AARE 2014 conference presentation slides. "Social media technologies and the first year of university: Connecting with teachers, connecting with peers". Kelli McGraw, Shaun Nykvist & Michelle Mukherjee (Queensland University of Technology)

1. Social media technologies and the
first year of university: Connecting
with teachers, connecting with peers.
Kelli McGraw, Shaun Nykvist & Michelle Mukherjee
Queensland University of Technology
kelli.mcgraw@qut.edu.au

2. Context
Learning and teaching that uses social media technologies is not
constrained in higher education institutions to the same extent
that it is in school settings…
Schools:
• Internet firewalls &
‘blocked’ sites
• Inconsistent Wi-Fi access
• Restricted access to admin
rights on devices
• Conservative policies on
teacher-student
networking
Universities:
• No ‘blocked’ sites
(replaced by ‘code of
conduct’ rules)
• Superior Wi-Fi access
• More students using own
devices
• Teacher-student
networking supported by
policy (to an extent)

3. Aims
We are exploring the use of personal mobile devices (e.g.
smartphones, tablets) and social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter)
in a blended learning environment, with an emphasis on QUT
student first year experience.
More specifically we have sought to:
● Identify how students in the Faculty of Education currently use
personal mobile devices and social media
● Identify the extent to which lecturers are using personal mobile
devices and social media within a blended learning environment (with an
emphasis on units of work taught in the first year)
● Explore the relationship between tertiary students’ use of mobile
devices and social media and how this is supported through current
teaching and learning practices

4. ‘Social Media Technologies’ (SMT)
In order to capture the complex relationship between tools
and devices, the term ‘social media technologies’ is used to
describe:
• the range of social networks available for use, as well as
• the devices used to access these networks via
smartphone and tablet ‘apps’ and browser extensions.

5. Literature
This study was interested in determining whether the potential for student
use of social media technologies (SMTs) reported in the literature was
taking place in the researchers’ institution and how this contrasted with the
patterns of usage from the academic staff teaching these first year students.
• Virtual environments allow all students to engage in peer to peer social and
learning centred activities (Menzies & Nelson, 2012)
• Facebook has been identified as a means through which students can express
opinion; social media found to create links between international and local
students (McCarthy, 2010)
• Facebook could create a more comfortable classroom climate and increase
learners’ motivational levels (Goertler, 2009)
• Facebook can also expand learning beyond a traditional classroom into informal
learning settings (Bull et al., 2008; Yang, Wang, Woo, & Quek, 2011).
What about other social
media platforms?
Can we get a bigger sample
size please?

6. The data (so far)
Survey data from first-year students in the Faculty of Education at
Queensland University of Technology from 2012 (N=538), 2013 (N=537) and
2014 (N=397) are used to examine students’ experience and perceptions.
Survey data from academics that teach first-year students collected in the
third year of the study (2014) to examine the ways that academics use and
perceive these technologies.
Sample:
• Response rate = over 80% for each of the years.
• Over 70% of respondents in each of the surveys were
female (in line with enrolments).
• Age profile of first year Faculty of Education student
respondents = majority aged 15-22 (62% in the 18 – 22
years age range and 22% in the 15 – 17 years age range).

7. Some key findings (1)
The data from the student survey indicates that there was a strong use of social media
tools by the students in each of the years…
SMT Use (‘regularly’ or ‘almost always’)*
Facebook 84% in 2012; 87% in 2013; 86% in 2014 (4-6% ‘never’)
Instagram 54% in 2013; 50% in 2014 (~1/3 = ‘never’)
Tumblr 16% in 2013; 18% in 2014 (~2/3 = ‘never’)
Twitter 8% in 2012; 11% in 2013; 6% in 2014 (~3/4 = ‘never’)
Snapchat 13% in 2013; 45% in 2014
vs. Email 89% in 2012; 88% in 2013; 91 in 2014
*4 point Likert scale = ‘never’ / ‘occasionally’ / ‘regularly’ / ‘almost always’

8. Some key findings (2)
Student survey data also indicates a lack of use/familiarity with the types of online
communication tools more conventionally used in university course work…
Communication
via…
Use (‘regularly’ or ‘almost always’)
YouTube (posting) 7% in 2012; 4% in 2013; 4% in 2014 (69-86% ‘never’)
Online publishing 14% in 2012; 10% in 2013; 11% in 2014 (69-74% ‘never’)
Discussion forums 7% in 2012; 9% in 2013; 5% in 2014 (71-78% ‘never’)
Facetime 10% in 2013; 13% in 2014 (58-67% ‘never’)
Skype video chat 20% in 2012; 24% in 2013; 18% in 2014 (33-39% ‘never’)

9. Some key findings (3)
Device ownership Staff (2014, n=6) Students
Laptop 100% 93% in 2012; 92% in 2013; 94% in 2014
iPhone 100% 47% in 2012; 59% in 2013; 80% in 2014
iPad 83% 17% in 2012; 27% in 2013; 57% in 2014
Android smart phone 33% 23% in 2012; 28% in 2013; 35% in 2014
Android tablet 33% 3% in 2012; 7% in 2013; 10% in 2014
vs. desktop PC 83% 45% in 2012; 43% in 2013; 63% in 2014
Cloud storage Staff (2014, n=6) Students*
Dropbox 100% 39% in 2013; 36% in 2014
Google Drive 33% 12% in 2013; 22% in 2014
iCloud (Apple) 67% 66% in 2013; 71% in 2014
Sky Drive (Microsoft) 17% 10% in 2013; 18% in 2014
*Skipped Q: n=252 in 2013; n=151 in 2014

10. Food for thought…
Please indicate below, your experiences surrounding the use of ICT by your teachers in your school
education.
Answer Options Never Occasionally Regularly Almost Always
Response
Count
My teachers used portable digital devices (e.g. ipad,
tablets, smart phones) in the classroom
265 150 56 30 501
My teachers used a data projector 21 132 229 120 502
My teachers used an Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) for
classroom activities other then projecting work
234 141 87 41 503
My teachers used digital presentations (e.g.
PowerPoint) in the classroom
46 121 202 133 502
My teachers communicated with students and parents
via email
161 138 125 80 504
My teacher shared electronic documents with students 131 141 143 88 503
My teacher allowed students to submit project work and
assessment electronically
171 159 95 78 503
My teacher used a wiki with the class 359 104 29 9 501
My teacher encouraged blogs with the class 397 82 18 5 502
My teacher encouraged international collaboration with
other students
348 103 39 11 501
My teacher used online videos and resources in the
classroom
85 180 159 78 502
2013 survey responses

11. Some student comments
When asked: ‘Do you think there is a place for mobile devices such as phones, tablets and
laptops in the classroom?’…
• I don't think students should be using mobiles but other tech is fine
• I think it's good for children to learn on laptops and tablets but not every lesson,
definatly no phones!
• Being a student myself I feel tablets, laptops, mobile phones can be a distraction as
they offer internet services, access to games etc.
• Only to a certain extent, for learning purposes only, not for socialising
• It enables easy access to resources
• It will get the students more engaged in learning
• Phones, tablets and laptops allow students to feel more independent about there
education
• Yes, because there are currently already schools using tablets in classrooms
• I don't think that students have the capacity to separate work and play from an
object that can do both
• This is a yes and no answer. It depends on the age group of the students. I would
say yes there is a place for them amongst mature aged students such as in Tafe or
Uni but definitely not in Primary or Secondary education. It is far too distracting for
young students.

12. Discussion
• Facebook, email & laptops FTW! Majority of students and staff use
all of these.
• Contrary to predictions that younger students are moving away from
Facebook, other platforms are not overwhelmingly being taken up.
• However…problematic to assume that students will use Facebook for
learning purposes!
• Device ownership & cloud storage use is higher in the staff cohort,
but student use is on the rise (enabling BYOD strategies with fewer
equity concerns?).
• However…students and staff present with different digital literacies
and cultural practices. Social media vs. academic usage.
• Successful use of SMTs for learning is not yet linked to assessment, a
key driver of student and staff behaviour (Selwyn, 2014).
• Capacity for SMTs to encourage ‘social learning’ is not largely
recognised by first-year students in our cohort.