STUDENT-CONTROLLED SOCIAL NETWORKS FOR PROMOTING HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT FROM THE PRESPECTIVES OF STUDENT COACHES
Abstract
Many previous research works have studied the impact of online social networks for educational purposes. We examine in particular how Facebook is being used as a platform to communicate among students of an on-going student development project run by a local tertiary institute in Hong Kong so as to facilitate promotion and foster participation and interaction. The study focuses on the perspectives from student coaches and evaluate on the facilitation and difficulties in promoting self-initiated holistic development via Facebook. The study shows that instant interaction between participants and student coaches via Facebook can lead to information circulation in a much faster and effective manner compared with traditional communication channels such as email or bulletins. However, limitations are found on the lack of proactive discussions initiated by participants, and the difficulties in establishing active interactions between coaches and participants. This has undermined the effectiveness of promoting to participants’ in self-initiated holistic development.
Keywords
References
Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010). Beyond the digital natives debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 26(5), 321-331.
Bugeja, M. J. (2006). Facing the Facebook. Chronicle of Higher Education: C1.
Capriccioso, R. (2006). Facebook face off. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved April 6th, 2012, from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/02/14/facebook.
Chakrabarti, A. K., & Santoro, M. D. (2004). Building social capital and learning environment in university–industry relationships. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 1(1), 19–36.
Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P. Y. & Lee, M. K. O. (2011). Online social networks: Why do students use facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1337-1343.
Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2009). Understanding the sustainability of a virtual community: Model development and empirical test. Journal of Information Science, 35(3), 279-298.
Cho, H. C., Gay, G., Davidson, B., & Ingraffea, A. (2007). Social networks, communication styles, and learning performance in a CSCL community. Computers & Education, 49(2), 309-329.
Corrin, L., Lockyer, L., & Bennett, S. (2010). Technological diversity: An investigation of students’ technology use in everyday life and academic study. Learning, Media & Technology, 35(4), 387-401.
DeVoss, D., & Porter, J. (2006). Why Napster matters to writing: Filesharing as a new ethic of digital delivery. Computers and Composition, 23(2), 178–210.
DeVoss, D., & Rosati, A. (2002). It wasn’t me, was it?: Plagiarism and the Web. Computers and Composition, 19(2), 191–203.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communications, 12, 1143–1168.
Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1), 92-113.
Hart-Davidson, B., Cushman, E., Grabill, J. T., DeVoss, D. N., & Porter, J. (2005). Why teach digital writing? Kairos, 10(1). Retrieved May 11th, 2012, from http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/10.1/binder2.html?coverweb/wide/index.html.
Hwang, A., Kessler, E. H., & Francesco, A. M. (2004). Student networking behavior, culture, and grade performance: an empirical study and pedagogical recommendations. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(2), 139–150.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.
Jones, C. (2010). A new generation of learners? The net generation and digital natives. Learning, Media and Technology, 35(4), 365-368.
Jones, C. & Cross, S. (2009). Is There a Net Generation Coming to University? ALT-C 2009. “In dreams begins responsibility”: Choice, evidence and change, 8-10 September 2009, Manchester, UK.
Kennedy, G., Judd, T.S., Churchward, A., Gray, K. & Krause, K. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122.
Madge, C., Meek, J. Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: it is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 141–155.
Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on ‘‘Facebook”: The effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56(1), 1–17.
Oblinger, Diana. (2003). Understanding the new students: Boomers, gen-xers, and millenials. Educause Review, 37–47.
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.
Parker, P., Hall, D. T., & Kram, K. E. (2008). Peer coaching: a relational process for accelerating career learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(4), 487–503.
Perkel, D. (2008). Copy and paste literacy? Literacy practices in the production of a MySpace Profile. In K. Drotner, H. S. Jensen, and K. Schroeder (Eds). Informal Learning and Digital Media: Constructions, Contexts, Consequences (pp. 203-224). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Roberts, D. F., & Foehr, U. J. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8–18 year-olds (Report). The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved May 12th, 2012, from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/7251.cfm.
Selfe, C. L. (1999). Technology and literacy: A story about the perils of not paying attention. College Composition and Communication, 50(3), 411–436.
Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline social networks: use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 420–433.
Vie, S. (2007). Digital Divide 2.0: “Generation M” and online social networking sites in the composition classroom. Computers and Compositions, 25, 9-23.
Wang, S. L., & Wu, P. Y. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: the social cognitive perspective. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1589–1598.
Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practices. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57.
Yancey, K. B. (2004). Made not only in words: Composition in a new key. College Composition and Communication, 56(2), 297–328.
Yu, A. Y., Tian, S. W., Vogel, D. & Kwok R. C. (2010). Can learning be virtually boosted? An investigation of online social networking impacts. Computers and Education, 55, 1494-1503.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright © 2012 - 2023, All rights reserved.| ijitr.com
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.Based on a work at IJITR , Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_GB.