THEORETICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE UTILIZATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES

Year 2015, Volume: 16 Issue: 4, 67 - 83, 05.10.2015

İlker Yakın , Hasan Tınmaz

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.81802

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In the past 10 years, the internet has been transformed, along with the emergence of interaction and communication technologies. Indeed, there has been an emerging movement in the interaction and communication technologies. More specifically, the growth of Web 2.0 technologies has acted as a catalyst for change in the disciplines of education. The social networking websites have gained popularity in recent years; therefore, many research studies have been conducted to explain how the use of social networking websites for instructional purposes. For the best practices, it is essential to understand theories associated with social networking studies because related theories for any subject may provide insights and guideline for professionals and researchers. This theoretical paper was designed to offer a road map through the literature in relation to the utilization of social networking websites by presenting main understandings of theories associated with social networking. The Uses and Gratification Theory, social network theory, connectives, and constructivism were selected to serve as a basis for designing social networking studies regarding instructional purposes. Moreover, common attributes of the theories and specific application areas were also discussed. This paper contributes to this emerging movement by explaining the role of these theories for researchers and practitioners to find ways to beneficially integrate them into their future research endeavors.

Keywords

Social Networking Sites, Web 2.0, Uses and Gratification Theory, Social

References

• Acquisti, A. & Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. PET 2006 - 6th Workshop on Privacy Enhancing
• Technologies, Robinson College, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Retrieved May 19, 2010, from http://petworkshop.org/2006/preproc/ preproc_03.pdf
• Al-Shehri, A. (2011). Connectivism: A new pathway for theorising and promoting mobile language learning. International Journal of Innovation and Leadership in the Teaching of Humanities, 1(2): 10-31.
• Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy.
• International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 80-97. Andon, S. P. (2007). Evaluating computer-mediated communication on the university campus: The impact of Facebook.com on the development of romantic relationships.
• Unpublished master's thesis, The Florida State University, Florida. Arends, R. I. (2001). Learning to teach (5th Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
• Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D.
• Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.) Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 25-56. Beer, D. (2008). Social network(ing) sites… revisiting the story so far: A response to danah boyd & Nicole Ellison. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 516-529.
• Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118.
• Boitshwarelo, B. (2011). Proposing an integrated research framework for connectivism:
• Utilizing theoretical synergies. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 161-179. Boogart, M. R. V. (2006). Uncovering the social impacts of Facebook on a college campus.
• Unpublished master's thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. Borgatti, S., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323, 892-895.
• Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), Retrieved May 11, 2008 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html
• Coyle, C. L. & Vaughn, H. (2008). Social networking: Communication revolution or evolution?. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 13(2), 13-18.
• Dalsgaard, C. (2008, June 24). Social networking sites: Transparency in online education.
• A paper presented in EUNIS 2008 VISION IT - Vision for IT in Higher Education. Århus:
• Denmark. Retrieved September 05, 2009, from http://eunis.dk/papers/p41.pdf
• Donath, J. (2008). Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 231-251.
• Ellison, N. B. & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1), 99-122.
• Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer
• Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
• Ethier, J. (2006, May 27). Current research in social network theory. Retrieved January, 27, 2013, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/11171859/Current-Research-in-Social- Network-Theory
• Farfaglia, P. G., Dekkers, A., Sundararajan, B., Peters, L., & Park, S.H. (2006).
• Multinational web uses and gratifications: Measuring the social impact of online community participation across national boundaries. Electron Commerce Res, 6, 75-101. Graven, M. (2004). Investigating mathematics teacher learning within an in-service community of practice: The centrality of confidence, Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57(2), 177-211.
• Hatala, J. P. (2006). Social network analysis in human resource development: A new methodology. Human Resource Development, 5(1), 45-71.
• Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Personal information of adolescents on the Internet:
• A quantitative content analysis of MySpace. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 125-146. Huang, J. J. S., Yang, S. J. H., Huang, Y.-M. & Hsiao, I. Y. T. (2010). Social learning networks: Build mobile learning networks based on collaborative services. Educational
• Technology & Society, 13(3), 78-92. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2010). 2010 Horizon report: K-12
• Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Joinson, A. N. (2008). ‘Looking at’, ‘looking up’ or ‘keeping up with’ people? Motives and uses of Facebook. CHI 2008, Florence, Italy.
• Jonassen, D., Cernusca, D., & Ionas, G. (2007). Constructivism and instructional design:
• The emergence of the learning sciences and design research. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 45-52). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Kadushin, C. (2004, February 17). Introduction to social network theory. Retrieved
• February, 4, 2013, from http://hevra.haifa.ac.il/~soc/lecturers/talmud/files/521.pdf
• Kang, I., Choi, J., & Chang, K. (2007). Constructivist research in educational technology: A retrospective view and future prospects. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(3), 397-412.
• Katz, E., Blumler, J. G. & Gurevitch, M. (1974).Uses and gratifications research. The Public
• Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523. Kelty, C. (2005, June 9). Stanley Milgram's small world experiment. Retrieved April, 22, 2008, from http://cnx.org/content/m10833/2.2/
• Ko, H., Cho, C., & Roberts, M. S. (2005). Internet uses and gratifications. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 57-70.
• Koening, E. (2008). Creatingidentity in a digital age: The Facebook addiction. Retrieved
• July 21, 2010, from http://www.warren-wilson.edu/~socanth/students/ koenig08.doc
• Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. International Review of Research in
• Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 19-38. Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-13.
• Krause, J., Croft, D. P., & James, R. (2007). Social network theory in the behavioral sciences: Potential applications. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 62(1), 15-27.
• Lampe, C., Ellison, N. & Steinfield, C. (2007). A familiar Face(book): Profile elements as signals in an online social network. Proceedings of CSCW, San Diego, California, USA.
• Lange, P. G. (2007). Publicly private and privately public: Social networking on YouTube.
• Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), Retrieved September 25, 2009, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.html
• LaRose, R. & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of Internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting &
• Electronic Media, 48(3), 358-377. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation,
• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2011, April). Social development theory (Vygotsky) at learning-theories.com. Retrieved March 19th, 2011 from http://www.learning- theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html
• Lenhart, A. & Madden, M. (2007, April 18). How teens manage their online identities and personal information in the age of MySpace. Teens, Privacy & Online Social Networks.
• Pew Internet & American Life Project, Retrieved June 20, 2009, from http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Society_and_the_
• Internet/PIP_Teens_Privacy_SNS_Report_Final.pdf Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2006). Determinants of success for online communities: An empirical study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(6), 479-488.
• Liu, X., Magjuka, R. J., Bonk, C. J., & Lee, S. (2007). Does sense of community matter? An examination of participants’ perceptions of building learning communities in online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9-24.
• Luo, M. M., Chea, S., & Chen, J. (2011). Web-based information service adoption: A comparison of the motivational model and the uses and gratifications theory. Decision Support Systems, 51(1), 21-30.
• Madey, G., Freeh, V., & Tynan, R. (2002). The open source software development phenomenon: An analysis based on social network theory. Eighth Americas Conference on
• Information Systems (pp.1806-1813). Dallas: The United States of America.
• Marhan, A. (2006). Connectivism: Concepts and principles for emerging learning networks. The 1st International Conference on Virtual Learning, ICVL (pp. 209-216). Bucharest: Romania.
• Medina, M. G. R. (2007). A look at the factors influencing the utilization and enjoyment of computer-based social network. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46. (UMI No. 1444827)
• Merchant, G. (2012). Unravelling the social network: theory and research. Learning,
• Media and Technology, 37(1), 4-19. Mondi, M., Woods, P., & Rafi, A. (2008). A ‘Uses and Gratification Expectancy Model’ to predict students’ ‘Perceived e- Learning Experience’. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 241-261.
• Mujis, D., West, M., & Ainscow, M. (2010). Why network? Theoretical perspectives on networking. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(1), 5-26.
• Musolesi, M., & Mascolo, C. (2007). Designing mobility models based on social networks theory. Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 11(3), 59-70.
• Next Thing Now Report (2008, March). Universal McCann. Retrieved June 21, 2009, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/3836535/Universal-Mccann-on-Social-Media
• Nyland, R., & Near, C. (2007, February). Jesus is my friend: Religiosity as a mediating factor in Internet social networking use. Paper presented at AEJMC Midwinter Conference, Reno, NV.
• Oblinger, D. & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the Net generation. In D. Oblinger, & J. Oblinger (Eds), Educating the Net Generation,
• EDUCASE. Retrieved September 25, 2009, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101b.pdf
• Osatuyi, B. (2013). Information sharing on social media sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2622-2631.
• Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco: John Willey & Sons, Inc.
• Reigeluth, C. (1983). Instructional design: what is it and why is it?. In C. Reigeluth (Eds.)
• Instructional Design Theories and Models. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rosen, C. (2007). Virtual friendship and the new narcissism. The New Atlantis, 17, 15-31.
• Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century. Mass
• Communication & Society, 3(1), 3-37. Sachdev, V. (2007). Why do people engage in social computing? A need fulfillment perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International, 115. (UMI No. 3307230)
• Severin W. J., & Tankard, J. W. (1997). Uses of Mass Media. In W. J. Severin, & J. W.
• Tankard (Eds.) Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media (4th ed.). New York: Longman. Siemens, G. (2004, December, 12). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.
• Retrieved January 31, 2013, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
• Siemens, G. (2005, August, 10). Connectivism: Learning as Network-Creation. Retrieved
• January 31, 2013, from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/networks.doc
• Siemens, G. (2006, October). Connectivism: Learning and knowledge today. Paper presented at Global Summit 2006: Technology Connected Features, Sydney, Australia.
• Retrieved May 14, 2008, from http://www.educationau.edu.au/ sites/default/files/gs2006_siemens.pdf
• Siemens, G. & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook for emerging technologies for learning.
• Retrieved July 25, 2010, from http://umanitoba.ca/learning_technologies/ cetl/HETL.pdf
• Siraj, S. A. (2007). Synthesis of the structure and functions of the uses and gratification model. European Journal of Scientific Research, 17(3), 339-408.
• Smock, A. D., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Wohn, D. Y. (2011). Facebook as a toolkit: A uses and gratification approach to unbundling feature use. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2322-2329.
• Snelbecker, G. E. (1999). Some thoughts about theories, perfection, and instruction. In C.
• M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models. A new paradigmof instructional theory (pp. 31-47). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Storsul, T., Arnseth, H. C., Bucher, T., Enli, G., Hontvedt, M., Klİvstad, V. & Maasİ, A. (2008). New web phenomena: Government administration and the culture of sharing.
• Oslo University, Department of Media and Communication. Retrieved December 22, 2009, from http://www.duo.uio.no/publ/mediekomm/2008/86099/NewWebPhenomena- report.pdf
• Quatman, C., & Chelladurai, P. (2008). Social network theory and analysis: A complementary lens for inquiry. Journal of Sport Management, 22(3), 338-360.
• Tinmaz, H. (2012). Social Networking Websites as an Innovative Framework for
• Connectivism. Contemporary Educational Technology, 3(3), 234-245. Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 124
• Tufekci, Z. (2008). Grooming, gossip, Facebook and MySpace. Information,
• Communication & Society, 11(4), 544-564. Vie, S. (2007). Engaging others in online social networking sites: Rhetorical practices in
• MySpace and Facebook. Dissertation Abstracts International, 222. (UMI No. 3254886)
• Vitak, J. M. (2008). Facebook “Friends”: How online identities impact offline relationships.
• Unpublished master's thesis, Georgetown University. Williams, M. (2008, February). Connectivism from design. Retrieved November 11, 2009, from http://design.test.olt.ubc.ca/Connectivism
• Williams, R., Karousou, R., & Mackness, J. (2011). Emergent learning and learning ecologies in web 2.0. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 39-59.
• Wise, K., Hamman, B., & Thorson, K. (2006). Moderation, response rate, and message interactivity: Features of online communities and their effects on intent to participate.
• Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 24-41. Yang, S., Yang, X., Zhang, C., & Spyrou, E. (2010). Using social network theory for modeling human mobility. IEEE Network: The Magazine of Global Internetworking, 24(5), 6