whether the benefits such applications provide in terms of engagement and interaction, outweigh their potential cost as a source of distraction. To help in clarifying these issues, the present paper presents a case study on the impact of using SpeakUp (an app aimed at promoting student participation through anonymous chatrooms) in an authentic face-to-face learning scenario. Concretely, we focus on the connection between SpeakUp and the student engagement, distraction, social interaction, and the influence of the teachers’ style. Our findings highlight that SpeakUp favored students’ engagement and social interaction, but they also point towards its limitations in keeping students communicating about content relevant to the course.

Keywords

Social media Engagement Attention Interaction Learning Teaching 

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson, R.J., Anderson, R., Vandegrift, T., Wolfman, S., Yasuhara, K.: Promoting interaction in large classes with computer-mediated feedback. Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, vol. 2, pp. 119–123. Springer, Amsterdam (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergstrom, T., Harris, A., Karahalios, K.: Encouraging initiative in the classroom with anonymous feedback. In: Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6946, pp. 627–642. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blood, E., Neel, R.: Using student response systems in lecture-based instruction: does it change student engagement and learning? J. Technol. Teach. Educ. 16(3), 375–383 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Gutmann, M.L., Hanson, W.E.: Advanced mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (eds.) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, pp. 209–240. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dewan, P.: An integrated approach to designing and evaluating collaborative applications and infrastructures. Comput. Support. Coop. Work (CSCW) 10(1), 75–111 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dillenbourg, P.: What do you mean by collaborative learning. In: Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, vol. 1, pp. 1–15. Elsevier Publishing (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Du, H., Rosson, M.B., Carroll, J.M.: Augmenting classroom participation through public digital backchannels. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, GROUP 2012, NY, USA, pp. 155–164. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Erickson, J., Siau, K.: Education. CACM 46(9), 134–140 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fies, C., Marshall, J.: Classroom response systems: a review of the literature. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 15(1), 101–109 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greene, J.C., Benjamin, L., Goodyear, L.: The merits of mixing methods in evaluation. Evaluation 7(1), 25–44 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grotenbreg, G., Wong, S.B.J.: Using Pigeonhole \(\textregistered \) Live to elicit feedback, questions & reinforce learning during lectures. CDLT Brief 16(2), 2–7 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guba, E.G.: Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. J. Theor. Res. Devel. Educ. Commun. Technol. 29(2), 75–91 (1981)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harry, D., Green, J., Donath, J.: Backchan.nl: integrating backchannels with physical space. In: CHI 2009, pp. 2751–2756. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holzer, A., Govaerts, S., Vozniuk, A., Kocher, B., Gillet, D.: Speakup in the classroom: anonymous temporary social media for better interactions. In: Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI EA 2014, NY, USA, pp. 1171–1176. ACM, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holzer, A., Govaerts, S., Ondrus, J., Vozniuk, A., Rigaud, D., Garbinato, B., Gillet, D.: SpeakUp – a mobile app facilitating audience interaction. In: Wang, J.-F., Lau, R. (eds.) ICWL 2013. LNCS, vol. 8167, pp. 11–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horowitz, H.M.: Student response systems: interactivity in a classroom environment. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference on Interactive Instruction Delivery. Salt Lake City, UT, February 1988Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jensen, E.: Teaching with the brain in mind. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J.: Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ. Researcher 33(7), 14–26 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jorrín-Abellán, I.M., Stake, R.E., Martínez-Monés, A.: The needlework in evaluating a CSCL system: the evaluand oriented responsive evaluation model. In: International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, CSCL 2009, pp. 68–72, International Society of the Learning Sciences, Rhodes, Greece (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kinzie, M.B., Whitaker, S.D., Hofer, M.J.: Instructional uses of instant messaging (IM) during classroom lectures. Educ. Technol. Soc. 8(2), 150–160 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P.A., Jochems, W.: Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Comput. Hum. Behav. 19(3), 335–353 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kuznekoff, J.H., Munz, S., Titsworth, S.: Mobile phones in the classroom: examining the effects of texting, twitter, and message content on student learning. Commun. Educ. 64(3), 344–365 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McCarthy, J.F., Boyd, D.M.: Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces: experiences at an academic conference. In: CHI 2005 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI EA 2005, pp. 1641–1644. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Prince, M.: Does active learning work? a review of the research. J. Eng. Educ. 93(3), 223–231 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reinhardt, W., Ebner, M., Beham, G., Costa, C.: How people are using twitter during conferences. In: Proceedings of 5th EduMedia Conference, p. 145 (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Retelny, D., Birnholtz, J.P., Hancock, J.T.: Tweeting for class: using social media to enable student co-construction of lectures. In: Poltrock, S.E., Simone, C., Grudin, J., Mark, G., Riedl, J. (eds.) CSCW (Companion), pp. 203–206. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sana, F., Weston, T., Cepeda, N.J.: Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Comput. Educ. 62, 24–31 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scornavacca, E., Huff, S., Marshall, S.: Mobile phones in the classroom: if you can’t beat them, join them. CACM 52(4), 142–146 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Seaman, J., Tinti-Kane, H.: Social media for teaching and learning. Technical report, Pearson Learning Solutions (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stake, R.: The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1995)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stowell, J.R., Nelson, J.M.: Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation, learning, and emotion. Teach. Psychol. 34(4), 253–258 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sung, Y.T., Chang, K.E., Liu, T.C.: The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: a meta-analysis and research synthesis. Comput. Educ. 94, 252–275 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Trees, A.R., Jackson, M.H.: The learning environment in clicker classrooms: student processes of learning and involvement in large university-level courses using student response systems. Learn. Media Technol. 32(1), 21–40 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Worthington, D.L., Levasseur, D.G.: To provide or not to provide course powerpoint slides? the impact of instructor-provided slides upon student attendance and performance. Comput. Educ. 85, 14–22 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yardi, S.: The role of the backchannel in collaborative learning environments. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, ICLS 2006, pp. 852–858. International Society of the Learning Sciences (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • María Jesús Rodríguez-Triana
    • 1
  • Adrian Holzer
    • 1
  • Luis P. Prieto
    • 1
  • Denis Gillet
    • 1
  1. 1.École Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations