You are on page 1of 77

Chapter One 1.

1 Introduction
In this chapter a brief concept of socialization is introduced. Additionally, internet, e-learning and social networks‟ benefits to students and academicians are highlighted. Statements of research problem and research questions are also stated in the chapter. Finally research objectives, scope and report organization completed the chapter.

1.2 General Overview
Socialization is the process of inheriting and circulating ideologies, norms, etc. among particular group of people sharing common interest(Greenhow, 2009). Socialization provides people with the skills and knowledge essential to participate in their communities, it is as old as human history(Hayashi, 2008). People enjoy socializing and sharing their experiences with fellow individuals who are willing to listen and learn something from them(Amichi-Hamburger, 2010; Ellison, 2007). Sharing ideas contribute a lot and play an important role in human life irrespective of its economical, social, moral, political or educational nature(Hernandez, 2011; Kaplan, 2010). Academic environment is an environment specifically for individuals that gather together to acquire a specific knowledge in a specific area of interest(Lizzio, 2002). In teaching, it is expected for the academician to develop a better understanding and mutual relationship with his/her students in order to be able to deliver the message clearly and for the students to be able to use the knowledge they acquired(Galy, 2011; Hayashi, 2008). Students from the same department for instance are expected to

interact and share ideas on a course that they find difficult to deal with individually(Evans, 2009; Galy, 2011). The kind of relationship students build with 1

colleagues is quite different from the one they engage with academicians (Mykota, 2007). Before the advent of technology, the manner in which students and academicians relate is quite traditional, students communicate with academicians in either face-to-face basis or through a communication medium such as telephone lines. So a better approach for students and academicians to interact becomes necessary. No sooner the invention of the internet, the academics see the opportunity it provides and capitalize on that. Initially internet was characterized with read only features allowing its users to only get the online content without the ability of editing it (Evans, 2009; Galy, 2011; Greenhow, 2009). Later on in 2004, important features that encourage collaboration, sharing, and participatory practices, and social networks were incorporated(Greenhow, 2009). Youth today are media oriented, interactive and creative and they make use of the internet in their daily affairs. As such the use of the technologies in schools would definitely result in better engagement and preparation(Evans, 2009). E-learning can be defined as the utilization of internet technologies to make available, no matter the distance, a set of answers for the enhancement or acquirement of knowledge and applying the acquired knowledge in the appropriate field(Rodrigues, 2010). According to Hayashi (2008), users willingness to use e-learning system depends immensely on the bridge between expectation and post-use experience; the narrower the gap the higher the satisfaction level. Moreover, e-learning increases chances of reaching many students and give them flexibility of setting their schedules at their own conveniences(Galy, 2011). As Rodrigues (2010) rightly put it, e-learning can be used irrespective of location or time. For a university to be considered to be following international standard of today, it is necessary for it to adopt the concept of using elearning in disseminating knowledge to its students. 2

Social networks which are Facebook, YouTube, etc. can serve as a teaching agent, for instance with problem-based learning (Ellison, 2007; Kim, 2011; Liccardi, 2008). Social networks have been shown to help people with low psychological state perform effectively because of loose relationship with friends and relatives(Ellison, 2007). The major goal of the current study is to find out how social networks influence teachinglearning communication between academicians and students in higher institutions.

1.3 Statement of the Problem
Communication is the backbone reason why students and academicians gather together in an academic environment. Traditionally, an academician communicates with his students in a lecture room and share the required knowledge he possesses. In the general perspective, each academician possesses a unique style of conveying message to his/her students. Some are friendly, entertains all sorts of questions, ready to help anytime and anywhere while others are exactly the opposite or possess some of the qualities aforementioned. According to Kember (2010), most feel uneasy when communicating with students in classes with larger population. One key note to be remembered is that learning can only be possible through the process of sharing knowledge(Rodrigues, 2010). Academicians may involve interaction, activities and dialogue during lecture period, but majority neglect it, and for those who entertain interaction, is mostly for a short period of time and this has prompted some students to show preference to online discussion in comparison to face-to-face interaction(Kember, 2010). Despite the fact that e-learning is readily available everywhere, students find it difficult to get the appropriate information for their studies. They need more encouragement, recommendations, advices, and help from expert and professionals on their selected field of study using the simplest and updated version of the technology(Greenhow,

3

peers. an active and collaborative type of education is required which makes use of social networks to support e-learning(Rodrigues. In most cases. etc) and with individuals (academicians. The use of online social networks increases visibility in students‟ work and that will aid in improving social interactions with (Rodrigues. Social networks media is one of the available and suitable platform for both students and academicians to meet and discuss issues related to academia. To identify the factors that influence the use of social networks in e-learning.4 Research Objectives The objectives of the study are as follows: i. e-library). 4 . 2009). Blogs. 2010). To test the framework based on a system prototype. Knowing and understanding how students utilize their time when using social networks platform will immensely help authorities responsible with student affairs issues in overcoming the stated problems. Wikis) proved to be more convincing than the provision of just access to academic materials (e. tutorials. Kember (2010) confirms the significance of two-way communication in supporting student‟s improvement on much needed learning benefits and that participation in a conversation involving communication with online resources (social networks.2009). To design a research framework to assess the influence of social networks media on teaching and learning in the academic environment. iii. to encourage students to solve problems. students find it difficult to get an instance guidance or professional advice when encountered with academic problems(Greenhow. specifically local universities. ii. 1. Furthermore.g. 2010).

1. objectives. Research theoretical frameworks related to 5 . What are students and academicians‟ perception in using social networks in e-learning? iii. 1.5 Research Questions The study aims to address the following research questions: i. e-learning and social networks benefits to students and academicians are highlighted.6 Research Scope The research is intended to be narrowed on the role of social networks media in improving communication between academicians and students in tertiary institutions. research questions and scope were also stated. the current study however focuses on three main social medias: Facebook.7.1 Chapter One: Introduction In this chapter a brief concept of socialization is introduced. What are the significant factors that influence the use of social networks in e-learning? ii.1. YouTube and Twitter. Is there a difference between the way(s) students and academicians use social networks with respect to e-learning? 1.7. Though social networks are many.7 Research Report organization 1. Additionally. Statements of research problem.2 Chapter Two: Literature Review This chapter elaborates on the trend of e-learning platform and the extent to which technology is used in supporting e-learning. internet.

the study were also investigated and reviewed.5 Chapter Five: Prototype Implementation and Testing This chapter presented the pictorial representation of the implemented prototype and how the prototype pages works. categories of social networks and its relation to e-learning are presented as well. 1. Furthermore.3 Chapter Three: Research Methodology This chapter defined the methodology chosen in the study and the research theoretical framework employed was discussed together with the generated research hypotheses from the reviewed literature.7.7. Furthermore.0) was used to analyze the data.4 Chapter Four: Results and Discussion Statistical Package of the Social Sciences 20. 1. 1. factor analysis. Finally a discussion on the overall research results was done at the end of the chapter. Social networks is defined. The description of the selected approaches in the survey and the sampling technique used in collecting data and the challenges faced during the data collection process were also explained. Tables and figures containing the results of the analysis were displayed together with the brief explanation of the contents.0 (SPSS 20. The most significant factors among the eight factors represented in the research theoretical framework were identified.7. Statistical tests such as descriptive statistic. Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA) and stepwise regression were used to analyze the data. discussions on how social networking platform can be used by students and academicians to improve students‟ academic performance were elaborated and the chapter was concluded with a brief summary of the entire content. Finally the summary of the chapter content was highlighted. Significant framework factors as shown on the previous 6 . measurement of the research instruments and definitions of factors in the research framework were provided.

The comments and recommendations of students and academicians on their perception of the system were also shown. 1. 7 .chapter were reflected on the prototype in order to satisfy the targeted users. Limitations and future work were also suggested.6 Chapter Six: Conclusion This chapter presented the overall summary of the whole study and conclusion on what should be done to ensure maximum benefits of the study.7.

and participatory practices(Greenhow. 2009). “relationship” technologies. Wikis. Blogs. Podcasts. Greenhow. 2009. Youth of nowadays are media 8 . 2010).2 Internet and Web 2.0 was named which distinguishes itself from the prominent read only Web 1.It also came with important features that encourage collaboration. Social networks is defined. 2. etc(Galy. Web 2. 2011. Google+.1 Literature Review This chapter elaborates on the trend of e-learning platform and the extent to which technology is used in supporting e-learning. Other features associated with Web 2. sharing. Furthermore. internet provides people with access to share information among themselves be it personal or academics. the features of Web 2. Jin.Chapter Two 2. In 2004. YouTube. According to Ellison (2007). Research theoretical frameworks related to the study were also investigated and reviewed. Web 2.0 is considered to be the most influential information technology in the 21st century(Rodrigues. “participatory media” and social networks such as Facebook.0. categories of social networks and its relation to e-learning are presented as well. 2011).0 are “Social digital technologies”.0 listed earlier improve relationship and communication between people and information they share in an interactive environment. According to Rodrigues (2010). discussions on how social networking platform can be used by students and academicians to improve students‟ academic performance were elaborated and the chapter was concluded with a brief summary of the entire content. MySpace. 2009).0 The internet is a global system of organized computer networks that uses the standard Transfer Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) collection to cater for billions of users globally(Wikipeda.0 into “read and write” Web 2.

2009). 2011). as such the use of the technologies in schools would definitely result in better engagement and preparation(Evans.0 in their daily affairs. and the ratio of student to networked computer has improved to 4:1 as against 12:1 (Greenhow.oriented. In a survey conducted in United States. Elearning increases chances of reaching many students and give them flexibility of setting their schedules at their own conveniences(Galy. 2011). 2. In almost all tertiary institutions. Academicians can also use content management system to assess students‟ academic performance(Sparks. they make use of Web 2. Academician(s) needs to be efficient and productive on the e-learning platform in order to satisfy learners well(Yenging. Research conducted by Galy (2011) shows that using e-learning facilities for campus-based and online classes contribute immensely to students‟ grade performance. Sparks. academicians 9 . download variety of learning materials. the findings shows that in the last decade public instructional classes have no more than 14% of internet accessibility but today. upload. Rodrigues. interactive and creative. 2009. Furthermore. 2007). 2011). According to Mykota (2007). 2010). e-learning creates an atmosphere for learners in which they are at ease and experience comfort when communicating with others. it has grown up to 94%. 2010).3 E-learning E-learning is the use of internet to facilitate students and academicians to learn anywhere at any time(Rodrigues. 2010. The students of 21st century have options on how and where to utilize their learning time than those in the earlier decades(Mykota. Socialization is what makes learning fun and useful to both students and academicians. A content management system is one of the widely used e-learning system that enable students and academicians to use. academicians encourage group discussion among students to increase their reasoning ability and to make them realize their learning potentials.

2010). social networks. Figure 2. using open source software. Some of the available tools that can be used to achieve aforementioned suggestions are YouTube. micro-blogging sites.0. Rather than coming to office every day. 2010). academicians should be allowed to choose the best possible way to impact knowledge to students and decide on the time to be in office(Yenging. 1995). single-handedly or in group learn through each module in an organized approach should be encouraged rather than timeframe learning where students are expected to complete a module within a stipulated time that limits their learning capability(Davis. methodologies and techniques to remain relevant in their field of specialization in this generation of rapidly changing concept(Yenging. Mastery learning on which students. etc. audio files. learning through mobile phones. Adapted from Rodrigues (2010) 10 .1: showing community of web2.must have or possess the ability to quickly learn and be familiar with technological new tools.

Kim.4 Social networks Social networks are an organization of nodes that act as individuals and the relationship between them within a particular region(Liccardi. They can also remove their friends at their own wish without the consent of the friends(Liccardi. 2008). and direct communication with students can boost their 11 . Social networks are open whereby members can join and opt out of a group or community without penalty or long procedures. engaging in discussions.1 shows students/user in the midst of different social networks platforms and elearning platform that he subscribed to. According to Lerman (2010). People tend to seek assistance of others who are domain experts. 2011).Figure 2. who are willing to contribute in problem solving and also can be reached easily(Evans. Social interactions play a vital role during web search as pointed out by other researchers as many information seekers need assistance when searching for information(Evans. Kim. and influence discovery. 2008) and it also helps in improving relationships between people(Ellison. 2011. social support and finding friends(Kim. 2007. Social networks can serve as a teaching agent. Mykota (2007) discovered that in online environment. The technology has pushed us towards adapting this kind of life style and of course it is becoming part of us. 2009). Galy. Liccardi. 2008). Replying to emails. there are people that he interacts and share ideas. 2007. 2011. 2011). searching. many users apply face-to-face communication skills and further stated that frequent informal communications with students can enhance social presence in learning. social networks play a vital role in information spreading. In each of the platforms. 2009). Furthermore. other reasons given by the users for joining social networks include entertainment. This has shown the new trend of learning and community formation in the virtual world environment. marketing. 2. for instance with problem-based learning (Ellison.

1 Facebook Facebook was formed on 4th February.4.1. 2010). Classmates. users spend almost 20 minutes on daily basis on the site. meeting celebrities. and about 67% of users login at least once a day(Ellison. etc. Rodrigues. MySpace. According to Kemp (2012).4. Among the prominent social networks platform today are Facebook. Ning and weRead. seeking social support. Initially the site launched a high school Facebook version in early September 2005 in USA to test its acceptability with students (Ellison. By beginning of year 2007.edu. at least 46. seeking information. Badoo. more than twenty-one (21) million registered members were reported creating over 1.1.6 billion page views every single day. 2. Eduardo Saverin. 2.morale. 2009. Roblyer. 2012).com.1 Types of Social networks Social networks platforms have been categorized into different groups by many researchers alike. 2010). Academia. Google+. and Chris Hughes while they were students in Harvard University (Rodrigues. The need for instructors to build up interactions with students using the social networks is encouraged in this era today. 2010). On average. Dustin Moskovitz. The site is targeting one billion active users by August 2012(Bennett. 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg.1 Social networks Various categories of individuals join social networks for one reason or the other. The major goal in this research is to find out how social networks can be used to improve the teaching-learning communication between academicians and students in tertiary institutions.1.4.9% of the Malaysians populace has an active Facebook account and that Malaysians have the highest average 12 . These categories are described in the sections below: 2. based on the similarity of their functions and purposes(Greenhow. 2007). Some of the reasons given were meeting friends. Friendster. 2007.

2012). As at February 2012. 2012). Facebook was designed in such a way that users do not have to struggle to find their existing friends and family. the percentages of female and male Facebook users in Malaysia are 47% and 53% respectively(Kemp.1 Twitter Two years after the release of Facebook. Twitter. Podcasts.1.4. Youth aged between 18 34 constitute about 62% of Facebook users in Malaysia and research has shown that Malaysia is ranked 16 in the world ranking report as at February 2012(Socialbakers. 2.4. 2010). It is targeted to reach 500 million registered users by the end of 13 . it provides a mechanism of linking friends whose emails addresses were known(Hew.1.2. Among the popular platforms are Blogs.0 as far as collaboration via social networks . At least 3 billion photos and 5 billion pieces of information are uploaded every month on Facebook. 2010).eu. Facebook is considered to be one of the frequently visited social sites worldwide(Rodrigues. It is rated top in the 100 most influential e-learning tools in the world with YouTube being in the second position. Jack Dorsey founded Twitter(Rodrigues. 2011). Interestingly.number of friends (233) on social sites than any other nation. blogger and Cirip. The basic goal of allowing users to have all these features is to meet and make friends.2 Microblogging Microblogging is one of the earlier technology related to Web 2.6 billion search queries in a single day (Bennett. producing more than 200 million tweets every day and managing over 1. conversational discourse. 2010). communications and online social interactions are concerned (Grosseck. 2012). Only recently educationist realized its benefits to academic learning. Twitter has about 462 million registered users with more than 100 million active users. 2.

4. 2011). According to Kemp (2012). web users in Malaysia spend about 41 million hours watching online video streams. every month. Lerman. 2009). 14 .1. YouTube was established in the year 2005(Perez-Latre.March 2012. YouTube has changed the internet world with its simplification approach of sharing videos. Rodrigues.3 Media Sharing Media sharing is a kind of social networks that allows information. 2.1. 2011. 2. Rodrigues. Users can subscribe to existing YouTube channels to get regular updates whenever the channel holders upload new video clip(s). Lerman. Furthermore. 2010. create and share with their colleagues(Jin. 2011. and files to be shared in a graphical. Academicians can upload course materials on YouTube for students to view. Twitter is a microblogging site designed specifically to distribute information(Bakshy. data. 2010). 2010). 2009).1 YouTube YouTube is mainly for sharing video clips(Greenhow. It provides users with flexible and versatile way of getting academic materials on their computers and other devices. Popular among the platforms that render such services are Flickr and Fotolog for sharing photo(s). 51% of Malaysians possessed an active YouTube channel and estimated that at least 80% of Malaysians‟ internet users stream online video content. 2010). animation.3. image or digital format. Twitter users were allowed to publish content having not more than 140 characters per tweet on their profiles (Bakshy. Users have the opportunity to follow other users with whom they share common interest or users they find beneficial(Bakshy. 2009. and YouTube and Metacafe for sharing videos(Greenhow. 2010).4.

(iii) changing as human do. Researchers have pointed out six unique concepts of learning: (i) Understand. while the subsequent three describe it as reproducing(Liccardi. A social network like Facebook with millions of users may have all these learning concepts represented in it. 2. (iv) Applying. Other researchers have implied that social networking 15 . In this research the in-depth details of these functions have not been discussed as they are not part of the study scope. The students need guidance and encouragement on how the social networks should be used especially from academicians and experts. 2009). among the major educational uses of social networking platforms is the ability to rely on their support for collaboration between learners having similar problems understanding their studies.5 Social Networks in E-learning Social networks are assumed to be well suited with the teaching of social-cultural theories of learning(Greenhow. Liccardi (2008) described learning to be a progression as such it will be more effective if the learner chooses his community rather than being assigned to one. the first three concepts describe learning as mainly a stage where learners try to understand the learning concept. in that they are collaborative and encourage active participatory role for users‟(Selwyn. and (vi) Reproducing and memorizing. (ii) Interpreting something from different angle. 2008). 2009). The collaborative.Other types of social networks are content aggregation and organization. Esposito(2007) revealed that 88% of his students admitted that they enjoyed interacting with him and other academicians on the Facebook and only 18% admitted feeling uneasy with their academicians on their friends list in Facebook. social bookmarking and Collaborative problem solving. According to Selwyn (2009). Furthermore. conversational and participatory nature of social networking platform services are believed to „mirror much of what we know to be good models of learning. (v) Boosting knowledge.

forms. To a certain extent.1 Facebook and E-learning According to Greenhow (2009). updates. Users can get updates from their friends all the time until. and more effective than traditional paper newsletters. Klein (2008) found that one of the key benefits of social networks is to improve communication and establish a sense of community belonging among its users. 2010). Students among the users can enjoy this feature very well since they can easily receive updates of any course from e-learning environment(Rodrigues. Facebook permits its users to freely share. 2. resolve conflicts and improve reading and writing skills. 2010). or a piece of note. flexible. enhancing a „critical thinking in learners‟ on their learning(Selwyn. and this will help the students in getting wider knowledge and increase their critical thinking. video clips. In a similar survey conducted by Roblyer (2010). web sites.5. timely.platforms present chances to commit students with learning and education. or centralized document distribution (Klein. comment and access friends‟ wall posts or in some situations friends of friends wall posts in just about real time. We believe the acceptance of the social networking to be one of the approved medium of communication between the students and academicians. universities and colleges 16 . Use of social networks is believed to help student‟s social skills. 2008). 2009). University‟s departments now have an effective vehicle for delivering news. 60% of the students claimed to use social networks to discuss educational topics. Whenever any of the friends updated his profile page/wall with photos. extreme use of Facebook combined with learner‟s feeling of social belonging makes them perform better academically. it automatically appears on user‟s profile. and files to their staff using social media tools that are easy to use. and 50% said they discuss schoolwork matters only(Roblyer. A survey conducted in US indicated that students share educational knowledge in social networks.

Ebner‟s (2010) findings show that microblogging provides the opportunity to be connected to other user‟s process by discussing.5. From the data collected by EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research (ECAR). they can get regular updates all the time. or improving it(Sparks. Twitter can be read and written through mobile phones. 9 out of 10 students use Facebook(Junco.950 sample students gathered from 126 United States universities and a Canadian university. Users have the chances also to be virtually present no matter where they might be in reality. Short Message Service (SMS). web interfaces (Ebner. 2011). 2011). out of the 36. and allow easy interaction(Sparks. Academicians need only to add social networks link on their e-learning environment and when students like the link.libraries globally are enjoying the services rendered by Facebook (Roblyer. commenting. 2010). The survey further showed that students were more motivated on the instructor open-mindedness on Facebook and it boosts their academic performance(Junco. 2010). 2011). academicians can enhance the level of engagement in a defined coaching environment and. Knowledge sharing among students and academicians can be encouraged through comments in a topic of interest in Twitter (Grosseck. Roblyer (2010) found that students enjoyed getting their references and research related questions answered through Facebook and email much more than in the traditional faceto-face interactions. They further suggest that by improving social interactions with and among students using social networks platforms such as Facebook and YouTube. links to Facebook. as such create a better efficient learning atmosphere. 2011). spread recent news. reading. A survey 17 . 2. Another vital role of Twitter is its ability to link to blog posts.2 Twitter and E-learning Grosseck (2010) suggested the use of microblogs in educational activities due to its interactive collaboration and flexibility compared to classroom learning. 2009).

a group of students widely used YouTube to share important topics in video format on the internet. 2009).5. Students can also share related materials obtained from other sources by uploading it to their YouTube channels. Additionally. communication is required between the two parties. Jin.3 YouTube and E-learning YouTube is an established social networks platform that is used as formal and informal learning tool by millions of users worldwide(Clifton. students will easily understand the message and can also keep it for the benefit of other students. Clifton (2010) urged academicians to examine using YouTube for learning and teaching within and outside classroom. watching the video clip will never be enough. Furthermore. 2. when materials are designed in visual form. share and express their feelings towards its usefulness (Clifton. However. YouTube has a key advantage of delivering learning materials in a more convenient way and helps students get engage from passive to active learning. commitment and encourage in-depth learning. There is no better way of understanding and exploring information than in pictorial form. communication between academicians and students are considered to be minimal in YouTube platform. 2010). it was discovered that YouTube usage increases student‟s critical awareness. Tutorial lectures in a form of video clip can be uploaded on the YouTube channels by academicians for students to watch. academicians must play a key role in stimulating students to use YouTube wisely. According to Sparks (2011). 2010. 18 .conducted by Top (2011) at Abant Izzet Baysal University in Turkey shows that blogging has been approved as a social media that aids in developing interaction and knowledge sharing among their students. In another survey conducted by Clifton (2010).

In the concept of Asian settings. Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) framework was used as the theoretical framework.2. Zengyan (2009) discovered that people change environment due to their dissatisfaction with the place of origin. According to Hayashi (2008). consumer‟s willingness to keep using a service/product or their chances of continual patronizing of the service/product depends on their satisfaction level with the service and that satisfaction is the determinant factor for their return to repurchase or pay for the service in the future. the dwellers of this region culturally do not mingle freely with people of different races(Kim.6. 2. Dissatisfaction with learning services in the traditional setting of institutions has been identified as one of the key variable leading students to seek alternatives in the social network media. The concept of PPM framework is mostly applied in situations where individuals exhibit tendencies of switching from one particular environment to another. 2009). This may be the likely reason why students find it uneasy to open up to their colleagues or 19 . One variable e-learning perception was identified to represent push factor in the research framework.1 Push factors Push factors are the unenthusiastic factors that forces people to look for alternatives and possibly better means of dealing with the problems they are facing in their current environment(Zengyan.6 Background work on the theoretical framework In this study. as the case is in this study. The environment might be learning environment (universities). 2011). Sub constructs were identified to be associated to the variable and they are listed and defined below. Inadequate interaction between student-academician and student-student is another subconstruct of concern.

This engagement from the side of the academicians resulted in students not getting the required attention from them. Some sub-constructs that are associated with these variables were identified and explained below. as such necessitates for them to look for an alternative elsewhere. Academicians need to prepare lecture notes. they tend to search for a better way and shift their attention there. attend lectures. Schwartz described her experience with her students in social network Facebook and how sharing information in the platform was awesome to her and the students(Rodrigues. In her findings. social influence. 2009). and supervise students. Hayashi (2008) discovered that some of the traditional instructors lack convincing techniques in teaching resulting in students losing confidence in them. They further said some students preferred receiving online updates from their colleagues instead of attending the class or they force themselves to attend the class for the sake of writing attendance. The academicians are under pressure due to the high expectations accrued on them. 2.academician(s) on a face-to-face interaction but feel more comfortable discussing on a virtual environment with the same people. academic reasons and ease of use.6. 20 . convenience.2 Pull factors Pull factors refers to the encouraging factors that attract people to the new environment(Zengyan. and in some cases in the entire learning. Today‟s institutions are over-crowded with students and this resulted in students getting inadequate academic support. 2010). Some of the variables that were identified that lead students to switch to social networks platforms and neglect the current institutionalized e-learning platforms are social networks. conferences. Disapproved teaching method style is another sub-construct that was considered in the study. When students are dissatisfied with the current setup of their learning environment.

Replying to emails on time. Zengyan(2009) reported that the close relationship between bands and fans sometime ago helped MySpace to get bigger by attracting more users including users from their main competitors. and possibly entertainment (Amichi-Hamburger. Notably Facebook is one of the environment that almost all the mentioned features can be found. 2007). forming volunteer pages to help the society with something vital and many more(Ellison. This network formation without doubt keep students busy on the site getting updates from their loved ones and also helps maintain distant relationship when they depart to another location(Ellison. and direct communications with students can boost their morale. 2007). engaging in discussions. online dating. Meeting existing friends. 2007. or education. 21 . Ellison. 2010. higher income. 2010). Attractiveness of alternatives can be considered in terms of superior opportunities for employment. It involves formation of groups and engagement in existing ones. They further suggest that frequent informal communications with students can enhance social presence in learning. Students‟ find groups that best suit their academic interest and join in order to get updates (Kirschner.The network formation sub-variable is a crucial one that cannot be neglected. 2011). Community formation is another aspect that led students and users to social networking platforms. Mykota (2007) argued that the presence of emotional and knowledge goals for the educational process necessitates social presence as a direct contributor to the educational experience. Social presence is one of the most important factors to examine the capacity of interaction and effectiveness of living in a social networking platform(Mykota. Kim. family members. 2009). 2007). joining participation pages and forums. social presence has a significant effect in virtual learning environment. preferable environment and free to select desired ones (Zengyan. According to Hayashi (2008). new friends.

Students switch to social networks because they believe using it improve their academic performances whereas academicians switch because it assists them in remaining relevant and exposed in their domain of interest. Ease of use sub-variable also plays an important role in students and academicians switching to social networks. 2011). 2008). when academicians give assignments to students. According to Hayashi (2008) perceived ease of use is the degree to which an individual agrees that using a particular system would help reduce a lot of effort. As earlier indicated. A survey conducted in United States revealed that the respondents of their surveys use internet as a means of gaining and searching for information(Kim. Galy(2011) added that student‟s perception that certain technology is simple and easy to use influences their decision to use it. Hayashi. The internet in general and social networks in particular provides easy access to educational materials to both students and academicians. Within a limited time students can discover valuable information concerning their studies in the social networks. This of course reduces student‟s effort of searching for the information in and around the internet. automatically it will reflect on the student‟s profile. uses of social networks platforms simplify the procedure of acquiring knowledge. they tend to allocate more time than in traditional campusbased(Galy. anytime the administrator of that page/forum updates the page/forum. Usefulness is the extent to which students and academicians understand that using social networks will improve their performance(Galy. Social networks such as YouTube saves students time a lot and in another view. For instance. 22 .Time saving is considered to be a strong sub-variable that really pushed students to social networking platforms. when a student subscribes to a particular forum or page in Facebook platform. 2011). 2011.

Students may be required to put on more effort in order to stay and enjoy the full benefit of social networks. they do not know what is actually happening currently in their institutions of study.2.3 Mooring factors Mooring factors refers to the factors that make individuals unable to decide on what is good for them or not(Zengyan. According to Junco(2011) some students are more engaged than others. There are some 23 . 2009).6. This constant checking of the site may hinder students‟ acceptance of the social networks. Privacy is one of the major sub-variables that easily lead to quite a number of unattended situations by both students and academicians(Mykota. and this is what Zengyan (2009) described as time and management cost. A variable called barriers was identified to represent mooring factors in the study framework and sub-variables that were associated to it were explained below. while others refrain from social networking platforms due to lack of motivation from friends and academicians. their isolation attitude will not allow them to submit. Lack of awareness among the students and academicians is a factor that keeps them away from the current educational progress. There are cases where some students hardly check their academic emails. 2007). It prevents many among students and academicians from joining the social networking platforms due to fear of being hacked or associated to parties of bad characters. Some students naturally enjoyed being isolated from their colleagues. They might be aware of the benefits associated to other platforms that may make positive impact to their current situations but cannot decide to switch due to some reasons. No matter how someone tries to influence them to socialize. Absence of social motivation is also a killer in making students doubtful of accepting new education changes.

marital status among others. as highlighted earlier on.7 Summary Numerous concepts have been studied from different researchers with regards to social networks and its relation to e-learning and the impact it makes on students learning process. Many findings have revealed that social networks do influence e-learning and some of the factors that lead students to join social networks platforms are inadequate assistance from academicians. etc.details that are required from users of most of the social networks such as age. The researchers have pointed out the educational benefits associated with social networks sites and how they can be adopted by universities to aid in boosting students‟ academic performance. Many do not want to reveal these details due to personal reasons and requiring these details to be provided might lead to their decision to avoid it even if they are aware of the full benefits they will get from it. desire to know more. Researchers termed it switching from the traditional way of learning to modern way of learning. The next chapter explains the theoretical framework in more detail. Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) framework was explained in relation to all the factors that might affect the use of social networks in e-learning. 2. friends influence. working place. 24 .

Convenience (Galy. 2008. Some variables are recognized as constructs of PPM factors. E-learning Perception (Hayashi.Chapter Three 3. Finally. The description of the selected approaches in the survey and the sampling technique used in collecting data were also highlighted. Zengyan. Ease of Use (Hayashi. 2009). 2007).2 Theoretical framework The theoretical framework used in this study is depicted in Figure 3. 2009). Galy. Table 3. 2011. Barriers (Junco. namely.1 Research Methodology This chapter explains the research theoretical framework used in the study with the generated research hypotheses from the reviewed literature. Mykota. 2009) and the dependent variable is Teaching and Learning Benefit. the independent variables are seven. 2008). Furthermore. 2008). 2011. 25 . 2010. Social Influence (Bakshy.1 provides the operational definition of each of the variables. 2011. 2007. Social Networking (Amichi-Hamburger. Hayashi. 3. the summary of the chapter content was highlighted. Zengyan. Zengyan. 2008. Hayashi. 2011. measurement of the research instruments and definitions of factors in the research framework were provided. Ellison. Academic Reasons (Ellison.1. 2007).

Table 3. E-learning Perception 2008. Refers to perceptions current on students and academicians e-learning platforms implemented in tertiary institutions(Hayashi.1 Research variables and operational definitions Variables Operational Definitions Refers to the academic benefits gained by Teaching and Learning Benefit students and academicians as a result of using social networking platforms.Pull Factors Social Influence Convenience Ease of use Push Factors E-learning Perception Academic Reasons Social Networking Teaching and Learning Benefit Barriers Mooring Factors Figure 3.1 Conceptual theoretical framework. 2009) 26 . Zengyan.

2008). family members. academicians. Ellison. 2010. Galy. 2007). 2009). 2007). Refers to the availability of variety of social networks type that gives users choices of switching to any they find and feel comfortable in Convenience providing their social or academic needs. 27 . Ease of use is the degree to which an individual Ease of use agrees that using a particular system would help reduce a lot of effort(Hayashi. 2008) (Amichi-Hamburger. Mykota. Refers to the extent to which students understand that using social networks will improve their understanding of a course and academicians believe that using social networks will improve their understanding and widen their skills on certain aspects of teaching due to its usefulness Academic Reasons and easy access(Ellison. Hayashi. 2007. 2011. (Galy. Hayashi. Zengyan. family and Social Influence academicians in using social networks in e-learning (Bakshy. Refers to the use of social networks to meet Social Networking friends. 2011. 2011.Refers to the influence of friends. 2008. and experts.

privacy issues. With the vast resources in social networking platforms and their flexibility in allowing users to add as many links to other sites as needed. absence of Barriers social motivation.Refers to all the possible barriers that might prevent one from using social networks in elearning such as lack of awareness. etc.3 Research hypotheses 3. Some e-learning platforms allow forum participation while others do not. it is expected that if students or academicians are not comfortable with the services rendered in their e-learning platform they will likely abandon it and shift to their desired social networking platform(s). seven general predictors that affect the influence of social networks in e-learning were identified and explained based on the variables defined in the study framework. Hence.3. Zengyan. 2009) 3.(Junco. 2011. time and management cost. Disapproved teaching method can also lead to demoralization in students and the remedy might be searching for a better alternative in order to stay current and relevant. a hypothesis was postulated below. The study intends to investigate whether there is link between e-learning perception and teaching and learning benefits in social networks or not.1 General predictors In this section. 28 .

H2: There is no association between social influence and teaching and learning benefit in social networks Social networks make access to educational materials viable. social networks allow users to create pages and groups 29 . The need to communicate with loved ones especially for students that are far away from home is expected to be one of their reasons of joining social network platforms. The hypothesis below was postulated to address whether usage of social networks for academic reasons lead to teaching and learning benefit. Another advantage is that user can subscribe to be getting related materials in the future from the social sites. Additionally.H1: There is no association between e-learning perception and teaching and learning benefit in social networks The presence of colleagues in a social environment is likely to result to conversation that will lead to academic discussions and as such those that have adequate knowledge on the topic of discussion will share their experiences and viewpoints. Social networks being one of the medium that gather such kind of individuals can be target zone for academic communications among students or academicians. experts and many talented individuals. Is there a connection between social influence and teaching and learning benefits among students and academicians or not? This question resulted in the creation of the second hypothesis. H3: There is no association between academic reasons and teaching and learning benefit in social networks. Keeping in touch is necessary especially to close ones in order to be able to concentrate on daily routines. It is also expected that using social networking platforms among academicians and students will result in a pleasant relationship on the virtual environment and improves their communication level thereby boosting their knowledge and possibly increase their grade level. YouTube for instance have piles of educated materials uploaded by several individuals.

H5: There is no association between convenience and teaching and learning benefit in social networks Accessing learning resources in social networking platforms are assumed to be simple and easy when compared to other means of getting resources in the internet. H6: There is no association between ease of use and teaching and learning benefit in social networks There are among students and/or academicians that are doubtful of what to do in some situation. Hence the following hypothesis was formed. They might be aware of usefulness and benefits associated with social networks but due to some factors and reasons could not make up their mind to join and enjoy the available services.to share common interest with other users. users have alternatives of joining other social sites that provides similar services. instant response of messages received via social networks media is linked to students and academicians embracing them as one of the better medium of communication. Do such kinds of groups/pages have beneficial impact in students and academicians? The hypothesis below will be tested to discover the fact. Furthermore. The flexibility and freedom to switch from one social network to another when it no longer provides what is needed is expected to have influence in students and academicians willingness to keep using the social sites. These reasons and excuses are what referred to as barriers 30 . If for instance Facebook decided to shut down „Group‟ participation. The group and pages can be open or close depending on the reasons and policies behind its creation. It is a great opportunity for students and/or academicians to create or join group of interest to improve their learning or knowledge. H4: There is no association between social networking and teaching and learning benefit in social networks. The social networks are discovered to spread information quicker than traditional email service. It is expected that students and academicians will respond positively in this aspect.

2 Student-Academician Perception In this section. 31 . The details of the hypotheses are provided below: When students and academicians felt dissatisfied with the services rendered by e-learning platforms. The hypothesis below was postulated in relation to the question. seven hypotheses were generated to investigate whether there is difference in the way students and academicians use social networks for academic benefits. H7: There is no association between barriers and teaching and learning benefit in social networks. H8: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ towards e-learning perceptions with regards to teaching and learning benefit Social influence has been defined as impacting positively on people‟s life through sharing and spreading vital information they find beneficial to them. A hypothesis that tried to address the situation is postulated below. do they face common challenges in using e-learning platforms? There is need to know whether they have similar needs and experience common problems with the e-learning platforms that lead them to join social sites. Below is a hypothesis that is related to the perception mentioned above. they tend to search for alternative means of getting satisfied through the use of other mediums such as social networks. H9: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards social influence with regards to teaching and learning benefit. Since students and academicians play different roles in academics.in the theoretical framework. 3. How students influences others might or might not be the same way academicians influences same or different categories of individuals.3.

The simplicity of social networks makes it to be a target for many in getting and spreading information. joining forums. etc. What differentiates the two parties will be investigated with the help of the hypothesis below H10: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards academic reasons with regards to teaching and learning benefit. pages. The manner in which students form a community of network on social sites might be same or different from the one form by academicians.Though academicians primary role is to teach and students are expected to learn from the academicians. Whether students and academicians share the same thought on what exactly convenience means to them need to be confirmed. How do students and academicians use and define ease of use? 32 . Meeting friends. H12: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards convenience with regards to teaching and learning benefit. are mostly open for users to choose and join. Hence. the hypothesis below was raised. H11: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards social networking with regards to teaching and learning benefit. experts. when it comes to getting information from social networks do these sets of individuals access and use the information on the same manner or not? Both without doubt are working towards improving their understanding and probably digging to know more about a particular concept or topic. groups. Individuals are free to interact with different sets of people in social networking environment from young adult to old people without limitation. There is need to investigate in order to know common differences between students and academicians if it does exist. Convenience has to do with the attractiveness of alternatives and time saving in getting required data or information on the social sites.

Six university students and two academicians reviewed the questionnaire to gauge if survey respondents would be able to understand the questions. isolation attitude. Barriers as discussed earlier hindered students or academicians from joining social sites due to some particular reasons such as privacy issues.81 indicating a high level of internal consistency. statements and instructions given in the research instruments. Galy (2011). 3. etc. Quantitative approach of gathering data was adopted in this survey due to the fact that respondents are dispersed across Malaysia from different universities and with the availability of internet everywhere.4 Research Method 3. it is considered a wise decision to adopt this techniques in getting the survey feedback.Do they see it and understand it from the same angle or not? will be the focus of the hypothesis below. H13: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards ease of use with regards to teaching and learning benefit. students and academicians may have similar reasons why they are resisting from joining social sites and they may also differ in the same issue. H14: There is no difference between students’ and academicians’ perceptions towards barriers with regards to teaching and learning benefit. The hypothesis below will be used to investigate the situation.1 Questionnaire The questionnaire in this study was developed in accordance to the research conducted by Zengyan (2009).4. Hayashi (2008) and Kim (2011). 33 . The final questionnaire revealed a Cronbach value of 0. A 45-item questionnaire assessing demographic information and statements related to using social networks in e-learning was prepared in English.

The survey data were collected using an electronic sample survey website https://docs. 3. A total of 24 usable survey responses were obtained during the pilot test study of which 20 were students and four were academicians. Section 1 requires the respondents to provide their demographic details such as age. choice of social networks used. There were a total of 39 statements. two and three are measured using a 5-point Likert scale (1= strong disagreement and 5 = strong agreement). Generally respondents were happy and commented well on the questions.6 Survey Pilot Testing At the initial stage. The studied samples are within the specified range of age being studied in the survey and each and every questions asked to them were related to the research study. To confirm the assertions. respectively. All the statements in Section one. gender.5 Sampling Technique The survey sampling was characterized by the populace (students and academicians) ability to access internet everywhere across the globe and their general awareness of the existing of the social networking platforms targeted on the research.The questionnaire consisted of four sections. 3. a pilot test was conducted as discussed in the next section. pilot test was attempted on the selected individuals to determine any unclear questions that needed to be revised. 34 . The questionnaire is attached as Appendix A. perceptions on social networks and e-learning and perceptions related to factors that might prevent one from social networks in e-learning.google.com. etc. They were invited to fill up the questionnaire via the website link provided to them. YouTube and Twitter. Section two. The participants are assumed to be internet users and are familiar with social networking platforms such as Facebook. three and four focused on statements related to perception on current elearning platforms used.

3. The universities and colleges were selected based on their popularity and world academic ranking. Since the questionnaire was prepared online. a URL was provided https://docs.com to the respondents via their university‟s central email service or forwarded to their personal emails. corrections were pointed out that needed to be effected before final distribution of the survey questionnaire. followed by those within the age of 18 – 25 years with 43. A total of 455 responses were received at the end of the survey comprising of 255 females and 200 males. A quantitative approach of gathering data was adopted in the study survey. A total of 455 responses were received with almost equal number of male and female respondents.7% of the total responses.7%.7 Respondents The respondents investigated in the survey were students and academicians from various universities and colleges across Malaysia.google. 35 . Respondents aged between 25 – 39 years dominated the survey with 47.Notwithstanding.8 Summary Push Pull Mooring (PPM) framework was adopted as the theoretical framework that fitted into the study based on the studies carried out on the previous related researches by other researcher. Others received the link via Facebook. All other data remain valid and respondents commented well on the simplicity of the questionnaire. The next chapter presents the results of the quantitative survey. Fourteen hypotheses were formed of which seven of them are concerned with the general predictors that affect the influence of social networks in elearning while the remaining seven were formed to check if differences exists in the way students and academicians perceive the use of social networks in e-learning. 3.

This indicates that majority of the respondents are youth and they are the primary target of the research.0%) and female (56. factor analysis.2.1 are found to have almost equal number of male (44.0) was used to analyze the data. Tables and figures containing the results of the analysis were displayed together with the brief explanation of the contents.0 (SPSS 20.6% percent of the respondents‟ age were greater than 40 years and are most likely to be among the academicians. It was quite interesting how the result appeared that way and this has proven the survey of not being gender biased. 36 . Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA) and stepwise regression were used to analyze the data.2 Descriptive Analysis 4. Only 8. Finally a summary of the overall research results was done at the end of the chapter.3% followed by those within age range of 18 – 20 with 23.Chapter Four 4.5%. Statistical tests such as descriptive statistic. The most significant factors among the eight factors represented in the research theoretical framework were identified. The overall result for the age range was quite positive with respondents within age range of 25 – 30 slightly dominated the survey with 27. 4.1 Demographic details The responses from the research as shown in Table 4.1 Results and Discussion Statistical Package of the Social Sciences 20.0%) responses.

Students both from undergraduate and postgraduate field have shown their interests in this research by participation amass.2%) 124 (27. 37 . age-range and category Frequency Female Gender: Male Total 18 – 20 21 – 24 Age Range: 25 – 30 31 – 39 >40 Total Academician Category Type: Postgraduate Undergraduate Total 255 (56.1: Number of respondents according to gender.0%) 455 (100. The number of responses from academicians has indicated how current and active they are on the social sites domain and their willingness to explore and engage teaching via social sites as indicated in the subsequent statistics to follow.4%) (8.5%) 92 (20.0%) 107 (23.1%) 455 (100.6%) 147 (32.3%) 178 (39.0%) 200 (44.3%) 93 39 (20.6%) 455 (100.0) 130 (28.Table 4.0 Students and academicians actively responded in the survey.

1 shows that social networks have gained total acceptance in the academic community.1: Graph of social media platforms The result on figure 4.e. questionnaire) to a high extent accurately represents the research design. with 34 items included. The result further showed that Twitter is still yet to gain popularity among students and academicians with only 28%.00) of the expressed variance was contained in these eight factors.2 Description of social platforms Figure 4. 4.4. 2012). Approximately 77. The high variance indicates that the measurement method (i.2% (eigenvalue more than 1. Nine out of ten respondents have an active Facebook account and may likely have another account in other social network media. On the other hand.3Factors Analysis The factor analysis resulted in a total of eight factors (Table 4.2). YouTube has gained popularity among students and academicians and this is not a surprising considering earlier report on the literature review that 51% of total Malaysian possessed an active channel in YouTube(Kemp. 38 .2.

Table 4.975 .953 6.700 .919 . YouTube simplifies sharing of audio/video files online Social sites are good medium for students and academicians meetings and communications Eigenvalue FACTOR 4: Social Influence Friends and family influence the way I use social networks in learning My academicians influence the way I use social networks in learning Friends taught me how to access learning materials through social network sites My academician taught me how to access learning materials through social network sites Eigenvalue .981 .971 4.85 .821 3.975 .974 . YouTube and Twitter to assists students.10 .12 Factor loadings .982 .838 .974 .775 .69 39 .2: Varimax rotated factor loadings matrix Factors Dependent variable FACTOR 1: Teaching and Learning Benefit I am benefitting a lot (academically) through social networks usage.869 .978 3. pull & mooring factors) FACTOR 2: E-learning Perception I am satisfied with the current e-learning facility in my university/college The e-learning facilities allow me to communicate with my peers and/or academicians My peers and/or academicians always assist me academically via e-learning platform The current e-learning platforms enhances my (academicians) style of teaching I am able to use the e-learning platform to fulfil all my learning/teaching needs Eigenvalue FACTOR 3: Convenience Communications in social networks platforms is much faster Searching for a specific video/audio clip is efficient on YouTube. I would like academicians to join Facebook.902 . I believe social networks can be used to improve teaching & learning I believe social networks can be used to improve the collaboration among peers and between students and academicians Eigenvalue Independent variables (push.950 .

) I would prefer to use social networks compared to other modes (emails. social sites distract my attention I wanted to join social sites but something inside me tells me to wait until later I was not aware that I can use social networks for academic benefits Lack of motivation from peers and academicians discourages me from joining social networks I quit social network sites due to its constant requirement of time and management Eigenvalue FACTOR 6: Academic Reasons Intellectuals attract my attention in social networks Groups pages participation in Facebook make access to learning materials easier Academicians in my university/college use social networks to enhance teaching methods I use social networks for educational purpose Eigenvalue FACTOR 7: Ease of Use Communications in social networks platforms is much easier I am attracted to variety of communication mediums in social networks (able to upload materials.927 .685 .458 .78 FACTOR 8: Social networking I use social networks to stay in touch with my friends and families I use social networks to make new friends I use social networks to meet people of the same field of study Eigenvalue Total Variance .833 .959 2.552 1.70 .675 . send messages etc.745 .36 77.2% 40 . phone calls) as a communication medium with peers and/or academicians Eigenvalue .710 .FACTOR 5: Barriers I am conservative as such I do not like socializing on internet I enjoy working alone.711 .782 2.840 1.924 .65 .813 .744 . posts.957 .

The dependent variable was named Teaching and Learning Benefit, it contains all items grouped in factor one that measure the benefit of using social networks in teaching and learning. All the items related to respondents‟ perceptions on the current e-learning platform used are grouped into factor two; therefore, this factor was named E-learning Perception. As the name implies, factor three relates to all the items focusing on the Convenience of using social network sites for communication and sharing materials. Factor four has four items that shows how friends, families and academicians assist one to use social networks; therefore this factor was named Social Influence. Six items measuring reasons as to why student and/or academician may not use social networks loaded into a single factor that is named Barriers. Factor six is called Academic Reasons as it contains all the items that measured how social networks can be used for educational purposes whereas factor seven is named Ease of Use as it contains items that attract the respondent‟s to use social networks due to its simplicity. Finally, factor eight relates to how social networks can be used for communication and network building among the respondents, hence it was named Social Networking. Five items were dropped due to their low factor loadings (i.e. less than 0.4). They are: i. ii. Instant response to information request influences my stay in social sites I am always happy to add academicians/students to my friends list iii. iv. v. Academicians respond quickly to my academic queries in Facebook I use Facebook to make appointments with my academicians/students I am careful of the content I post on my Facebook/Twitter update status due to the presence of my academicians. Facebook/Twitter

41

4.4 Respondent’s Overall Perceptions
The mean and standard deviation of the respondents were calculated using descriptive analysis to measure the ways in which students and academicians rated the influence of social networks in e-learning with regards to the eight factors extracted using factor analysis. Table 4.3 below shows the mean and standard deviation of the eight factors. Table 4.3: Mean values for all the factors Factors Academic Reasons Social Networking Ease of Use Convenience Teaching and Learning Benefit Social Influence E-learning Perception Barriers Mean 4.21 4.10 4.06 3.96 3.83 3.62 3.27 2.35 Std. Deviation .803 .789 .804 .757 .852 1.065 1.163 1.254

The average mean and standard deviation for all independent factors is 3.65 and 0.95, respectively. Factors that scored above the average mean are Academic Reasons, Social Networking, Ease of Use, Convenience and Teaching and Learning Benefit whereas Social Influence, E-learning Perception, and Barriers scored below the average factors‟ mean score. Academic Reasons, Social Networking, Ease of Use, Convenience and Teaching and Learning Benefit have a standard deviation value of less than one, indicating that the respondents have consistently rated all these factors. The mean scores for all the factors were above 3.20 except for Barriers. This indicate that majority of the respondents rated positively to most of the statements. As for Barriers, the low mean score shows that most of the respondents did not agree that social network act as a 42

barrier to their learning and teaching activities. Social Influence, E-learning Perception and Barriers factors have standard deviation values which are greater than one, indicating disagreeing opinions among the respondents about these three factors.

4.5 Identification of significant predictors
In order to investigate and test the seven predicted hypotheses (H1 – H7) described in the previous chapter, stepwise regressions were used to identify the significant predictors that affect the influence of social networks in e-learning. Table 4.4 below provided the result of the stepwise regression analysis. Table 4.4: Stepwise regression Factors Academic Reasons Beta 0.898 t-Statistics p-value 22.2 5.27 0.98 2.65 1.84 1.08 0.52
2

0.000* 0.002* 0.015* 0.039* 0.047* 0.068 0.606

E-learning Perception 0.021 Convenience Social Networking Ease of Use Barriers Social Influence 0.000 0.092 0.085 0.043 0.012

*= Significant (p < 0.05); F =207.82 (p < 0.001) R = 0.792

In Table 4.4, the adjusted R2 clearly explains 79.2% of the variance associated with Teaching and Learning Benefit factor. The F-statistics for the model was also found to be significant (F = 207.82; p < 0.000). Academic Reasons, Convenience, Social Networking, Ease of Use and E-learning Perception were found to be significantly associated with Teaching and Learning Benefit. A higher beta weight (0.898) and tstatistics (22.2) for Academic Reasons makes it more influential to Teaching and Learning Benefit than the rest of the significant factors, that is, Convenience, Social Networking, Ease of Use and E-learning Perception. These factors are also positively 43

the hypotheses are all rejected. The rest of the factors were not found to be significant predictors for Teaching and Learning Benefit as such their hypothesis are not rejected. 4. therefore. meaning an increase in any of these factors results in a significant increase in Teaching and Learning Benefit. The finding coincides with the result obtained by (Kim. 2008. Liccardi. The hypotheses that related to the total five significant factors were listed below: H1: There is no association between e-learning perception and teaching and learning benefit in social networks H3: There is no association between academic reasons and teaching and learning benefit in social networks H4: There is no association between social networking and teaching and learning benefit in social networks H5: There is no association between convenience and teaching and learning benefit in social networks H6: There is no association between ease of use and teaching and learning benefit in social networks Since the p values for all the five factors associated with these hypotheses are less than 0. Zengyan.5.05.associated with Teaching and Learning Benefit. 2011.6 Students and academicians perceptions on social networks in e-learning The hypotheses (H8 – H14) statistical significant difference(s) between students‟ and academicians‟ perception towards all the seven independent factors and the dependent factor were tested using ANOVA as depicted in Table 4. 2009) on how social networks positively affect teaching and learning benefit based on the aforementioned factors. Significant differences were 44 .

90 Mean values indicate that students have a higher degree of agreement towards Social Influence and Teaching and Learning Benefit than academicians and this can be understood considering tendencies of students to follow and engage in any kind of activities they come across in social sites due to their inability to distinguish between need and want.022). family members.found in six of the factors.000* 0.5 shows the ANOVA.46 – 4.72 3. Students are always searching for an easier way that will lead them to understand certain courses easily without much effort. Factors Social Influence Ease of Use Social Networking Teaching and Learning Benefit E-learning Perception Academic Reasons Barriers Convenience *= Significant (p-value < 0. Social Influence (p-value < 0. new friends.20 – 2.06 2.08 10.12 – 3. whereas academicians will hardly be there to meet people they have no contact before.55 0.23 3. E-learning Perception (p-value < 0. celebrities. Of course students networked with friends.000* 0.001) and Academic Reasons (p < 0.05) F statistics p-value Mean (Student-Academician) 26.000).021 0.000).50 3.92 16.30 4.018).81 – 3.884 3.72 4. 2008). Students also agree more on Social Networking than the academicians. Ease of Use (p-value< 0. Table 4. Again students agree more that social 45 .000* 0.000).000* 0.59 15. The result is similar to one discovered by (Hayashi.07 46.29 – 2. Social Networking (p-value < 0.018 0.26 3.07 – 3.018* 0.91 – 3. lecture note in form of video clip provided in YouTube is easier to grab than walking for an hour to lecture hall to attend lecture. Teaching and Learning Benefit (p-value < 0.001* 0.061 0. As for Ease of Use students seems to agree more than the academicians.05 – 3.087 0. etc.

This is no surprise because academicians are more talented and goal oriented when it comes to looking for what they want than the students.networks provide Teaching and Learning Benefit than academicians do. the hypotheses are therefore rejected. H13: There is no difference between students and academicians perception towards ease of use with regards to social networks usage. H9: There is no difference between students and academicians perception towards social influence with regards to social networks usage. Students might have other form of engagements on the sites that may carry their attention away from doing appropriate things while on the social networks. H10: There is no difference between students and academicians perception towards academic reasons with regards to social networks usage. Hence. As for Academic Reasons academicians seems to agree more on the statements than students.5 are listed below: H8: There is no difference between students and academicians towards e-learning perception with regards to social networks usage. The hypotheses related to the significant factors in Table 4. 46 . H11: There is no difference between students and academicians perception towards social networking with regards to social networks usage.05. Hayashi (2008) discovered that frequent usage of the social sites will make one learn a lot of its potentials. since the p values of all the five factors connected to these hypotheses were less than 0.

Academic Reasons.7 Summary In this chapter.4. They are Convenience. Academic Reasons. the result of the survey demographic details was presented in which the ratio of male to female is almost 1:1 and youth dominated the majority of the survey. Convenience. Ease of Use and Social Networking. Stepwise regression was used to test general predictors affecting social networks in e-learning. Ease of Use and Social Networking) were found to be significant which resulted in rejecting five of the seven hypotheses. The next chapter presents a prototype implementation and testing based on the four of the five significant factors identified in stepwise regression test. Factor analysis was carried out in which eight factors were extracted. Six factors were found to be significant and mean values revealed some differences between students and academicians on the significant factors. 47 . Five factors (E-learning Perception. ANOVA was later used to test if there is a significant difference(s) on the way students and academicians perceived social networks link to Teaching and Learning Benefit.

The tools used in the development of the prototype are Asynchronous JavaScript (AJ).2 Description of Implementation With the availability of Web 2. that is Convenience. 5. Feedbacks from the users were also collected. An open source platform called webs available on the internet was used in developing the prototype.Chapter Five 5. Some of the tools used are already built-in into the packaged applications such as adobe flash and asynchronous JavaScript. some students and also academicians were asked to test the prototype. Academic Reasons.0 tools freely. After the completion of the system. forms. it becomes easier to develop an application using the free tools. Adobe Flash. The provision of the customization of the pages 48 . The URL link to the platform location is http://webs. The prototype was designed in such a way that the most significant factors. What is needed is the skill to integrate them together to achieve the desired goal and that has been done.1 Prototype Implementation and Testing This chapter presents the implementation part of the study research. Prototype JavaScript Framework and HyperText Markup Language (HTML) editor. Ease of Use and Social Networking in the research theoretical framework were made to be functional. It is a simple social site that enabled students and academicians share and communicate on academic related issues.com. The client-server and hosting of the prototype was control and run by the proprietary of the platform. Most of the functionalities required to be incorporated in the prototype such as blog. learning resources and chat services have already been packaged in the open source platforms. Ajax programming was used in the design and it uses JavaScript to allow upload and download of data from server without going through complete page reload.

1 shows the interface of the home page of the implemented prototype.3 Prototype Modules 5. and Academic Reasons in the research framework. Google+ pages. 5. Convenience. videos. audio) posted by colleagues or themselves anytime they wish and also comment or seek explanation on any topic they find interesting. The prototype was aimed at primarily designing a module for a course Information System Development Practices (ISDP) in Information System (IS) department in Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology in University of Malaya using combination of open source tools.) enable the development of the prototype to be done in such a way that only basic functionalities required were included.3. Social Networking. The functionalities (blog. chat. As indicated.1 Home page Figure 5. learning and teaching resources and user‟s profiles) provided on the system are determined from the significant factors Ease of Use. 49 .and widgets (links to Facebook. any student or academician who is willing to join the site must register on the right panel of the site. forum. etc. Academicians and students who registered on the site have the privilege to upload and download materials (documents. The basic components of the prototype were displayed with a brief description of what it was actually meant for. The acceptance of the system by academicians and students will determine whether the system will be generalized for all module courses in the Information System (IS) field and possibly expand it to cater for the entire university community.

Figure 5.2 Blog Blog can be a journal or an article authored by an individual or group of people.3. 5. The toolbar located at the bottom of the page allows academicians and students to follow related work on the existing social media Facebook. 50 . YouTube and Twitter by just clicking on the appropriate button. It allows students and academicians to express their personal or academic opinions based on their understanding. Students and academicians can interact on oneto-one basis via the use of chatting facility or short message whenever they like.1: Homepage The forum window also allows members to discuss issues related to the objective of the site and learn and share with each other.

And at the same time it will give an academician running the course module a clue on students that share similar ideologies on a specific domain. educational materials in different format (document. 5. etc) are provided for students and academician.Figure 5. At any time. 51 . The blog will contribute a lot towards understanding the focal point of most students that use it wisely and show their true character. students and/or academician can publish their journal or article here for others to see and learn.2: Blog page The blog service was integrated in the site to enable students and academicians share personal as well as academic stand on some issues they find interesting which ordinarily do not have the means to express them. video. They are encouraged to post any relevant material they come across for the benefit of the entire community of the site. audio.3. pdf.3 Academic Resources In this category.

3.3: Document materials page Figure 5.3.3 present document sections that enable students and academician upload and download educational related materials.1 Document file Figure 5. The interface was developed in such a way that students and academicians can easily upload documents without much follow up. one in Microsoft word format (doc) and the other in the portable document format (pdf). Some of them have already uploaded documents as shown in the figure. Academicians and students are allowed to have access to the materials uploaded by one of them for full benefit and encouragement for those that are yet to contribute.5. Student(s) and/or academician(s) that uploaded some documents can be able to modify or delete it at any time they desire and academician can also delete documents uploaded by students when they find them to be irrelevant in the module of discussion. 52 .

students and academicians can comment on any of the available video clips posted on the page.2 Video clip Figure 5. From the video clips already posted.3.3. Additionally. Students‟ and academicians‟ reactions on the video facility have been discussed in the testing section of the chapter. 53 . The concept is almost same for the document category discussed earlier. it can be seen that one of the video clip was viewed 14 times by students and/or academicians.5.4: Video page Figure5.4 displayed the interface where students and academician post video clips.

3.3 Audio clip Figure 5.3. As at the time of filing this report. They can listen to the audio clips at any time they want without the burden of continual staring at computer screen. 54 .5. Students and academician can post any related audio clip for the benefit of other members and probably themselves.5: Audio page There are instances when some individuals prefer listen to some important information than watching or reading them. two audio clips were posted by students and/or academicians. This page has provided that avenue for such categories of students and/or academician.

Each of these people plays a role in making the site sustainable. some topics were created by students and/academicians of this forum and comments were made.5.4 Forum Figure 5. academicians and students. nine of which are students and an 55 .6: Forum page Forum is an online discussion page where students and academicians can have open conversation on a specific topic proposed by any member. Students and academicians can also start a new topic on the forum by clicking on the „+New Topic‟ link provided on this page.6. They are administrator. Currently the site has ten users. Most of the discussions in a forum are centered on a specific domain and required members to comments and make suggestions on the topic of discussions. It is fun having discussion with colleagues on topics that are difficult to deal with.3.3. 5. As indicated on the Figure 5. it is hope that they will utilize it to the best of their ability. With this forum page available to students.5 Users There are three categories of users defined in this prototype.

5. The administrator can delete any member that violate the ethics and policy of the site and also monitor the overall activity of the site. Figure 5.1 Administrator An administrator controls the overall privileges of the site and users. 5. As couches/instructors of the course modules. Currently the site has only one course module running.academician.3. Academicians have the power to remove 56 .7 below displayed the users‟ page.2 Academicians Academicians play important roles in the site. He assigned responsibility to users of the site and manage the site whenever there is need to do that. their participation will influence many students to behave and stick discussions to course modules related matters.7: Users‟ collective page 5. The administrator is the only user that can add other course modules in the future. Figure 5.3.5. The toolbar also shows that students and academicians can have live chat among themselves whenever they are online.

or chatting with students.or edit any data or information posted by the students that they found to be irrelevant to the course module.3.9 below shows a typical profile of student‟s page in the site. They are provided with basic facilities that are present in Facebook. video and audio) create forums and comment on the existing ones. post and comments on academic resources (document. 5. Figure 5. YouTube and Twitter. Students can write blog. they are expected to be the role models on the site. Figure 5. They is also expected to participate in the forum discussions to motivate students and guide them on how to answer or approach certain issues they may find difficult to deal with. audios. Academicians can also do whatever the students are allowed to do in the sites such as posting notes.5.3 Students Any individual that register in the site is regarded as a student by default.8: Academician profile page. videos. 57 . They can also share on their profile their social feelings and what they were doing at a particular time. Add friends to their profile and communicate with members via a live chat window. In fact.

webs. Majority of the students and academicians are of the view that the prototype is simple and appealing and that it provides room for socializing and supports for academic learning and knowledge sharing among the academicians and students. They were later asked to assess the prototype based on their experience and fill in comments based on the factors identified via the link http://socialelearning. 58 . 5. Convenience.4. Refer to Appendix B for complete prototype testing survey questionnaire.4 Prototype Testing After the completion of the prototype. a total of ten students and academicians mostly from IT field were invited to test the prototype. The result was based on the ten responses collected from the respondents (students and academicians). 5.1 Respondent’s Mean Assessments The mean and standard deviation of the assessment of the four factors.Figure 5.com/. Ease of Use. Social Networking and Academic Reasons based on the experience on the prototype were calculated as shown in Table 5.9: Student profile page.1.

it can be said that respondents are happy with the contents and functionalities of the prototype. Convenience: The prototype provides variety of medium of communication and support variety of academic services to choose from. 5.10 . All the factors have standard deviation value of less than one showing that the respondents consistently rated all the factors with a high value.50 .69 respectively.Table 5. If it is sustained. videos & audios can be upload and downloaded easily. The simplicity of files and video upload is amazing Social Networking: It is a good avenue to meet and communicate with friends.71 4.2 show excerpt comments from respondents taken from each of the factors. it will go a long way in helping academicians and students to teach. academicians and read updates from colleagues Academic Reasons: It is amazing.67 The average mean and standard deviation for the factors are 4. Two of the factors Social Networking and Academic Reasons scored above the mean whereas Convenience and Ease of Use are slightly behind the average mean.2: Respondents‟ comments Factors Ease of Use: Respondents‟ comments The prototype is very simple to use.00 .48 4.88 4.4. operate and understand.2 Respondents’ Comments Respondents were asked to kindly comments on their experience and satisfaction level with the prototype for each of the factor given and Table 5. learn and communicate because educational documents.70 .33 and 0. 59 . Table 5.1: Assessment‟s Mean and standard deviation Factors Social Networking Academic Reasons Convenience Ease of Use Mean Standard deviation 4. Based on this.

Students and academicians were later asked to assess and comments on the prototype based on their experience and understanding. Snapshots of the prototype pages were provided with details of their contents.5 Summary The chapter described prototype implementation in which open source platform was used in developing the prototype. The next chapter concludes the overall contents of the study and suggests future works. The comments and assessments received were both positive and encouraging. 60 .5.

Chapter Six 6.1 Conclusion E-learning no doubt improves the way people learn and study in educational environments. teaching and learning among students and academicians in the universities. The statements of the study problems are: Despite the fact that e-learning is readily available everywhere. 2008. The study has discussed what researchers have done in the field of e-learning and social networking media and recommendations together with different approaches where suggested on how to maximize the benefits provided by the use of electronic learning. Three notable social media platforms were suggested and they are Facebook. students find it difficult to get the appropriate information for their studies. recommendations. students find it difficult to get an instance guidance or professional advice when encountered with academic problems(Greenhow. 2009). and help from expert and professionals on their selected field of study using the simplest and updated version of the technology(Greenhow. The social media reigning in the 21st century and total acceptance of it by the majority of the academic populace has shown how necessary it is to integrate it into educational studies. Zengyan. Social networks were suggested as one of the medium that can be used to deal with the aforementioned problems. They need more encouragement. advices. 2009) 61 . 2011. 2009. The study was supported and agreed with by the work carried out by (Galy. The study carried out has indicated that both students and academicians appreciate the services rendered by the social networks and agreed upon that the usage of social networks will increase the communication. Greenhow. Twitter and YouTube. Hayashi. In most cases. 2009).

The results of the analysis have shown that students and academicians find social networks media beneficial to teaching and learning. Then variables that may prevent students and academicians from joining the social networks were grouped under mooring factors. Five of the independent factors were found to be significant. Convenience. All the above objectives were met and achieved. To test the framework based on a system prototype. Variables that attract students and academicians joining social networks were also identified and grouped under pull factors. specifically local universities. Social Networking and Ease of Use were used during the implementation of the research prototype and links to popular 62 . To identify the factors that influences the use of social networks in e-learning. one for push factor (e-learning perception). Eight factors were identified. ii. iii. ease of use. All in all seven variables were identified from the literature review. They are E-learning Perception.The objectives of the study are: i. Research framework was designed using Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) model. The dependent variable was Teaching and Learning Benefit. Four of these factors Academic Reasons. convenience. Social Networking and Ease of Use. fall under mooring factor. one dependent factor and seven independent factors using factor analysis technique. Convenience. social networking and social influence) and the last variable barriers. To design a research framework to assess the influence of social networks media on teaching and learning in the academic environment. Academic Reasons. Variables that lead students and academicians to leave universities‟ e-learning platforms were identified and grouped under push factors. five for pull factors (academic reasons.

the research was restricted to Facebook. They have shown their total acceptability and willingness to open up and learn from academicians in the virtual environment and there is need from the management to encourage academicians to engage in social networks media and open up to students too. 6. In conclusion. it is recommended that if academicians want to engage students to build understandable relationship.3 Future Work In the future. This research was carried out in Malaysian‟s universities.social networks media (Facebook. This research suggested and investigated on only one among them. Students have shown their enthusiasms in meeting academicians in social sites to discuss academic matters. Twitter and YouTube platforms as scope. congregation and collaboration. the study can be extended to cover other social networks platforms such as social bookmarking. 63 . which is social networks. And even in the social networks domain.2 Study Limitations There are many approaches to handle the problem statements of the research as mentioned earlier. then they must come to understand the methods of communication that students naturally find engaging in today‟s world. YouTube and Twitter) were added to the implemented site‟s toolbar to enable students and academicians follow related work on those platforms. The assessment given by the students and academician after testing the prototype further proved that social networks media integration in e-learning is highly recommended. 6. it will be great if similar research is carried out in other universities across the world to see if students and academicians relate academically on social networks and their views on the impact social networks make on e-learning.

Future prototype should also accommodate more course modules to examine the impact and reactions from large number of students. 64 .

com/alltwitter/twitter-active-total-users_b17655 Brazill. Video instructions as support for beyond classroom learning. W.. Factor analysis versus multi-dimensional scaling: binary choice roll-call voting and the US Supreme Court. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. Social and Behavioural Sciences. A. from http://mediabistro. 65 . (2008). Factors influencing the usage of social networking websites amongst young. s. R. (240977) Amichi-Hamburger. Weathering wikis: Net-based learning meets political science in a south African university. J. Ayu. T. & Watts. B. (2002).. Carr. D. & Abrizah. Bakshy. E. (2011). 24(2002). (2010). Morrison. 201-229. 9(2010). 266-284. 26(2010). 1313-1318.. (2011). Kuala Lumpur. J. Y. Chan.. G. Pretoria. V. Everyone's an Influencer: Quantifying Influence on Twitter. R. University of Pretoria. M. (2012). Computers in Human Behaviour. A. Hofman.References Allen. Paper presented at the AsiaPacific Conference Library & Information Education & Practice. 250 Million Active Users By End Of 2012 Retrieved 18th February. 2011. 24(2007). (2007). A. A. Master of Business Administration. professional South Africans.. Social Networks. Computers and Composition. 2012.. Twitter On Track For 500 Million Total Users By March. Mason. Do You Facebook? Usage and Applications of Facebook Page among Academic Libraries in Malaysia.. J. Social network use and personality. Cox. Bennett.. 1289-1295. (2010). Y. 2012.... G. & Grofman. M. South Africa. T. A. & Deacon.

38(2011). I. P. Dabbagh. K. & Sorrell. Da. & Mann. Social Capital in virtual learning communities and distributed communities of practice. C. D. Delgado. Davis. Retrieved 66 . (2010). Social and Behavioural Sciences. Expert Systems with Applications. Schwier. J. W. A. M. A.C.. (1995). (2011). 29(3)(2003). 6981-6995. and selfregulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Human Capital and Social Change. M. & Pegalajar. Public and Private higher education institutions in Malaysia: Competing.. 4181-4189. Compementary or Crossbreeds as education providers.Clifton. 113-139. M. C.. social media. 15(2012). N.. (2007). Lienhardt. R. 1-14. XXV(2007).. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. 2012 Douglass . Cuellar. B.. Improving learning management through semantic web and social networks in e-learning environments. A. Internet and Higher Education. (2011). Rohs. 311-313. 31(2011).A chance to facilitate informal and process-oriented learning? Computers & Education. Personal Learning Environments. Ebner. & McCalla. 2(2010).. 92-100. Kajian Malaysia. (2010). C. Daniel. Microblogs in Higher Education . & Meyer.. (2003). 55(2010).. G. Creating a Culture of Aspiration: Higher Edcuation. Mastery Learning in Public Schools 18/01/2012. 3-8. M. (2007). Can YouTube enhance student nurse learning? Nurse Education Today. M.

J. Do your friends make you smarter?: An analysis of social strategies in online information seeking. B. 491-498. A. Greenhow. E. To use or not to use web 2. Evans. 246-259.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Eduacational Researcher. C. (2007). G. The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital and College Student's Use of Online Social Network Sites. 3(2007). 10(2011). S & Pirolli. Evans. Romania. M. (2011). Teaching.. N. 58-68. 67 . J. (2009). 15(2010). 38(2009). Esposito. Galy.. Academic Advising Today. E. Downey. 30 No. (2008). 1143-1168. and Scholarship in a Digital Age Web 2. Grosseck. The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education.Ellison. 46(2010).22. 209-230. Information Processing and Management. B. C & Johnson. 9. C & Lampe C.. (2011). Kairam. 50(2008). Saving Face(book): Engage Through Facebook and Retain Relevance. P. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. B & Hughes. A. (2009).. Robelia. Computer Science Education.. H. The Effect of Using E-Learning Tools in Online and Campus-based Classrooms on Student Performance. 12(2007). Journal of Information Technology Education. Steinfield. Learning. A.0 in higher education? Paper presented at the World Conference on Education Sciences 2009. 679-692. C. Forkosh-Baruch. A case study of Israel higher-education institutes sharing scholarly information with the community via social networks. Internet and Higher Education. (2009). (2007).

(2010). 15(2008). G. (2011). Experts System with Applications. 1443-1448. (2010). Students' and teachers' use of Facebook.0. H. Ryan. & Urquizu. A.. F.microblogging implications for continous education. training. G. An Augmented Social Interactive Learning Approach through web2. & Wu. 39(2012). 11(2011). (2011). The role of social motivations in e-learning: How do they affect usage and success of ICT interactive tools? Computers in Human Behaviour. 662-676. Hayashi. T. C. 2(2010). 139-154.. K. 27(2011). Tracing learning through spectrum of conversions. Holotescu. G. Sese.eu. The Role of Social Presence and Moderating Role of Computer Self Efficacy in Predicting the Continuance Usage of ELearning Systems. C. Journal of Information Technology Education.. Z.. & Holotescu. Hsu.Grosseck. (2011).. C. Computers in Human Behaviour. F. Hernandez. A microblogging approach to students' learning and research experience. Jin. C. Microblogging multimedia-based teaching methods best practices with Cirip.. (2011). 160-164. 187-193. Hew. Grosseck.. Paper presented at the 2009 33rd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Application COnference. 2151-2155. Evaluation criteria for blog design and analysis of casual relationships using factor analysis and DEMATEL. C. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences.. Montaner. 9(2010). learning and personal development. P. Teacher education in 140 characters. T. L. C. B. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. (2008). J. 68 . 27(2011). W. G. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. 2224-2232. (2009).

S. 162171. 18th February. 55(2010). S.. Kember.net/blog/2012/01/social-digital-mobile-malaysia/ Khamis. Internet and Higher Education. P. Kwon. A. M. participation in Facebook activities. & Ng. (2012. 27(2011). 572-580.. Investigating educational change: The Aga Khan University Institute for educational development teacher edication for school improvement model. Understanding the ways in which design features of educational websites impact upon student learning outcomes in blended learning environments. & Cheng. W. 26(2010). Social. 69 .. E. teaching. Business Horizon. Y. (2010). 254-263. Digital and Mobile in Malaysia. The relationship between frequency of Facebook use. 365-372. A. P. D & Choi. (2010). S. Sohn. 26(2010). Chong. Kaplan. (2011). (2010). Kemp. International of Educational Development. A. C. Kirschner. (2007). A. 1237-1245. 59-68. and assessment capabilities. M. Computers & Education.. and student engagement. McNaught. Y. Computers in Human Behaviour. C.. 14(2011). F. Facebook and academic performance.. & Karpinski. 15-26. Users of the world. H. K. 1183-1192. Y. Cultural difference in motivations for using social networks sites: A compaative study of American and Korean college students. 58(2011). Computers in Human Behaviour. unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media.. O. Lam P.(2011). An empirical study of the factors affecting social network service use. (2011).Junco.. 27(2007). D. (2010). Lai. C. F. Retrieved from http://wearesocial.. C. Computers in Human Behaviour. Kim. Y. 53(2010). R. Computers & Education. 2012). Using wikis to develop students' kearning.

Austria. 63-74. M. Internet and Higher Education. (2008).. Affirmative Action and Higher Education Reforms in Malaysia: A Tightrope Walk Equality and Excellence.1(2007). S. Graz. S. Communicacion Y Sociedad. R. Pau. Ounnas A. Globalisation. S.. Perez-Latre. J.. Herman. (2007). Portilla. 27-52. Wilson. J. XXIV(1)(2011). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. Olenski. F. (2002). S.. D. Should Teachers And Students Be allowed To Communicate Via Social Media? Follow Up. Paper presented at the Proceedins of the 9th Annual IAS-STS Conference "Critical Issues in Science and Technology Studies. Nentwich.0 and academia. Massey. K.. Rao.. & Blanco.1)..Lerman. Information Contagion: an Empirical of the Spread of News on Digg and Twitter Social Networks.. Webb. 13(2010). A. (2008). R.. Witty. Liccardi. 134140. Kinnunen. Midy... & Sarkar C. Computer Science Education. The role of social networks in students' learning experiences. E.. (2010). University Students' Perceptions of the Learning Environment and Academic Outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. McDaniel.. Lizzio. Information Science(2010). Retrieved from Roblyer. Web 2. M. Studies in Higher Education 27(No. (2010). Learner characteristics as predictors of online social presence. P. M. (2010). 70 .. 224-237. & Simons. M.. Lewthwaite. R. D.. D. I. V. I. 157-170. C. (2011). Social Networks.. 30. Mykota. Media and Audiences: A Literature Review. M.. (2010). Canadian Journal of Education. G. K. R.

& Zhou. 5(2010).2009. & Jhaveri K. (2011). 38(2009). Enhancing e-learning experience with online social networks..M. M. Being ready for the paradigm shifts in e-learning: Where is the change happening and how to catch the change? Social and Behavioural Sciences. 2012.. 5762-5768. 24-28. Learning.com/facebook-statistics/malaysia Sparks.. N.D. 1147-1154. & Ozcinar. Internet and Higher Education. and migration in the context of social change Social Science Research. Hawaii. A.wikipedia. (2009). Zengyan. 157-174. Cyber Migration: AN Empirical Investigation on Factors Affecting Users' Switch Intentions in Social Network Sites. A. Top.R. (2010). gender. N. Media and Technology. 71 . Faceworking: exploring students' education-related use of Facebook.org/wiki/Internet. Sabino..Sethi. 883-896.C. 2011 Williams. Education. 58(4)(2011). IET Communications. J. E. Special Article. Dilek. (2009)..M. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sceicnes . S. from http://www. Yinping. C. K. Internet Retrieved 8/12/2011. Yenging. (2011).. Embracing the internet as a Means of enhancing Medical Education in Nephrology. 2(June 2009). Wikipeda. (2012).. J.Rodrigues. O'Seaghdha. I.. 2(2010). Karahoca.. (2010). Socialbakers.P. L. China. C.K. http://en. Selwyn. (2009). 34 No.. F. J. 15(2012).socialbakers.. 2012. Blogging as a social medium in undergraduate courses: Sense of community best predictor of perceived learning. (2011). Malaysia Facebook Statistics Retrieved 18th February.. Y. 512-518. Z. & Lim.

........ Part One: Background information 1.....39 o > 40 3..30 o 31 ... Faculty/Department: .. Your data will be treated with utmost confidentiality.... Thank you for your cooperation...... University/College of study/teaching: .. 5.20 o 21 ..... we embark in investigating how Facebook........ Twitter and YouTube can be blended into e-learning to enhance academic communications between academicians and students in tertiary institutions (universities/colleges).. Age range: o 18 ..Appendix A: Survey Questionnaire Social Media and E-learning Survey Questionnaire Considering the acceptance of social networks (Facebook. Gender: o Male o Female 2... Twitter........ Category Type: o Undergraduate o Postgraduate o Academician 4.... Kindly please ensure the success of this study by filling the survey‟s questionnaire by filling the information provided below......... 72 ... etc) in our society....24 o 25 .. YouTube....

o o o o o o o o I use the following social networks (Choose at least one) Facebook Twitter YouTube MySpace LinkedIn Google+ Academia.6.edu Others (Specify) Please indicate the extent to which you think each statement pertain using the scale below: Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree 1 2 3 4 Part Two: Experiences with current e-learning platform 1 I am satisfied with the current e-learning facility in my university/college The e-learning facilities allow me to communicate with my peers and/or academicians My peers and/or academicians always assist me academically via e-learning platform The current e-learning platforms enhances my (academicians) style of teaching I am able to use the e-learning platform to fulfil all my learning/teaching needs Strongly agree 5 2 3 4 5 Part Three: Experience with social networks platform 1 I use social networks to stay in touch with my friends and families I use social networks to make new friends I use social networks to meet people of the same field of study I use social networks for educational purpose Friends and family influence the way I use social networks in learning My academicians influence the way I use social networks in learning 2 3 4 5 73 .

YouTube simplifies sharing of audio/video files online. I believe social networks can be used to improve teaching I believe social networks can be used to improve the interaction among peers and between students and academicians I believe social networks can be used to improve the collaboration among peers and between students and academicians 2 3 4 5 74 . Instant response to information request influences my stay in social sites I am always happy to add academicians/students to my Facebook/Twitter friends list Academicians respond quickly to my academic queries in Facebook I use Facebook to make appointments with my academicians/students I am careful of the content I post on my Facebook/Twitter update status due to the presence of my academicians.) Communications in social networks platforms is much easier Communications in social networks platforms is much faster Intellectuals attract my attention in social networks Social sites are good medium for students and academicians meetings and communications. Groups and page participation in Facebook make access to learning materials easier I would like academicians to join Facebook. I am benefitting a lot (academically) through social networks usage. YouTube and Twitter to assists students.1 Friends taught me how to access learning materials through social network sites My academician taught me how to access learning materials through social network sites Academicians in my university/college use social networks to enhance teaching methods I would prefer to use social networks compared to other modes (emails. phone calls) as a communication medium with peers and/or academicians as it is simple and easy to use I am attracted to variety of communication mediums in social networks (able to upload materials. YouTube always suggests similar related video/audio clips. send messages etc. On searching for a specific video/audio clip. posts.

Lack of motivation from colleagues discourages me from joining social networks. I am conservative as such I do not like socializing on internet. I joined social sites before but have to quit due to its constant requirement of time and management. I enjoy working alone.Part Four: Factors that might prevent me from using social network sites 1 2 3 I do not know that I can use social networks for academic benefits. social sites distract my attention I am concerned about privacy issues on social networks 4 5 75 .

Gender: o Male o Female 2. Social Networking Refers to the ability of the prototype in allowing students and academicians communicate via chat. etc Convenience Refers to the provision of alternatives source of getting teaching and learning materials. Thank you for your cooperation. Part One: Background information 1. Category Type: o Student o Academician Please rate the extent of your satisfaction for each of the factors below: Strongly Disagree 1 Ease of Use Refers to the simplicity of the prototype in terms of use and operation Academic Reasons Refers to the ability of the prototype to provide access to teaching and learning materials such as videos. Your data will be treated with utmost confidentiality. documents.Appendix B: Prototype Testing Questionnaire Kindly please ensure the success of this study by filling the information provided below. status updates and forum participation. messages. Disagree 2 Neutral 3 Agree 4 Strongly agree 5 1 2 3 4 5 76 .

Academic Reasons: 3. 1.Please write your comments on your experience with the prototype. Ease of Use: 2. Convenience: 4. Social Networking: 77 .