2017 IEEE/ACS 14th International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications

Facebook as a learning tool in classrooms: A case

study
Manal Abdo Farhan Saif1, Ahmed Tlili2, Fathi Essalmi2, Mohamed Jemni2
1
Virtual University of Tunis, Tunisia
2
Research Laboratory of Technologies of Information and Communication and Electrical Engineering (LaTICE),
Tunis national higher school of engineering (ENSIT), Tunisia
m_almikhlafi@yahoo.com
ahmed.tlili23@yahoo.com
fathi.essalmi@isg.rnu.tn
mohamed.jemni@fst.rnu.tn

Abstract— Social networking services specifically Facebook
has recently shown exponential growth in its number of users,
which attracted researchers to investigate its educational
potentials. While various studies have investigated learners’
attitudes towards incorporating Facebook in classrooms, limited
attention has been paid to examine learners’ level of knowledge
and motivation involved in online learning using Facebook.
Therefore, this study proposes a new designed Facebook learning
tool with various applied design strategies to enhance the
learning process in classrooms. Thirty five learners, from a
public University in Tunisia, participated in a quasi-experiment
to validate this designed Facebook learning tool. The findings
highlight that this tool has had a positive impact on the learners’
level of knowledge regarding learning “game development”
course. Besides, learners found this tool useful, interesting and
safe, resulting in better engagement and a competitive attitude.
Keywords— Online social networks; Social presence;
Facebook; Online learning.
I. INTRODUCTION
With the increase use of social network technologies in the
world by users during their daily lives, many researchers and
practitioners thought about using these technologies for a
diverse range of purposes such as business, marketing,
advertising and education. From the educational purpose,
social network technologies contribute to the establishment of
new learning environments where learners are engaged in
online learning communities using technologies familiar to
and accepted by their generation [1]. Social networks have the
potential to offer better support for self-governed, problem-
based and collaborative learning processes, resulting in better
academic instruction and learning experience [2].
Facebook is particularly getting the attention of instructors
and educators because it is the most popular social network
among users, including learners. Facebook claims that, as of
March 2017, 1.28 billion on average are daily active users [3].
In addition, most learners are using Facebook on a daily basis
[4, 5]. According to Smith and Caruso [6], 96.6% of college
learners who participate in social networking use Facebook.
Another finding highlighted that 98% of undergraduate
learners, within a major public university, have Facebook
accounts [7]. Therefore, instructors and educators became
more interested in investigating Facebook as a learning tool in
their universities and colleges.
Despite the benefits of Facebook in learning such as,
increasing communication among learners, facilitating access
to provided course materials, and improved logistical
management of learning contents [8, 9], many studies have
reported that Facebook is not well investigated as a learning
tool. For instance, Wise et al. [10] stated that psychology
learners spent an average of one hour per day on Facebook,
but mostly to engage in social interactions and only few of
them reported that Facebook provided them with information.
Other studies highlighted the concerns regarding Facebook
being a source of distraction more than learning and the
influence it has on academic performance is still questionable
[10, 4]. These facts hinder the full adoption of Facebook in
classrooms by instructors and educators. Sanchez, Cortijo, and
Javed argued that Facebook has yet to make significant
inroads into usage within classroom [11]. A recent study
stated that institutions should investigate the potential benefits
and drawbacks of Facebook as a learning tool in their
classrooms [12]. Thus, this study investigates the impact of
using Facebook as a learning tool on the learners’ level of
knowledge and motivation compared to the traditional
learning method in classrooms. In this context, a pilot
experiment at a public university in Tunisia was conducted.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2
describes related work regarding social network sites,
specifically Facebook in education. Section 3 describes the
designed Facebook Learning tool to be used by learners at the
university. Section 4 presents the conducted experiment, while
the experimental results are presented in section 5. Section 6
concludes the paper and gives an overview about future
directions based on this research.
II. RELATED WORK
This section defines social network sites (SNSs) and their
importance in education. In particular, this section focuses

2161-5330/17 $31.00 © 2017 IEEE 509

DOI 10.1109/AICCSA.2017.97
specifically on Facebook as a learning tool which is used by
instructors and educators.
A. Social network sites
Since their introduction, social network sites (SNSs) such
as Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter have grabbed
the attention of millions of users, where many of them have
integrated these sites into their daily practices. Boyd and
Ellison [13] defined SNSs as “web-based services that allow
individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile
within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users
with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse
their list of connections and those made by others within the
system.”
SNSs have grown enormously since their invention
and their popularity among learners is unquestionable. They
were originally designed for social uses, and then their use
was shifted to other domains, including education [5].
Fernàndez and Gil-Rodríguez stated that the huge success
of social networks has raised new questions regarding the
potential use of the latter as platforms for learning [14].
Kayri and Çakir stated that, due their features, SNSs are
related to many pedagogical points of the constructivist
approach [15]. Visagie and deVilliers [16] pointed out that
there is an emerging trend in integrating the pedagogical
potential of SNSs in higher education. In particular, Facebook
is grabbing the attention of instructors and educators because
it is the most popular social networks among the majority of
learners at university or college and they are using it on a daily
basis [4, 5]. The next subsequent section presents the
efficiency of Facebook as a learning tool.
B. Facebook as a Learning Tool
Facebook is an SNS that was founded on 4 February 2004.
Its mission, according to its information page is “to give
people the power to share and make the world more open and
connected. People use Facebook to stay connected with
friends and family, to discover what’s going on in the world,
and to share and express what matters to them.” Facebook is
mostly used to keep in touch with contacts, share photos,
organize groups and use applications [17]. According to
Smith and Caruso [6], of the 90.4% of college students who
participate in social networking, 96.6% use Facebook. Recent
research at a major public university affirms this trend,
suggesting the proportion of undergraduate students with
Facebook accounts exceeds 98% [7]. Junco reported that
students spend an average of over 1 h and 40 min per day on
Facebook [18].
During the recent years, several scholars and educators
have focused on investigating the benefits and drawbacks of
Facebook in educational environments [12, 13]. Various
pedagogical affordances of Facebook are found as follows
[19]: (1) possibility of mixing different learning resources
available in different mediums (e.g., YouTube or blog),
resulting in a rich learning experience; (2) possibility of
hybridizing different expertise of various contributors such as,
graduate and undergraduate learners, practitioners and
instructors, resulting in the encouragement of social capital
510
development; and, (3) possibility of widening the context of
learning, where learners and instructors share personal and
professional matters, hence mixing different contexts of
learning and social/personal life. Besides, Facebook supports
the “just in time” learning strategy since learners can instantly
use their mobile devices to access Facebook and learn
whenever they want and wherever they are.
While some studies have reported the advantages of using
Facebook in learning, other studies argued the positive impact
of Facebook as a learning tool on the learner’s performance
[10, 11, 12, 13]. Findings are mixed about the possibility of
Facebook in enhancing formal learning [20]. Besides, various
research studies highlighted some limitations of using
Facebook in learning, such as privacy and cyber bullying [21].
Therefore, institutions should investigate the potential benefits
against the potential drawbacks of Facebook as a learning tool
in their classrooms [12]. The next section presents our
designed Facebook learning tool which is used then in a public
Tunisian university.
III. DESIGNED FACEBOOK LEARNING TOOL
Game development is gaining an increasing attention by
researchers and practitioners, therefore many universities have
started including it as a course in their computer science
programs. This may prepare learners to an industry which may
get larger than Hollywood [22]. Thus, the designed Facebook
learning tool was designed to teach this interesting game
development course. The goal of this course is to introduce to
learners games with their different genres and elements.
Besides, it aims to help learners acquiring various technical
skills using a particular game engine.
The instructor started by creating a private group where
only him as a moderator had the possibility to accept the
requests of joining this group. This was to protect the privacy
of the learners, including their written information, from
outsiders or strangers during the learning using Facebook. In
addition, each learner signed a code of conduct paper which
says for instance a learner will be responsible for any
misbehavior coming from his/her account profile.
Furthermore, the instructor posted as a first video the rules
within this group which are about respecting and supporting
each other. This was to protect learners from cyber bullying
which is a common problem in many online learning [21].
The instructor also used the possible various features and
functionalities within a Facebook group to deliver a fun and
interactive learning experience to learners. This was as
follows:
• Facebook wall: The instructor used the group wall to
post various learning content, such as video tutorials,
links and web pages. This can help to deliver a rich
learning experience by combining different
information from different sources.
• Facebook post: The instructor used the post
functionality to create open and closed quiz questions
regarding different parts of the course, such as game
genres and elements. The learners can then post their
answers as comments. The instructor can also post
 his feedback regarding the learner’s answer as
comments too. This can help to create a constructive
discussion where learners exchange answers and
feedback. At the end, the instructor posts the
"correct" answer, also in the form of a comment.
• Facebook chat: The instructor used the Facebook
chat to communicate with the learners within the
group and answer their questions regarding various
points related to the provided course.
• Facebook live: The instructor used the Facebook live
functionality to allow an external invited speaker to
participate in the course, share her expertise and
interact with the learners. This functionality can
make the learning experience more exciting and
engaging for learners by mixing different expertise.
• Facebook Emoticons: To increase the learner’s
motivation, the instructor used the Facebook
emoticons (e.g., like) to encourage learners whenever
they give their answers. Also, these emoticons are
used to gamify the learning environment, where the
number of “likes” on the learners’ answers is used as
a score for each learner.
Figure 1 presents an example of the way Facebook post
was used during the learning process. In particular, in this
figure, the first learner has five likes on her answer which
means that she got a score of five points on that answer.
Fig. 1. Screenshot of the designed Facebook learning tool.
511
IV. EXPERIMENT
To evaluate the efficiency of the designed Facebook
learning tool, a pilot experiment was conducted in a public
university in Tunisia during the second semester for two
months. This section introduces the participants of this
experiment. Besides, it describes the followed procedure.
A. Participants
This experiment was conducted in a public university in
Tunisia. Participants of this experiment were sixty under-
graduate learners. They are all majoring in computer science
and enrolled in “game development” course. Their ages
ranged between 21 and 23. The learners have reported that
they have never previously taken a game development course.
B. Procedure
A quasi-experiment was designed by voluntary assigning
learners to two different groups namely experimental and
control. The experimental group has thirty learners and used
the designed Facebook learning tool to learn game
development course. The control group has also thirty
learners and used the traditional learning method namely
lectures to learn game development course. The two learning
methods were designed by the same instructor to ensure the
consistency of the implemented learning content.
Before the learning process, both groups of learners took a
five points Likert scale motivation pre-questionnaire (1:
Strongly disagree and 5: Strongly agree) to evaluate their level
of motivation towards learning the game development course.
Also, both groups of learners took a level of knowledge pre-
test (using a pen and paper) to evaluate their level of
knowledge regarding game development.
After the learning process, during the whole second
semester, both groups of learners took motivation post-
questionnaires and level of knowledge post-tests. This aims to
investigate the impact of the designed Facebook learning tool
on the learner’s level of knowledge and motivation compared
to the traditional learning method.
In addition, the experimental group took a five points
Likert scale satisfaction questionnaire (1: Strongly agree and
5: Strongly disagree) which aims to investigate the satisfaction
of learners towards the usefulness of the new designed
Facebook learning tool and if they are willing to use it again in
the future. Besides, this questionnaire aims to investigate the
satisfaction of learners towards the applied security strategies
by instructor (closed group, signed code of conduct paper,
etc.) to protect their privacy and to avoid online problems such
as bullying. Furthermore, an unstructured interview was
conducted with the learners of the experimental group, in
order to get their feedback regarding this new learning
experience.
V. RESULTS
The collected data from the learners was then analyzed
using IBM SPSS Statistics 19 in order to draw conclusions
regarding this new designed Facebook tool and the applied
design strategies by the teacher. In particular, only eighteen As shown in table 2, there was a significant difference
learners from the experimental group and seventeen learners between the mean of the learners' scores in both post-tests,
from the control group completed all the required since the obtained p value is equal to 0.03 and less than 0.05.
questionnaires (in total thirty five learners).The obtained In particular, the experimental group had better post-test
results are listed in the following subsequent sections. results compared to the control group. Therefore, the null
hypothesis is rejected. This is explained with the designed
A. Level of Knowledge Facebook learning tool has significatly influenced the
To investigate the impact of the designed Facebook learners’ level of knowledge when it comes to learning the
learning tool on the learner’s level of knowledge compared to game development course compared to the traditional method.
the traditional method, the independent sample t test of the As a result, the experimental group made better learning
control and experimental groups’ pre-tests was calculated. In progress.
this case, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference
between the level of knowledge of both control and B. Motivation
experimental groups. Table 1 presents the obtained results. Prior to conducting further analyzes, it is important to
evaluate the reliability of the motivation questionnaire’s
measurement. Thus, the Cronbach’s alpha to measure the
TABLE I. T-TEST RESULTS OF THE LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE PRE-TESTS
internal consistency was calculated and it was equal to 0.77.
This means that the questionnaire is reliable since Cronbach’s
Std.
Group N Mean t sig alpha is greater than 0.7 [23].
Deviation
To investigate the impact of the designed Facebook
Control 17 6.47 2.29 learning tool on the learners’ motivation compared to the
traditional method, the independent sample t test of the control
33 0.51 and experimental groups’ motivation pre-questionnaires was
calculated. In this case, the null hypothesis is that there is no
Experimental 18 6.97 2.19 difference between the level of motivation of both control and
experimental groups. Table 3 presents the obtained results.

As shown in table 1, the obtained mean of the pre-tests (of
both control and experimental groups) is almost the same.
Besides, as shown in table 1, there is no significant difference
between the pre-tests mean of both the control and
experimental groups since the obtained p value is equal to 0.51
and greater than 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis is not rejected.
This can be explained with both groups of learners are
beginners in game development course before the learning
process, hence, they have had the same level of knowledge
pre-tests and no significant difference was noticed.
After the learning process using the Facebook learning tool
and the traditional method, the post-tests of both the control
and experimental groups were also analyzed using the
independent sample t test. In this case, the null hypothesis is
that there is no difference between the level of knowledge of
both control and experimental group after the learning process.
Table 2 presents the obtained results.
TABLE II. T-TEST RESULTS OF THE LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE
POST-TESTS
Group N Mean Std. t sig
Deviation
Control 17 8.26 4.37
33 0.03
Experimental 18 11.30 3.73
TABLE III. T-TEST RESULTS OF MOTIVATION PRE-QUESTIONNAIRES
Group N Std.
Mean
Deviation
t sig
Control 17 3.87 0.93
-0.78 0.43
18 4.12 0.88
Experimental
As shown in table 3, the obtained mean of the motivation
pre-questionnaires (of both the control and experimental
groups) before the learning process is almost the same.
Besides, as shown in table 3, there is no significant difference
between the motivation questionnaires’ mean (of both control
and experimental groups) since the obtained p value is equal
to 0.43 and greater than 0.05. Thus, it can be deduced that the
null hypothesis is not rejected and both group of learners
namely control and experimental have the same level of
motivation before the start of the learning process.
After the learning process using the Facebook learning tool
and the traditional method, the motivation post-questionnaires
of both the control and experimental groups were also
analyzed using the independent sample t test. In this case, the
null hypothesis is that there is no difference between the level
of motivation of both control and experimental group after the
learning. Table 4 presents the obtained results.

512
 TABLE IV. T-TEST RESULTS OF MOTIVATION POST-
QUESTIONNAIRES
Std.
Group N Mean t sig
Deviation
Control 17 3.75 1.12
-0.52
Experimental 18 3.93 0.93
As shown in table 4, the obtained mean of the motivation
post-questionnaires (of both the control and experimental
groups) after the learning process is almost the same too.
Besides, as shown in table 4, there is no significant difference
between the motivation post-questionnaires mean of both
control and experimental groups, since the obtained p value is
equal to 0.6 and greater than 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis is
not rejected and the designed Facebook learning tool did not
have a significant impact on the learners’ motivation level
compared to the traditional method. In fact, it is seen that the
learners in both groups were already highly motivated before
even the start of the learning process (the motivation scores’
mean of both groups, as shown in table 3, are around 5). This
can be explained with the “game development” course is a
newly added course to the curriculum and learners may
considered it something interesting and were willing to
discover it. Consequently, they were very motivated before
even the learning process.
C. Satisfaction
Prior to conducting further analyzes, it is important to
evaluate the reliability of the satisfaction questionnaire’s
measurements. Thus, the Cronbach’s alpha to measure the
internal consistency was calculated for each variable
(presented in the satisfaction questionnaire). As shown in table
5, the Cronbach's alpha values of the three variables (security,
usefulness and intention to use) within the satisfaction
questionnaire are greater than 0.7, hence the questionnaire is
reliable.
TABLE V. CRONBACH'S ALPHA RESULTS OF THE SATISFACTION TEST
Variables Inter-items Cronbach's alpha
security 4 0.91
Usefulness 3 0.88
Intention to use 3 0.78
Furthermore, median and mean of the learners’ answers to
the satisfaction questionnaire are calculated. In general, a
mean and median near 1 indicate that the learners are satisfied
with the developed Facebook learning tool. However, a mean
and median near 5 indicate that they are dissatisfied with this
learning tool. Table 6 presents the obtained results.
TABLE VI. MEAN AND MEDIAN REUSLTS OF THE SATISFACTION TEST
Std.
Variables Mean Median
Deviation
security 2.5 2.25 1.04
Usefulness 2.4 2 1.14
0.6
Intention to use 2.5 1 1.18
As shown in table 6, all values of the mean and median
are around 2 and completely far from 5, thus, the learners were
very satisfied with the designed Facebook learning tool. In
particular, they felt safe while learning. Besides, they found
the various used learning features and functionalities within
the designed Facebook learning tool useful. Consequently, the
learners were willing to use this tool again to learn.
D. Opinion
The learners’ opinions were collected via short and
unstructured interviews. In these interviews, learners talked
freely about their opinions regarding the learning
functionalities, applied strategies, etc. These opinions were
saved and filtered by removing the ones which did not help in
evaluating the Facebook learning tool. Furthermore, similar
opinions were grouped together. Table 7 lists some of the
grouped learners’ opinions collected during the interview.
TABLE VII. GROUPED OPINIONS OF LEARNERS
Learners Opinions
Learning game development course using this
Learner1 Facebook learning tool is very interesting and
different from the classic learning methods.
Learner2 The Facebook learning tool made me motivated and I
wish that all universities use it during their courses.
Learner3
The facebook learning tool made us competitive by
trying to get as many “likes” as possible from the
teacher, to have the highest score.
The instant answers (as comments) from the teacher
within the Facebook learning tool created a
Learner4
constructive discussion where we exchangeed ideas
regarding game development course.
As shown in table 7, the learners were really interested in
learning the “game development” course using the new
designed Facebook learning tool. Besides, some of them
wished that universities starts using Facebook as a tool to
deliver all courses. Furthermore, the used various features and
functionalities within Facebook group by the teacher (see
section 3), such as gamifying the learning environment using
emoticons or using the comments functionality, made learners
motivated, competitive and willing to learn more about game
development. These findings provide evidence that the
designed Facebook learning tool created an interactive, fun
513
and useful environment where learners were highly engaged to
learn game development. To conclude, the learners’ opinions
were very motivating to further try this Facebook learning
course with other courses in the future.
VI. CONCLUSION
This study provides a look at the impact of Facebook as a
learning tool on the learners’ level of knowledge and
motivation in classrooms. In particular, it gives a look how
Facebook as a learning tool can be designed by teachers to
enhance the learning process.
Despite the solid ground that this study gives regarding the
way of using Facebook as a learning tool, it has some
limitations. For instance, the number of participants was small,
thus further experiments are needed with more participants
from different universities around the world. Also, this study
did not investigate the impact of Facebook on other important
variables, such as cognitive load.
Future work focuses on overcoming the above mentioned
limitations. It also focuses on providing a personalized
Facebook learning experience to learners according to their
characteristics. For instance, various recent studies highlighted
the importance of considering the learner’s personality in
computer based learning [24, 25]. Despite the importance of
learning personalization in enhancing the learning outcomes,
all learning experiences using Facebook fall under the “one
size fits all” category. Furthermore, while many studies
highlighted the importance of educational games as learning
tools [26, 27], little is known about the impact of integrating
educational games in social networks, including Facebook, on
the learning outcomes. Therefore, future directions focus also
on designing Facebook educational games and investigating
their impacts.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Oradini, & G. Saunders, “The use of social networking by students
and staff in higher education.” In iLearning Forum, 2008, pp. 4-5.
[2] C. Dalsgaard, “Social software: E-learning beyond learning management
systems.” European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2006
9(2).
[3] Zephoria, “The Top 20 Valuable Facebook Statistics – Updated May
2017” Accessed 9 Mai 2017 from https://zephoria.com/top-15-valuable-
facebook-statistics/, 2017.
[4] P. A. Kirschner, & A. C. Karpinski, “Facebook and academic
performance.” Computers in human behavior, 26(6), 2010, pp. 1237-
1245.
[5] M. D. Roblyer, M. McDaniel, M. Webb, J. Herman, & J. V. Witty,
“Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college
faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites.” The
Internet and higher education, 13(3), 2010, pp. 134-140.
[6] S. D. Smith, & J. B. Caruso, “The ECAR study of undergraduate
students and information technology.” Colorado: Educause.
[7] N. E. Hurt, G. S. Moss, C. L. Bradley, L. R. Larson, M. Lovelace, L. B.
Prevost, ... & M. S. Camus, “The ‘Facebook'effect: college students'
perceptions of online discussions in the age of social networking.”
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2),
10, 2012.
[8] C. Madge, J. Meek, J. Wellens, & T. Hooley, “Facebook, social
integration and informal learning at university:‘It is more for socialising
and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’.”
Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 2009, pp. 141-155.
514
[9] J. D. Ophus, & J. T. Abbitt, “Exploring the potential and perceptions of
social networking systems in university courses.” Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 639, 2009.
[10] L. Z. Wise, J. Skues, & B. Williams, “Facebook in higher education
promotes social but not academic engagement. Changing demands,
changing directions.” Proceedings ascilite Hobart, 2011, pp. 1332-1342.
[11] R. A. Sánchez, V. Cortijo, & U. Javed, “Students' perceptions of
Facebook for academic purposes.” Computers & Education, 70, 2014,
pp. 138-149.
[12] M. Camus, N. E. Hurt, L. R. Larson, & L. Prevost, “Facebook as an
Online Teaching Tool: Effects on Student Participation, Learning, and
Overall Course Performance.” College Teaching, 64(2), 2016. Pp. 84-
94.
[13] N. B. Ellison, “Social network sites: Definition, history, and
scholarship.” Journal of ComputerǦMediated Communication, 13(1),
2007, pp. 210-230.
[14] C. Fernàndez, & E. P. Gil-Rodríguez, “Facebook as a collaborative
platform in higher education: The case study of the universitat oberta de
Catalunya.” In Technology-Enhanced Systems and Tools for
Collaborative Learning Scaffolding Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011,
pp. 27-46.
[15] M. Kayri, & O. Cakir, “An applied study on educational use of
Facebook as a web 2.0 tool: The sample lesson of computer networks
and communication.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1009.0402, 2010.
[16] S. Visagie, & C. de Villiers, “The consideration of Facebook as an
academic tool by ICT lecturers across five countries.” In South African
Computer Lecturers Association (SACLA) Conference, 2010.
[17] C. Lampe, N. B. Ellison, & C. Steinfield, “Changes in use and
perception of Facebook.” In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference
on Computer supported cooperative work, 2008, pp. 721-730.
[18] R. Junco, “The relationship between frequency of Facebook use,
participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement.”
Computers & Education, 58(1), 2012, pp. 162-171.
[19] S. Manca, & M. Ranieri, “Is it a tool suitable for learning? A critical
review of the literature on Facebook as a technologyǦenhanced learning
environment.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 2013, pp.
487-504.
[20] Y. Yang, Q. Wang, H. L. Woo, & C. L. Quek, “Using Facebook for
teaching and learning: a review of the literature.” International Journal
of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 21(1),
2011, pp. 72-86.
[21] C. Irwin, L. Ball, B. Desbrow, & M. Leveritt, “Students' perceptions of
using Facebook as an interactive learning resource at university.”
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7), 2012.
[22] A. D. Ritzhaupt, “Creating a game development course with limited
resources: An evaluation study.” ACM Transactions on Computing
Education (TOCE), 9(1), 3, 2009.
[23] C. H. Yu, “An introduction to computing and interpreting Cronbach
Coefficient Alpha in SAS.” In Proceedings of 26th SAS User Group
International Conference, 2001, pp. 22-25.
[24] A. Tlili, F. Essalmi, M. Jemni, Kinshuk, & N. S. Chen, “Role of
personality in computer based learning.” Computers in Human
Behavior, 64, 2016, pp. 805-813.
[25] F. Essalmi, A. Tlili, L. J. B. Ayed, & M. Jemni “Toward Modeling the
Learner's Personality Using Educational Games.” International Journal
of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), 15(4), 2017, pp. 21-38.
[26] M. A. Khenissi, F. Essalmi, & M. Jemni “Comparison between serious
games and learning version of existing games.” Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2015, pp. 487-494.
[27] A. Tlili, F. Essalmi, M. Jemni “A mobile educational game for teaching
computer architecture.” In IEEE 15th International Conference on
Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2015, pp. 161-163.