Gerzina 1 Lindsey Gerzina Ms.

Martinez ENC 1102-0112 23 April 2012 Facebook, Webcourses and the Classroom Technology is making a difference in our writing styles and our flexibilities to write in a variety of literacies. New technologies like Social Networking and Texting have been the main influences when it comes to students writing styles (Allwardt; Bryant; Chretien; Grabill). There are also suggestions that technology can help a new way of teaching students, along with some research that has shown advances in writing skills due to new technology (Lunsford; Hartley OKeefe & Clarke; Zhang). Though these sources do not directly talk about why and how the internet is accessible to students, they have identified different aspects of technology that may have impacted the ways that students write. Social Networking Much of the writing students do today is through social networks. Research has shown that this type of writing improves our general writing style and tone (OKeefe and Clarke; Tolchinsky; Klass; Gerben1; Gerben2; Chretien; Allwardt; Bryant). For example, OKeefe and Clarke assert Social media participation also can offer adolescents deeper benefits that extend into their view of self, community, and the world, which means that they believe that social networks have a positive impact on the user and the community in which they live (n. page). What is also being said is that social networking is helping people become confident in whom they are and letting them engage in many different types of activities. Gerben, a professor from the University of Michigan, also conducted research on the way that social networks influence

Gerzina 2 students writing communities, explaining A profile page on Facebook becomes a site of social and textual collaboration with complementary goals of self-expression and reaching out to a real and relevant audience (3). What I took away from this quote was that Facebook becomes more than just a page where people can talk about themselves and stalk friends; it is where they can gain a greater sense of self in a variety of groups and interests. When Gerben uses collaboration of self-expression it shows that it is more than one person writing the text meaning opinions can form or change due to other peoples opinions. Even with this additional information a similar concern still stands, do they just say they enjoy rap on their page or are they doing it to conform with other people, and have similar likes. In contrast to the previous sources, Alison Bryant, a professor Indiana University, asserts that students were neither more nor less likely to create friendships using socially interactive technologies SITs. SITs are technologies like instant messaging and text messaging. Bryant supports this assertion by conducting a study using multiple SITs to see what the peoples tendencies are when they are on these sites. Her purpose was to find if these sites made people more sociable or not because there is a different medium of communication. She states, There was little overlap between SIT-facilitated and offline social networks; and the socially-isolated adolescents were less likely than other adolescents to use SITs (1). What Bryant is saying is that if you are not social face to face you are probably going to be just as antisocial over the internet. This point directly contradicts the ideas presented by OKeefe and Clarke and Gerbens research. Another article relevant to my topic was written by Debra Allwardt, a Professor at Western Illinois University. She studied the impact that Wikis have on our everyday lives. Wiki is a site that people use very often daily to research information and it makes research quicker and easier. Allwardt states, Wikis can be used in social work practice to collaborate on

Gerzina 3 documents or projects within or between organizations, which means many people use Wikis for work to keep organized and in contact with other people (598). Although Wiki may have these positive aspects to it, Wiki is a popular cite for students to plagiarize. It creates a constant temptation for students to help make their papers sound better with other peoples words. Texting Texting is a tool that many people in this generation could not go a day without. Research has shown that students have started to rely on their phones more than ever before. (Grabill; Bryant). Jeff Grabill, a professor at Michigan State University, asserts that students have many different literacies and genres outside of the classroom. Grabill supports this assertion by giving statistics from a survey he conducted showing the students choices of preferred genres when writing, the first two were text messaging and then emailing and in seventh place was IMing. His purpose was to show where students write the most and get an idea of what students do daily. He states, Half of the ten genres that participants report writing most frequently are digital genres (5). Grabills point in saying this was to explain that technology is playing a bigger role than ever before in students lives and that number will only increase over time. Similarly to Grabills research, Alison Bryant, a professor at Indiana University determines that text messaging is a growing phenomenon. She says, Email and text messaging allow for rapid, asynchronous communication within ones peer network (4). Bryant is saying that texting is quick and the recipient can respond at any time they should choose, allowing time to elapse. The problem with texting is if something is pertinent and you are only able to text, it could be blown off until later and you are unable to get a timely response on the predicament. Another idea presented by Bryant is, Aside from email, the most often used Internet tool for peer communication is instant messaging. This is also a youth- preferential activity, with 74% of

Gerzina 4 online adolescents in the U.S. having used instant messaging. (4) What Bryant is saying is that many young people or students are using instant messaging as well as texting. It has become so popular that Facebook has interlaced text messaging into their website, so users can communicate faster. Teaching With all of the technology today, it can be a great outlet for teachers to find this common ground with their students to get their lesson across in a new manner. Many have shown that technology may not completely supplement for different writing processes but it does teach people new literacys (Zhang; Chretien; Allwardt). Chretiens article is relevant to my topic because it focuses on how deep a students thinking is when using technology and the internet. She states, The majority of students enjoyed the activity and found the instructors feedback helpful. Assessment of the posts revealed reflections on experience, heavily concerned with behavior and affect (Chretien 2066). This shows that students like activities that are conducted over the internet and are likely to elaborate when questions stimulate thought. Zhang, a professor at Washburn University, has been working with students with learning disabilities, trying to see if technology will make a difference in their learning capabilities. Zhang goes on to say about her study that The belief that technology can assist students with learning disabilities in mastering basic writing skills is still under examination. To understand the applicability of technology, one must understand the special problems that beset student with learning disabilities (3). She is saying that the technology to help these students is so new that true results are not even available yet as to whether or not it is working. This study suggests how much of an impact technology can have on society and also how new technology is.

Gerzina 5 Advances in writing skills People generally learn writing skills only in the classroom. Recent research has shown that writing skill have actually improved more when writing personal things at home (Zhang; OKeefe and Clarke; Lunsford; Hartley; Gerben). Chris Gerben asserts that success of an internet website has to do with design, access and the attitude of the user towards the texts and social practices. Gerben supports this assertion by analyzing three very popular websites and analyses them to these criteria. He defines a term Versioning is an approach to digital texts that addresses how a piece of information- such as a news story, good for sale or portion of a user profile- gets updated and displayed on popular websites. This approach focuses on how the new is valued in digital texts as a result of web design and text layout (Gerben 4). In this quote Gerben is explaining the user friendly pages that social networks have created to enable as much use as possible. He then goes on to explain Thus versioning, a model of writing, revision, and reception in post-Web 2.0 technology, is inherently collaborative in that co-authoring and recontextualizing is necessary for there to be new versions of a particular text(16). He is saying that people are able to write and rewrite what is written on the page, giving people the opportunity to edit their writing. Also relatable is research done by Andrea Lunsford. She asserts that these new technologies are not hindering students writing capabilities but rather helping them. Lunsford supports her assertion when conducting a longitudinal study of students attending Stanford University, grasping students many literacies. She states the following in her research These activities [Emailing, texting and social networking] seemed to help them develop a range or repertoire of writing styles, tones, and formats along with a range of abilities, which means that students have been doing a lot of different type of writing and it has helped their writing get

Gerzina 6 better stylistically (1). When she says styles, tones, and formats, I start to think as to whether or not they are useful in a working environment, or if it is not sophisticated enough tone or style to be written to a boss or professor. The accessibility and effectiveness of technology in students lives has been studied from multiple perspectives. Though these sources have provided background information on social networking, teaching, advances in writing skills and texting, they fail to examine if and how technology may improve the effectiveness of student writing by allowing them to communicate through social networks. I will be focusing on if and how social networking is more accessible for students or if they prefer the usual school mandated websites. Methods While doing research I developed these questions after reading about the internet, social networking and different literacies. I want to know what websites are more accessible to college students and if these sites can be a new outlet for learning. The two examples I will compare for the purposes of my study are Facebook and a UCF school site called Webcourses. Though my sources proved to be helpful they did not go into great detail about efficiency, accessibility, students engagement in learning on school websites and the students perception of it. I want to further explore these topics in research of my own. To do this, I will ask four students about the difference between having a class website on a social network and on a school mandated cite. I will ask them, how many times they go on Facebook daily, the number of times they go on the class page and the different distractions on both pages. (See Appendix A for a list of all focus group questions). To further my study, I will compare the answers between the students and hopefully find results that might suggest a better solution between the two. I will also look at

Gerzina 7 how many times a document is viewed and how quickly and likely it is for a student to respond to posts or questions on the two different sites. To get these numbers I went to my sociology teacher, who uses Webcourses, for data. This data indicated the total number of times each student accessed Webcourses throughout the semester and the total amount of times each document was looked at or downloaded. I also look at the number of views each document posted on Facebook received and the tendency of the students to respond to posts on the page. By conducting this study I will understand how big of a role social networking, has on a students life, from an academic standpoint. I hope to learn if Facebook or Webcourses is more accessible for a college student and I also hope to understand if and why a student responds to one site quicker than the other one. I also want to get their perception of the two sites regarding if one is easier to browse on, simpler to use and the downfalls to both of the sites. The audience that would benefit the most from this study would be college students and professors. College students would understand why teachers are turning to social networks to and that their writing styles are different between the two sites. Professors would benefit because they would understand the college students lives so much more. They would be able to grasp the different literacies they use the most, their style of writing and maybe even try to connect with them on their common literacies. Results and Discussion There were many positive and negative effects to having a class website on a social networking page, Facebook, rather than a school mandated website, UCF Webcourses. I have come to realize that this topic has a lot to do with accessibility to the website and the students ability to engage more. From conducting my interviews I was able to get a few students

Gerzina 8 perceptions of the two sites and which one they liked better and found most helpful to their learning. This will give a stronger understanding of what a student thinks is a more suitable site for a classroom. Accessibility In my research, when asked which of the two websites they go on more frequently each day, all of my participants said Facebook. With that being said, the reason for going on Facebook is not just for the class page, but for interacting with friends online. However, when asked if they go on the class Facebook page when they are already on Facebook for networking all of the participants said they do go onto the class page even though this was not their initial intention for logging on to Facebook. This suggests that a class website integrated into a social networking site like Facebook may motivate students to check up on their classes more frequently. Incorporating classes on Facebook helps students to see school more integrated into their life. Teachers sometimes wonder how academic students are when they go home, but when combing school on to something like a personal Facebook page, school becomes a part of the student. Although Facebook may be an accessible site for most students, it may not be for teachers. Teachers have to know how to use Facebook effectively in order for the site to be helpful for the students. Teachers would be using a new genre, which is somewhere that a group can communicate, and using a different lexis, which is the language that the members of the group use. Participating in students literacies will assist teachers in understanding what their students like and how they function. Students engagement After analyzing the number of views that each document received on both Facebook and Webcourses, I have found that documents from the Facebook page on average had one more

Gerzina 9 view per student than the documents teachers uploaded to Webcourses. The Facebook documents had 3.6 views per student and the Webcourses documents had 2.6 views per student. This can imply two things that students do one, they visit their class Facebook page more frequently and two that the documents on Facebook are easier to access. Using a social networking site like Facebook is simpler for a student to access because it is a familiar genre. When it comes to Webcourses students need a tutorial and even then they do not understand some aspects of the site. Students are also able to ask and respond to question easier on Facebook than on Webcourses. The wall feature on Facebook is something that every user knows how to manage and it applies to every page on the site. The message board on Webcourses can be confusing at times and students dont want to be the one to email the whole class in regards to one question. This limits the students and helps no one. Usefulness to Students Though it is clear that students are accessing Facebook more than the Webcourses site, it is clear that each has its benefits and limitations. For example, while Facebook is good for students due to access, there are many distractions that come with the site. Students log on to the site with their personal pages and can then be distracted by a plethora of different things. Distractions range from instant messages from friends, notifications, and friends recent activities. There are some cases where students had intentions of going onto their class Facebook page but forgot to completely due to distractions. During my interviews a student said, The Facebook page makes keeping track of class easy but then I want to catch up with friends online; this happens almost every time. This can cause students to lose track of time and get completely off schedule while doing homework. In a comparison with Facebook, Webcourses has almost no distractions at all. The only distraction that came up when talking about Webcourses was when a

Gerzina 10 student decided to look at other teachers grades rather than immediately downloading a file for another class assignment. Another factor of usefulness to the students is the limitations between the two sites. A major limitation is that teachers are unable to post grades on to Facebook, but are able to and highly recommended for teachers to post grades are Webcourses. Another limitation primarily aimed at Facebook is that not every student has a Facebook page and teachers cant force students to create a page. Teachers are then responsible for also notifying the students in person what was already posted on Facebook ensuring that the students without a Facebook understand the assignment. This is not a problem for Webcourses because the University requires that every student have one. Conclusion With the information regarding Facebook and Webcourses there is no clear cut answer as to which one is better. Using a familiar genre like Facebook depends on the teacher and what their goals are for their students, because both sites have drawbacks. The disadvantages were apparent in my focus group, and the results varied more than I had expected. Initially, I thought my participants would have just said Facebook was the best option, but they saw distractions and grades as major setbacks. Looking back I realize that my focus group should have been bigger. I would have had much more data to work with and it would have been easier to find trends between the students responses. I also would have interviewed teachers asking if they have ever used or thought of using Facebook or any other social networking site as a class page. This information would have supported whether or not social networking sites were accessible to teachers as well. With that said, this study can accentuate the advantages and disadvantages

Gerzina 11 between Facebook and Webcourses capabilities, so that students and teachers can make a decision about technology and social networking in the classroom for themselves.

Gerzina 12 Appendix A Focus Group Questions 1. How many times a day do you access Facebook? 2. When on Facebook how many times do you go on English Page? 3. Do you ever go on Facebook just for the English Page? 4. What do you do on the English Page? Access documents, grades talk to other student online? 5. Do you get distracted a lot while on Facebook? By what? 6. How many times a day do you go on the University of Central Florida Webcourses? A week? 7. What do you do on this website? Access documents, grades talk to other student online? 8. Do you get distracted while on Webcourses? By what?

Gerzina 13 Works Cited Allwardt, Debra E. Teacher Note Writing with Wikis: A Cautionary Tale of Technology in the Classroom. Journal of Social Work Education 47.3 (2011): 597-605. Education Full Text Database. Web. 22 Feb. 2012. Bauerlein, Mark. The Dumbest Generation. New York; Penguin, 2008. Print. Bryant, Alison. IMing, Text Messaging, and Adolescent Social Networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11.2 (2006): Web. 22 Feb. 2012. Web. Carr, Nicholas. Is Google making us Stupid? The Atlantic. Aug. 2008: Print. Chretien, Katherine. The Reflective Writing Class Blog: Using Technology to Promote Reflection and Professional Development. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 23.12 (2008): 2066-70. Web. 22 Feb. 2012. Gerben, Chris. Privileging the New in New Media Literacy: The Future of Democracy, Economy, and Identity in 21st-Century Texts. Media in Transition 6 (MiT6) Conference. (2009): 1-23. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. ---. Putting 2.0 and Two Together: What Web 2.0 Can Teach Composition About Collaborative Learning. Computers and Composition Online. (2009): 1-23. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. Godwin, Mary. Disruptive Technology: What Is It? How Can It Work for Professional Writing? The Writing Instructor. 2010. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. Grabill, Jeff, et.al. The Writing Lives of College Students. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, WIDE Research Center: Writing in Digital Environments. 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012.

Gerzina 14 Hartley, James. Writing Through Time: Longitudinal Studies of the Effects of New Technology on Writing. British Journal of Educational Technology. 32.1 (2001): 141-51. Web. 22 Feb. 2012. Klass, Perri. Seeing Social Media More as Portal than as Pitfall. The New York Times. 9 Jan. 2012. Web. 14 Feb 2012. Lunsford, Andrea. Our Semi-Literate youth? Not so fast. Purdue University. (2011): 1-4. Web. 3 Feb. 2012. O'Keefe, G., & Clarke, K. "The Impact of Social Media on Children, Adolescents, and Families." Pediatrics 127.4 (2011): 800-4. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. Tolchinsky, Anatol. Problematic Video Game Play in a College Sample and Its Relationship to Time Managements Skills and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptomology. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 14.9 (2011): 1-9. Web. 22 Feb. 2012. Zhang, Yuehua. Technology and the Writing Skills of Students with Learning Disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 32.4 (2000): 467-78. Web. 22 Feb. 2012.