Towards An Understanding of Social Media Use in The Classroom: A Literature Review

Technology, Pedagogy and Education
ISSN: 1475-939X (Print) 1747-5139 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtpe20
Towards an understanding of social media use in

the classroom: a literature review
Antoine Van Den Beemt, Marieke Thurlings & Myrthe Willems
To cite this article: Antoine Van Den Beemt, Marieke Thurlings & Myrthe Willems (2019): Towards
an understanding of social media use in the classroom: a literature review, Technology, Pedagogy
and Education, DOI: 10.1080/1475939X.2019.1695657
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1695657
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
Published online: 28 Nov 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 405
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtpe20
TECHNOLOGY, PEDAGOGY AND EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1695657
Towards an understanding of social media use in the classroom: a

literature review
Antoine Van Den Beemt , Marieke Thurlings and Myrthe Willems
Eindhoven School of Education, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The importance of social media for today’s youth often elicits teachers to Received 27 November 2017
explore educational use of these media. However, many teachers appear Accepted 3 May 2019
to struggle with the tension between possible pedagogical use and the KEYWORDS
tempting distraction of this technology. The current literature review aims Framework synthesis;
to present a synthesis of conditions and outcomes relevant for a well- primary; secondary; higher
considered, evidence-based use of social media, and teacher professional education; social media
development. A conceptual model consisting of intended curriculum
(school level), implemented curriculum (teacher level) and attained curri-
culum (student level) guided the research questions. The review included
271 articles, which were analysed with framework synthesis. Ambiguous
results and poor quality of studies often hindered clear statements about
conditions and outcomes regarding social media in the classroom.
Nonetheless, reported factors include school culture, attitude towards
social media, support, teacher professional development, learning goals
and a clear position in the curriculum. Considerations and advice for
educational practice were formulated.
1. Introduction
The importance of social media for today’s youth often elicits teachers to explore the added value of
educational use of these media (e.g. Bate, 2010). However, many teachers experience social media in
classrooms as disturbing (Selwyn, 2010). Teachers appear to struggle with the tension between
possible pedagogical use and the tempting distraction of this technology (Rosen, Carrier, & Cheever,
2013). Often a lack of technical pedagogical content knowledge to enrich teaching with social media
intensifies this tension (Van Acker, Van Buuren, Kreijns, & Vermeulen, 2011).
Defining social media is argued to be elusive (Tess, 2013). However, the concept of social media
can be summarised as encompassing Internet applications that support the creation and exchange
of user-generated content, that require a certain degree of self-disclosure and that allow for a certain
level of social presence (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Carr and Hayes (2015), in an effort to present
a more precise and future-proof definition, summarised social media as:
Social media are Internet-based channels that allow users to opportunistically interact and selectively self-
present, either in real-time or asynchronously, with both broad and narrow audiences who derive value from
user-generated content and the perception of interaction with others. (Carr & Hayes, 2015, p. 50)
Existing literature reviews on social media and education emphasise the pedagogical use of specific
applications and channels, such as wikis (Trocky & Buckley, 2016), Twitter (Aydin, 2014; Forgie et al.,
2013) or Facebook (Yang, Wang, Woo, & Quek, 2011), and examine (improvement of) learning results.
CONTACT Antoine van den Beemt a.a.j.v.d.beemt@tue.nl Eindhoven School of Education, Eindhoven University of
Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
2 A. VAN DEN BEEMT ET AL.
Although educational software, such as learning management systems, increasingly includes social
media-like functionalities, it often appears to limit aspects like self-presenting and types of
audiences.
Earlier reviews distinguished the researchers’ wish for a successful use of social media in class-
rooms and the often weak empirical evidence for this success (e.g. Tess, 2013). Some authors point
out that social media were never developed for pedagogical uses (Bruneel, De Wit, Verhoeven, &
Eelen, 2013; Kuiper, Volman, & Terwel, 2005), while others take this as a starting point for research
(Taylor, King, & Nelson, 2012). These reviews also showed that the evidence for increasing learning
results often consists of self-reports (Hew & Cheung, 2013). To our knowledge, only one large existing
review on 951 articles discussed multiple aspects of the complex whole of factors and effects (CASE,
2011). However, this review was limited to descriptions of these factors, instead of offering explain-
ing relations. One broader perspective meta-analysis of 40 years of research on ICT and learning
showed a small, yet significant, increase in learning results caused by ICT use in classrooms (Tamim,
Bernard, Borokhovski, Abrami, & Schmid, 2011).
Both empirical studies and literature reviews that analyse pedagogical use of Internet applica-
tions, such as social media, mainly focus on partial aspects. For instance, the relation between
Internet applications and reading skills (Takacs, Swart, & Bus, 2015), between Internet applications
and information literacy (Mills, 2010), or pedagogical approaches that suit Web 2.0 in secondary or
higher education (Hew & Cheung, 2013).
The focus on partial aspects, rather than an integrated view of social media in education, prohibits
understanding of what is known as the hidden curriculum: societal, institutional or lecturers’ values
that are transmitted unconsciously to students (Cotton, Winter, & Bailey, 2013). Edwards (2015)
explained how software, or rather computer code, is never objective, and reinforces existing
preferences of, for instance, teachers.
Taken together, many of these reviews reported barriers to using social media in class (e.g.
Henderson, Snyder, & Beale, 2013; Minocha, 2009), such as the fear of losing control over students
(Tess, 2013), lack of ICT skills (Minocha, 2009), and possible distractions of social media (Piotrowski,
2015). In contrast to these barriers, research also reports affordances, such as engagement and
student motivation. Reviews often also reported uncertainty about the effectiveness of social media
for improving learning results. Nonetheless, social media are imputed with great potential for
improving education.
1.1 Conceptual framework and research questions

For our analysis, we take the integrated perspective of three levels of curriculum (Van den Akker,
2003): (a) the intended curriculum – the formal ideal image; (b) the implemented curriculum – the
operationalised version; and (c) the attained curriculum – the curriculum as experienced by learners.
Using this perspective allows us to explore hypotheses around conditions and outcomes in sub-
areas, at the same time considering the complexity of everyday educational practice.
Each curriculum level helps to point out direct and indirect factors. For instance, the intended
curriculum especially plays out at the school level, where social media, like any other learning
materials, are (supposed to be) part of the educational vision and the policy on learning materials
(cf. Kirschner & Wopereis, 2003). Conditions in the implemented curriculum can be learning goals,
pedagogy, and existing knowledge, skills and values of teachers (Van Veen, Zwart, & Meirink, 2012).
In the attained curriculum, student characteristics play a role, such as preferences for types of
interactive media (Van den Beemt, Akkerman, & Simons, 2010), and knowledge, values, age and
gender (Kuiper et al., 2005).
Indirect factors play a role on all curriculum levels, and are, for instance, distraction in class
(Grosseck & Holotescu, 2008), changes in the perception of time (Duncheon & Tierney, 2013) and
developing learning skills, such as deep learning, influenced by a permanent disturbance of atten-
tion (Kuiper et al., 2005).
TECHNOLOGY, PEDAGOGY AND EDUCATION 3
Figure 1. Conceptual model including three levels of curriculum and related factors. Interpersonal teacher–student relation was
added as a result of the review.
To do justice to the complex situation of factors and outcomes related to social media in
classrooms, this literature review intends to extend existing research using the perspective of the
three curriculum levels. Its intended audience is researchers and teachers. Our purpose is to enable
teachers to make a well-considered and evidence-based choice for the pedagogical use of social
media in their classrooms, while taking into account all three levels of the curriculum. In the process,
we focus on clarifying relevant factors, the relations between these factors and subsequent effects
on (the learning of) students, which taken together form a framework for our investigation (Figure 1).
The research questions central to this review are:
(1) Which goals and considerations are relevant for teachers in their choice to apply social media
in classrooms? (Intended curriculum)
(2) How and in what context do teachers use social media in their teaching practice?
(Implemented curriculum)
(3) What evidence (theoretical and/or empirical) can be found to show whether the intended
outcomes are realised? (Attained curriculum)
(4) What is the relation between factors and outcomes of social media in class?
2. Method
To answer our research questions, the pre-defined procedure called framework synthesis (Brunton,
Oliver, & Thomas, 2015; Oliver et al., 2004) was followed. Findings from individual studies are placed
into a framework which is based on existing and former studies (Brunton et al., 2015; Oliver et al.,
2004), which is then used to describe and interpret findings. In the current review, the conceptual
framework (see Figure 1) served as this framework. Moreover, framework synthesis supports to
understand the complexity of a given phenomenon, because it structures individual studies’ find-
ings, and examines how these are related in the context of that phenomenon (Brunton et al., 2015).
Framework synthesis consists of six concessive stages (Brunton et al., 2015). First, research
questions are posed, after which studies are searched (stage 2) and selected using several in- and/
or exclusion criteria (stage 3). Next, data is extracted from the selected studies into the framework.
The fifth stage consists of synthesising the individual studies’ findings. The content of each part of
the framework is analysed by applying a thematic approach. Finally, these findings are interpreted.
2.1 Searching, screening and selecting studies

To search, screen and select studies, the databases Scopus and Web of Science were consulted. The
following keywords guided the search: (‘social media’ OR ‘social networking sites’ OR ‘social network-
ing software’) AND (education OR teacher OR student OR school). The query included peer-reviewed
articles published between January 2005 and November 2016. Furthermore, editions of relevant
journals (i.e. Computers & Education, Computers in Human Behavior, Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning and Learning, Media & Technology) were consulted, as well as the reference lists of found
articles (‘snowballing’; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006). This resulted in 4727 articles from Scopus, and in
2590 articles from Web of Science. After deleting duplicates, 6210 articles remained. Sixty-nine
articles were included from specialised journals on learning with ICT. Most of these (38 articles)
were published in Computers & Education.
Titles and abstracts of the complete set of articles were scanned based on the following inclusion
criteria: (a) the investigated social media include Internet-based channels that allow users to
opportunistically interact and selectively self-present, either in real time or asynchronously, with
both broad and narrow audiences who derive value from user-generated content and the percep-
tion of interaction with others (Carr & Hayes, 2015); (b) the study focused on at least one of the three
levels of curriculum (Van den Akker, 2003); (c) the study was performed in primary, secondary and/or
higher education; and (d) the study investigated at least one of the factors and/or effects of social
media in education. This stage resulted in 2001 articles. Next, the full text scan resulted in 1602 more
articles being labelled as off-topic, because they did not fit the inclusion criteria, despite promising
titles and abstracts.
2.2 Data extraction

In the fourth stage of the literature review, findings from the individual studies were extracted into
a results matrix (i.e. an Excel file) that was based on a codebook that linked to the conceptual
framework (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006). Each row of this matrix represented an individual study. The
columns consisted of information about the method, such as country of origin, number of partici-
pants and data collection strategies. The codes, describing the conditions and outcomes of the
conceptual framework, were added to the columns of the matrix. Findings from each individual
study that discussed specific conditions and outcomes were extracted to the respective cells. During
this stage, another 128 articles were excluded, because they were not empirical, appeared to be off-
topic, or full texts were not available, even after contacting the authors. This resulted in 271 articles
to be included in this review (see Figure 2).
2.3 Synthesising and interpreting findings of included studies

During the fifth and sixth stages, results from the studies were continuously compared with factors
in the conceptual model. To increase the reliability of this literature review, the authors collabo-
rated closely in the process. Points of debate and uncertainty were discussed until consensus was
reached. Results were brought together that focused on shared conditions or outcomes. This
resulted in enrichment of the model with relations between conditions and outcomes of the
possible educational use of social media. The most important addition to the model concerns the
variable ‘interpersonal relation’ between teachers and students, which emerged from many
studies.
Database selection Scopus Web of Science

n = 4727 n = 2590
Deduplication Duplicates = 1076
n =6210
Title and abstract scan Off-topic = 4209
n = 2001
Full text scan Off-topic = 1602
n = 399
Off-topic = 128
Full text reading
n = 271
Figure 2. Flowchart of the selection process.
3. Findings
This section first discusses an overview of included studies, followed by results on the three levels of
the intended curriculum (school), the implemented curriculum (teacher) and the attained curriculum
(student). References included in this section serve as illustrative examples of found results.
3.1 Overview of included studies

Descriptives of the included studies (see Table 1) show, amongst others, that a large number of
studies included empirical results about students, followed by studies that made statements about
teachers. Only a few studies discussed school level. Most studies were performed in higher education.
The small number of studies in primary and secondary education is not surprising; much educational
research takes place in higher education, and many social media applications apply an age limit.
Furthermore, social media are often textual, which suggests that a good command of language is
needed (Van den Beemt et al., 2010).
The number of respondents ranged in the studies from three to more than a thousand, with 6000
respondents in an Italian study as the upper limit. However, a considerable number of studies were
not explicit about respondents or demographics. Most studies showed equal gender divisions
among participants, apart from domains such as medical education or social sciences, which were
female dominated. This is in line with studies without an educational focus that show equal gender
divisions in social media use (e.g. Gray, 2018). Studies with larger respondent numbers mostly
transcended single domains or disciplines. Included single domain studies showed a slight over-
representation of medical education. Most studies applied surveys and used a quantitative approach
(112 studies) or a mixed-method approach (84 studies). Qualitative approaches, for example
Table 1. Descriptive results of included articles (271 studies).

Country
USA 45
Asia (e.g. China, Taiwan, Malaysia) 39
UK 19
Australia 13
Turkey 11
Canada 5
Other countries, groups of countries 74
No location reported 65
Sector
Primary education 2
Primary and secondary education 11
Secondary education 31
Higher education 218
Undecided 9
Design
Quantitative 112
Qualitative 65
Mixed methods 84
Other (case description or literature review) 10
Journal
Educational use of ICT 171
General education 72
Other 28
School Total: 8
Facilitation 16
Image 7
Policy on curriculum materials 3
Educational vision 2
Teacher Total: 167
Professional development 17
Experiences, skills, values 43
Learning goals 2
Pedagogical activities 105
Student Total: 251*
Motivation 58
Learning outcomes 85
Experiences, skills, values 108
Interpersonal relation teacher–student 24
*The numbers do not add up because some studies discussed
multiple aspects.
interviews, were pursued in 65 studies. Two articles described a series of lessons, without further
analyses. The eight remaining articles contained reviews of empirical studies.
Most of the articles were designed as a single case study (Borko, 2004), in which social media were
applied as part of an educational programme in a specific educational context. Often these studies
first presented a large claim, such as ‘learning results will increase when one uses social media’. The
results of these studies subsequently showed more nuance, with strikingly often little statistical
significance of the results. The tone of voice of discussion and conclusion sections sometimes
betrayed the attitude of the researcher regarding social media.
Perception research was conducted in a large part of the studies. Researchers asked students
about their experienced outcomes on learning and motivation of a tool. In addition to perception
research, many articles present effect studies that only examined partial aspects of educational use
of social media. For instance, the relation between social media and diverse effects such as academic
achievement (e.g. Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010), motivation (e.g. Junco, Heiberger, & Loken, 2011),
collaboration (e.g. Purser, Towndrow, & Aranguiz, 2013) and the development of information literacy
(e.g. Ahn, 2013). Studies also connected informal learning to social media (e.g. Bartlett-Bragg, 2006)
and examined ways in which teachers use these media in class (Bate, 2010).
3.2 School
3.2.1 Facilitation and support of processes
Facilitation and support entailed two aspects: (1) facilitating the use of social media for learning, for
instance with infrastructure or possibilities for professional development, and (2) using social media,
for instance to support communities of practice. The included studies emphasised facilitation of
infrastructure or professional development. Often this included attention to teachers’ responses and
attitudes, for instance by showing that teachers were less inclined to use social media when
facilitation did not meet their expectations. On the school level, there is still work to be done to
take away fears among teachers about social media as pedagogical tool (Goktalay, 2013). Teachers
reported fear of insufficient support, and of insufficient knowledge to find things out by themselves.
These fears are affected by experience with social media (see also subsection '3.3 Teacher'), thus
showing a relation between facilitation (policy on school level) and attitude (teacher).
Additionally, the included studies most often reported barriers on the school level. For instance,
organisational limitations (‘the principal would not allow it’; Mawdsley, 2015; Minocha, 2009), net-
work restrictions (‘we should avoid network overload’), lack of money to invest in technical infra-
structure, lack of knowledge among management and lack of access to technology. These barriers
are related to school leaders’ anxiety about using social media (Cox & McLeod, 2014a). School leaders
thought that social media require extra time or they thought technical problems would hinder them
from being online. On the other hand, reasons that made school management more inclined to allow
for social media use were, for instance, increased transparency in decision-making processes and
budgets, positive influence on personal and professional development of school leaders, and an
extra channel for management information (Cox & McLeod, 2014a).
Regarding the second aspect of facilitation, social media were used in two studies to support
teachers. In one study, school leaders used Twitter to organise a community of practice and to
communicate policy (Sauers & Richardson, 2015). The other study used Facebook to support teachers
in implementing a new learning approach (Shraim, 2014).
3.2.2 Image
One reported benefit of using social media to improve the image of schools and universities is that
a larger audience can be reached, although this did not result in more student engagement
(Bélanger, Bali, & Longden, 2014). Furthermore, students reported thinking more positively about
teachers and their university when social media were used in education (Neier & Zayer, 2015).
Both school leaders (Cox & McLeod, 2014a) and school principals (Cox & McLeod, 2014b) reported
that social media enabled more rapid and frequent interaction with stakeholders, which resulted in
better mutual relations. School principals reported that social media allowed them to express and
share their visions better (Cox & McLeod, 2014b), and school leaders argued that they could no
longer work without these media in contemporary times (Cox & McLeod, 2014a). In particular,
Facebook and Twitter were reported as being the most popular tools (Bélanger et al., 2014).
Reported disadvantages were the possible negative publicity, for instance when disturbing
events about the school appeared on social media (Cox & McLeod, 2014a), and the obligational
character: once you start communicating through social media, people expect you to continue (Cox
& McLeod, 2014a).
3.2.3 Educational vision and policy on curriculum materials

Only two studies discussed educational vision and policy on curriculum materials. Cox and McLeod
(2014a) showed that publicly sharing and communicating the school’s vision was perceived as
a benefit. Preston et al. (2015) were more critical: they concluded that for education to renew in
the direction of digital teaching, school boards should acknowledge and recognise this goal, and
incorporate it in plans for improvement. Social media can help to share this goal and vision with
stakeholders (cf. Cox & McLeod, 2014a).
3.3 Teacher
Several studies discussed teacher professional development and social media. One group of studies
discussed how professional development plays a role for using social media. A second group of
studies investigated how teachers could use social media in professional development trajectories.
3.3.1 Professional development for using social media

Implementing social media implies new teacher roles and new approaches to teaching and learning
(Hoyos, 2014). Furthermore, Buus (2012) argued for the need for teachers’ awareness of possibilities
and technical challenges. To fulfil these roles, approaches and awareness, training and re-training of
teachers are required (Gan, Menkhoff, & Smith, 2015), including technophobic teachers. In contrast
to Gan et al. (2015), Buus (2012) suggested scaffolding learning processes. Scaffolding strategies
could include peer mentoring and experts demonstrating technical aspects (Cochrane & Narayan,
2012). Teachers who took part in such a trajectory along the way obtained an early adopter role,
using similar strategies to help their colleagues. Whatever its form, teacher professional develop-
ment was shown to be a significant predictor of the integration of Web 2.0 in schools (Pan & Franklin,
2011). However, when applying the plan in practice, lack of time on the teacher side could be
a barrier (Preston et al., 2015).
3.3.2 Professional development by means of social media

Studies that applied social media for teacher professional development all concluded that social
media promoted teacher professional development (Ostashewski, Moisey, & Reid, 2011; Visser,
Calvert Evering, & Barrett, 2014). In particular, the possibility to reflect and respond instantaneously
was valued (Yuksel, 2013). The popularity of websites such as Facebook is reported to be increasing
among teachers because these websites can be used to gain knowledge, receive feedback and
support, while simultaneously sharing teachers’ knowledge and expertise (Trust, 2012).
3.3.3 Experiences, skills and values

Many teachers would like to use social media (Kukulska-Hulme, 2012; Sobaih, Moustafa,
Ghandforoush, & Khan, 2016). Some studies discussed earlier experiences (Goktalay, 2013) and
concluded that, for instance, earlier experiences with blended learning correlate positively with
the educational use of social media (Manca & Ranieri, 2016). Other studies reported that inexper-
ienced teachers in higher education are more worried about the effects of social media on their
person, while more experienced teachers are especially worried about the impact of social media on
their students (Goktalay, 2013). When teachers experienced social media creating a tension between
private use and professional responsibility, they tried to find a middle ground with their professional
culture on the one hand, and their own values and ideals on the other (Veletsianos & Kimmons,
2013).
From the included studies, a long list of experienced barriers can be derived. In addition to lack of
experience (Goktalay, 2013) and of knowledge about social media (Dickie & Meier, 2015; Sobaih et al.,
2016), teachers also did not know how to integrate social media in existing online learning environ-
ments (Kamalodeen & Jameson-Charles, 2016; Minocha, 2009; Sobaih et al., 2016). Reported practical
problems are lack of infrastructure (Kamalodeen & Jameson-Charles, 2016), access (Balakrishnan,
2014; Veira, Leacock, & Warrican, 2014) and time (Kukulska-Hulme, 2012; Margaryan, Littlejohn, &
Vojt, 2011; Sobaih et al., 2016). Teachers also worried about privacy and security (Dickie & Meier,
2015), cyberbullying (Minocha, 2009) and ethics (Sobaih et al., 2016).
Furthermore, teachers were afraid to lose control in class (Minocha, 2009; Sobaih et al., 2016).
They also thought that social media belong to students and that they should not interfere (Dickie &
Meier, 2015). Sometimes the attitude of students was experienced as problematic (Goktalay, 2013),
or teachers were afraid that students who are less technically proficient would remain behind
(Minocha, 2009). It was also argued that social media are better suited for topics such as languages
(Margaryan et al., 2011). Finally, motivation (Kamalodeen & Jameson-Charles, 2016) and the will-
ingness to put effort into learning how to use social media in class were reported (Kukulska-Hulme,
2012), just like resistance to change (Margaryan et al., 2011). Veletsianos, Kimmons, and French
(2013) argued that resistance and fear are not so much barriers as an expression of high expectations
about the contribution of social media to education.
The demographical factors of age and experience were reported to correlate negatively with
attitude towards social media (Manca & Ranieri, 2016; Minocha, 2009). Gender differences were not
found for the actual use of social media (Manca & Ranieri, 2016). One study found that male teachers,
with a slight difference, reported more often a necessary distinction between private and profes-
sional life (Prescott, 2014).
Some teachers distinguished between reasons for using specific tools (Manca & Ranieri, 2016). For
instance, Facebook and Twitter were used to motivate students, and blogs and wikis to improve
education. Social media was reported as a way to stay in touch with other teachers (Dermentzi,
Papagiannidis, Toro, & Yannopoulou, 2016) or to remain up to date with developments in their field
(Tenopir, Volentine, & King, 2013; Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2013). Teachers with a teacher-guided
style thought that what happens on Facebook should stay there (Prescott, 2014), which implies
a distinction between private and professional exchanges. Teachers with a more student-oriented
style reported that they should teach students how to deal with online discussions and inappropriate
online behaviour (Prescott, 2014).
A handful of studies asked students about their teachers’ skills and knowledge (e.g. Gikas & Grant,
2013; Jones, Blackey, Fitzgibbon, & Chew, 2010; Margaryan et al., 2011). In sum, students thought
that teachers have insufficient social media skills and knowledge, and that they do not know how to
use these media, and that, frustratingly, they do not even try to start with social media. Teachers, in
the eyes of students, do not want mobile devices in class. Furthermore, students reported that
humour and personal things shared by teachers on Facebook positively affect students’ engagement
with the specific teacher’s course (Imlawi, Gregg, & Karimi, 2015).
3.3.4 Learning goals

Two studies discussed learning goals (Bicen & Uzunboylu, 2013; Dougherty & Andercheck, 2014).
These studies showed that teachers and students reported the importance of formulating and
communicating learning goals related to the use of social media.
3.3.5 Pedagogical activities

Several social media were used as learning tools in the included articles. Facebook was the most
often investigated (e.g. Kabilan, 2016; O’Bannon, Beard, & Britt, 2013; Safuan & Soh, 2013;
Vikneswaran & Krish, 2015). Twitter (e.g. Lin, Hoffman, & Borengasser, 2013; Prestridge, 2014; Yakin
& Tinmaz, 2013) and blogs (e.g. Greenhow, Gibbins, & Menzer, 2015; Kiili, Multisilta, Suominen, &
Ketamo, 2010) were less often investigated. In addition, YouTube, tools developed for specific
purposes and discussion forums (e.g. Abdullah, Yaacob, & Rahim, 2013; Mbati, 2013) were investi-
gated as curriculum materials. In general, these studies concluded that the tool was an interesting
addition; however, that its use should not stand in the way of instruction (e.g. Yakin & Tinmaz, 2013).
The included studies rarely reported social media as part of domain-specific pedagogies.
Studies asked students how they perceived specific applications as learning tools. Respondents
reported social media as user-friendly, especially compared with specific learning management
systems such as Moodle (Bahner et al., 2012; Deng & Tavares, 2013). Social media were reported as
interactive (Jong, Lai, Hsia, Lin, & Liao, 2014; Loving & Ochoa, 2011) and easy to use for communica-
tion and discussion (Manasijević, Živković, Arsić, & Milošević, 2016; O’Bannon et al., 2013), and for
sharing knowledge and information (Lin et al., 2013; Loving & Ochoa, 2011).
One advantage reported in some studies was the combination of informal and formal learning
(McCarthy, 2010). This connects to the affordance of social media to collaborate and support (Chen &
Bryer, 2012; Jong et al., 2014; Safuan & Soh, 2013), and to get help from the teacher (Prestridge,
2014). In other studies, there was reference to community building (Andersson & Räisänen, 2014;
Kabilan, 2016; Kaufer, Gunawardena, Tan, & Cheek, 2011), with the aim of collaboratively practising
specific skills in authentic situations (Safuan & Soh, 2013; Whittaker, Howarth, & Lymn, 2014). This, in
turn, prepares students for the future and enables them to develop knowledge (Yakin & Tinmaz,
2013) and (professional) identity (Kabilan, 2016; Kaufer et al., 2011; Rinaldo, Laverie, & Tapp, 2011).
These benefits resemble social constructivist approaches to learning (Mbati, 2013), and Facebook
was especially valued because it enables teachers to apply such social constructivist approaches
(Gomez & Lee, 2015). The final benefit is increased transparency of assessment procedures through
using social media (Kiili et al., 2010; O’Bannon et al., 2013; Shih, 2011). However, this benefit was
refuted by Loving and Ochoa (2011), who argued that Facebook can never compete with a good
learning management system when it comes to assessment.
Teachers’ interference in online discussions made students feel less free to express their thoughts
and opinions (An, Shin, & Lim, 2009). However, evidence is ambiguous because Prestridge (2014)
showed that teachers’ input promoted learning and Lin et al. (2013) showed that when teachers did
not interfere at all, collaboration between students did not take place.
Finally, it should be emphasised that most of these studies presented students’ self-reports.
Moreover, two studies nuanced the pedagogical use of social media and proposed conditions
(Chen & Bryer, 2012; Veletsianos et al., 2013). Both argued that social media are no panacea. Goals
and application in classrooms should be appropriately considered and preceded by clearly defined
goals (cf. Gomez & Lee, 2015).
3.4 Students
3.4.1 Motivation
Many studies examined the effect on motivation of educational uses of social media. A large number of
these studies found that social media, especially Facebook and Twitter, increased students’ motivation
and engagement (e.g. Cole, Brynn Hibbert, & Kehoe, 2013; Evans, 2013; Rinaldo et al., 2011; Wang,
2013). The more students used Facebook, the more they felt part of their class (Dougherty &
Andercheck, 2014). Furthermore, the number of tweets sent was found to correlate positively with
student engagement (Evans, 2013; cf. Menkhoff, Chay, Bengtsson, Woodard, & Gan, 2015).
In contrast, other studies reported no increase in student motivation (Selwyn, 2009; Welch &
Bonnan-White, 2012), or even a decrease (Dyson, Vickers, Turtle, Cowan, & Tassone, 2015; Flanigan &
Babchuk, 2015). Welch and Bonnan-White (2012) for instance found that students who did not use
Twitter showed more study engagement compared with students who used Twitter. Other students
showed less positive attitudes towards social media when they reported social media as being
distracting because new messages appeared too fast, which caused feelings of being overwhelmed
and resulted in decreased participation (O’Bannon et al., 2013). Furthermore, students did not appear
to be motivated to use Twitter if it was used only as a source of information (Buzzelli, Holdan, Rota, &
McCarthy, 2016).
3.4.2 Learning results

Learning results were reported to improve by increasing interaction between students (e.g. Ahern,
Feller, & Nagle, 2016; Al-Rahmi, Othman, & Musa, 2014; Lai, 2016) and being active with learning
content (Bicen & Uzunboylu, 2013; Kabilan, 2016; Smith, 2014). However, social media did not
evidently cause this, because it can also be achieved in other ways. Or, as Al-Rahmi et al. (2014)
argued, collaborative learning is a condition to use the advantages of social media in class. Moreover,
Bicen, Ozdamli, and Uzunboylu (2012) showed that blended learning environments lead to better
results compared with just online learning.
Studies with an explicit focus on learning results in relation to social media as a learning tool showed
a diversity of results. Reported positive effects of Facebook and Twitter are for instance increased
student engagement (Junco et al., 2011) and better grades (Clarke & Nelson, 2012; Wang, 2013).
However, in many cases, students (González-Ramírez, Gascó, & Taverner, 2015; Safuan & Soh, 2013) and
teachers (Bicen & Uzunboylu, 2013) thought that learning results improved.
Negative learning results were often related to the distraction of social media and to students’
short attention spans (Gupta & Irwin, 2016; Junco, 2015; Paul, Baker, & Cochran, 2012; Wood et al.,
2012). Several studies that compared education with social media to education without these media
reported no differences in learning results (Callaghan & Bower, 2012; Evans, 2013; West, Moore, &
Barry, 2015). Only West et al. (2015) based this result on actual grades. The other studies’ results are
based on surveys among students, sometimes supplemented with observations and extended
feedback by students.
Some studies took diversity and students’ characteristics into account. Young students spend
more time on Facebook and consequently achieve lower grades compared with older students
(Junco, 2015). Strong self-regulation led to less distraction by social media and resulted in higher
grades (Rouis, Limayem, & Salehi-Sangari, 2011). Several studies nuanced claimed causality of earlier
found relations. For instance, Alwagait, Shahzad, and Alim (2015) and Abu-Shanab and Al-Tarawneh
(2015) proposed a reverse argument: getting lower grades could lead to increased Facebook use.
A noteworthy result is the use of social media, and especially Facebook, for writing lessons and
language courses. Studies with a focus on writing and language showed increased results and
interest among students when using social media as learning tools (Lee, Koo, & Kim, 2016;
Suthiwartnarueput & Wasanasomsithi, 2012; Vikneswaran & Krish, 2015).
3.4.3 Experiences, skills and values

The results of the included studies suggested that experience and values relate to country of origin.
For instances, studies from East Asia (Al-Rahmi et al., 2014; Huang, 2011; Menkhoff et al., 2015) or
Turkey (Baran, 2010; Ekoç, 2014; Uzunboylu, Bicen, & Cavus, 2011) reported more reticence and
ignorance among students. Western studies reported enthusiasm for social media (Dougherty &
Andercheck, 2014; Hill, Thomas, Diaz, & Simm, 2016; Thalluri & Penman, 2015), yet they also reported
worries about privacy and security (Wang, 2013). Furthermore, the studies showed a rapid develop-
ment over time: the earliest papers often showed negative values among students towards social
media, whereas more recent papers often showed evidence of a change in attitude (Pilli, 2015).
Regarding experience, Lowe, D’Alessandro, Winzar, Laffey, and Collier (2013) reported that
students with much social media experience are not necessarily convinced about the benefits of
social media as a learning tool. This connects to the image of social media as a leisure activity
(Balakrishnan, 2014; Donlan, 2014; Prestridge, 2014). When students had experience with computers,
they were more easily convinced of the use of social media in class (Lowe et al., 2013).
Also, skills can influence the attitude and use of social media as learning tools. Students who
possessed skills for applications different to those used in the classroom felt disadvantaged (Evans,
2013). Furthermore, students were more reserved in using discussion forums, for fear of their lack of
knowledge being clear (Veira et al., 2014).
Usually, studies reported positive values (i.e. attitude) towards social media as a learning tool
among students. In studies on Facebook, most students were positive about this application because
it provided more options for personal engagement (Arteaga Sánchez, Cortijo, & Javed, 2014),
communication (Souleles, 2012) and collaboration (Shraim, 2014). Other advantages were flexibility,
no travel time and fitting personal learning strategies (Kohtz, Gowda, Stockert, White, & Kennel,
2012). One study that compared attitude towards social media before and after using Facebook in
the classroom showed that students were less convinced afterwards of Facebook’s effectiveness as
a learning tool (Irwin, Ball, Desbrow, & Leveritt, 2012). Nonetheless, a majority of students stated they
would use Facebook in the future.
A few studies showed that students preferred Facebook over Twitter as a learning tool (Rinaldo
et al., 2011; Welch & Bonnan-White, 2012). Although in general students were not inclined to change
tools, they were more positive about Facebook for learning about grammar and writing
(Suthiwartnarueput & Wasanasomsithi, 2012). Other studies, in turn, showed that students were
reluctant to use any social media tool in class, which directly affected their learning behaviour when
no alternative was provided (Nemetz, Aiken, Cooney, & Pascal, 2012).
3.4.4 Interpersonal student–teacher relations

Our conceptual model did not include teachers’ actions that strengthen their relations with students,
also known as interpersonal student–teacher relations. The data extraction phase, however, showed
several studies explicitly discussing this outcome. For instance, a positive attitude correlated with
student engagement in a course (Imlawi et al., 2015) and more positive interaction with the teacher
(Al-Rahmi et al., 2014). When teachers were able to efficiently shape their role in the chosen social
media tool, this led to a more learning-centred attitude among students, instead of an attitude
focused on communicating (Callaghan & Bower, 2012). This is especially the case when social media
were used for an online community (Evans, 2013). In these situations, students liked to be in touch
with their teacher through applications such as Twitter (Sendurur, Sendurur, & Yilmaz, 2015).
Facebook was in this context evaluated as a significantly faster communication channel compared
with other social media tools (Mueller, Della Peruta, & Del Giudice, 2014).
Again, contradicting results were found. Nkhoma et al. (2015) found a positive relation between
experience with social media and the quality of student–teacher interaction experienced on Facebook.
However, use of Facebook outside negatively influenced this relation: the more a student used
Facebook, the more negatively this student thought about the teacher–student relation. Matzat and
Vrieling (2016) reported no evidence for the correlation between social media use and teacher–student
relations. And finally, Ekoç (2014) and Hershkovitz and Forkosh-Baruch (2013) reported that students
do not consider Facebook to be the place to communicate with teachers.
4. Discussion
The motivation for this review was a lack of clarity in educational practice about social media: is the
distraction that comes with these media a burden for education? Or is it a blessing and could social
media usefully be applied as learning tools? Starting from the levels of curriculum (Van den Akker,
2003), we formulated research questions about the intended, implemented and attained curriculum.
Finally, we formulated a research question about the complete model of factors and effects related
to social media in class. We intended to bring together research on any of the three curriculum levels,
operationalised in aspects on school, teacher and student level (see Figure 1).
The answer to the first research question follows from the goals and considerations of teachers to
use social media in their teaching. Teachers use social media specifically to motivate students and to
improve teaching. The main goals reported for school leaders were improved communication with
the outside world and colleagues. Furthermore, school leaders use social media to promote social
learning and teacher professional development. They do so by mobilising early adopters and by
applying blended learning. This not only concerns improving ICT skills but also strengthening
teacher self-efficacy.
Considerations for using social media can be summarised as: reaching a wider audience, motivat-
ing students and improving transparency in (internal and external) communication, assessment and
evaluation. Another consideration was that students are already familiar with social media. However,
this led to the objection that social media belong in students’ leisure time. One condition at school
level is facilitation of teachers, especially organisational (i.e. time) and technical support.
Furthermore, teachers need support to develop their social media knowledge and skills. They
experience a lack of this support as a barrier. Finally, uncertainty regarding privacy and security,
lack of experience and a negative attitude towards social media or ICT in general are reported
barriers. These results confirm conclusions from earlier review studies (e.g. Henderson et al., 2013;
Minocha, 2009; Tess, 2013). The many barriers reported in the results of our review suggest that
much is to be gained by a systematic and profound elaboration upon the intended curriculum
regarding social media.
The second research question discussed the context and pedagogical use of social media in
classrooms. Facebook, in particular, was used, followed by Twitter and blogs. Teachers perceive their
own role as coach that supports students in their learning. Social media are used for collaborative
learning, for active engagement with the course content and to support metacognitive skills.
However, this last type of support is also perceived as conditional: a high level of self-regulation
among students leads to focused use of social media. This makes social media suitable for social
constructivist learning approaches (Ertmer & Newby, 1993).
Social media are used mainly in regular learning situations, where chosen applications are used as
an addition to or replacement of traditional curriculum materials. The purpose is to improve
communication, share knowledge and learn collaboratively. Also, interpersonal teacher–student
relations can be improved by social media. However, positive results on these aspects strongly
correlate with teachers’ actual behaviour on social media and their attitude towards these media and
ICT in general. This is in line with earlier research about teachers’ attitudes towards innovation
(Thurlings, Evers, & Vermeulen, 2015) and about considerations for ICT use among teachers (Van den
Beemt & Diepstraten, 2016).
The evidence for the outcomes, our third research question, is far from convincing. The results of
studies vary, just like the conclusions drawn from these results. Sometimes the belief of researchers
or the attitude of participating teachers leads to these varying results, which can also be seen as an
instance of the hidden curriculum (Edwards, 2015). Additionally, many studies refrained from being
explicit about the demographics of respondents, which only allowed us to draw less specific
conclusions. Furthermore, weak evidential power originates in perception studies and self-reports
(see for instance also Thurlings & den Brok, 2017), and is therefore ‘anecdotal’ (Hew & Cheung, 2013).
These perceptions and self-reports lead to statements about increasing motivation among students
or about improved learning results. Reported risk factors are for instance distractions caused by
social media and short attention spans among students. The central point of the evidential power is
diversity among students: differences in age, development, preferences for ICT or specific social
media, and in skills (see also Van den Beemt et al., 2010). This diversity is also apparent for teachers.
Most convincing is the use of social media in writing and language courses, which leads to better
results and motivation among students. For other domains, such as STEM or medical studies, the
included research showed less convincing results, regarding, for instance, specific pedagogical
activities. However, the general question, discussed in no single study in this review, is retention:
How persistent are learning results? In a similar tone, it can be questioned whether actively engaging
with course content can be achieved in other ways, without social media, possibly leading to even
better learning outcomes. Taken together, our review results suggest difficulties in making well-
considered and evidence-based choices for the pedagogical use of social media, because of poor
quality of studies and because of the large variety of results.
The last research question discusses the complete conceptual model. The relation between
conditions and outcomes regarding social media in classrooms remains unclear as a result of variety
in evidence. Rarely are cause and effect clearly pointed out: is Facebook a cause of lower grades, or
do students go online more often once they get lower grades? The context-dependency of studies
also influences this obscurity: executed in a specific course, and in a specific educational culture. This
hinders generalisations and determination of causality, even within specific domains such as STEM or
the social sciences. Nonetheless, facilitation (at school level) and attitude (teacher level) appear to be
related, for instance where professional development predicts integration of social media in class-
rooms. Barriers experienced by teachers for the pedagogical use of social media can be reduced with
the right policy and support. This serves as a positive influence on student–teacher relations, and
a better understanding by teachers of students’ attitudes towards social media. The implicit advice
for teachers appearing from our results is that teachers should learn to know what drives their
students.
5. Conclusion
The questions about social media in class play at the interrelated levels of student, teacher and
school. This review showed that existing research repeatedly focused on one single aspect, without
paying attention to this interrelatedness. Future research on pedagogical uses of social media should
attend to the complexity of interrelated factors, this raising awareness of hidden positions and
curriculum aspects. Furthermore, cause and effect should clearly and objectively be identified to
determine the effectiveness of specific pedagogical uses of social media in classrooms, while taking
into account content domains. This implies mixed methods including analyses of, for instance,
learning results, rather than relying on self-reports and perception surveys.
Our review resulted in an integrated model that gives educational practice starting points to
formulate considerations, while taking into account the interrelatedness of student, teacher and
school. As such, we contribute to knowledge and understanding about the educational use of social
media in teaching and in supporting educational processes. This, in turn, leads to practical advice
and considerations that can help schools and teachers to enrich their education with social media.
This advice can serve as grounding for practice-based organisations such as the International Society
for Technology in Education that aim to solve problems in education.
School
(1) Apply social media to reach a broader audience and to increase transparency in internal and
external communication.
(2) Include social media in policy on curriculum materials and educational vision as this promotes
the use of social media as learning tools.
(3) Develop focused policy and support to diminish the barriers experienced by teachers. Facilitate
teachers especially in technical support and in time to work on their social media skills.
(4) Consider diversity among teachers in experience, skills and values regarding social media.
(5) Mobilise early adopters of social media within the school.
(6) Support the development of knowledge and skills within teacher teams, small informal
groups of teachers.
Teacher
(1) Develop social media skills to be taken seriously by pupils and students.
(2) Scrutinise your own experiences, skills and values regarding social media to understand
barriers to pedagogical use of this technology.
(3) Facilitate students with clear, instruction-focused goals while adapting to their social and
educational needs. Effective learning goals are related to communication, sharing knowledge
and collaborative learning.
(4) Social media are suitable for social constructivist approaches to learning. Central is active
engagement with content, for instance by producing digital content. The teacher’s role is
coaching (Wopereis, Sloep, & Poortman, 2010).
(5) Use social media as a tool for collaborative learning. For instance, by enabling students to
have informal discussions about assignments.
(6) Be purposefully present on social media, to support groups of students as an online commu-
nity. This can strengthen interpersonal teacher–student relations.
(7) Present social media as optional, and offer an alternative for reluctant students (Chen & Bryer,
2012). Social media are an addition that should not stand in the way of instruction.
(8) Promote students’ formative feedback on (improved) use of social media to collaborate and
share knowledge. This promotes reflection on learning with social media.
Student
(1) Examine the status quo: not all students perceive social media as tools for learning. Consider
diversity in experience, skills and values regarding social media.
(2) Students use social media to communicate rather than develop or share information.
(3) Social media are not a panacea: learning results (i.e. grades) do not increase automatically.
Social media in the classroom can improve indirect learning outcomes, such as collaboration,
communication or motivation.
(4) Metacognitive skills are a prerequisite for a focused use of social media. However, this use also
increases these skills.
(5) Not all students have sufficient social media knowledge and skills. Explain aspects of security
and privacy (Chen & Bryer, 2012).
Are social media in class a burden or blessing? This appears to be connected to school culture,
attitudes of teachers and students regarding social media, support and teacher professional devel-
opment, clear learning goals and a clear role for social media in the curriculum.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Anouk van der Lee for her contribution to the review project.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
The work was supported by The Netherlands Initiative for Education Research (NRO) [grant number 405-15-719].
Notes on contributors
Antoine Van Den Beemt works as an associate professor at Eindhoven School of Education, the teacher training institute
of Eindhoven University of Technology. His research revolves around digital pedagogies, especially for STEM education.
He specifically puts emphasis on networked learning and learning analytics.
Marieke Thurlings works as an assistant professor at Eindhoven School of Education, the teacher training institute of
Eindhoven University of Technology. Her expertise lies in collaborative teacher professional development, STEM
education and systematic literature reviews. She has published in several journals, such as Review of Educational
Research and Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.
Myrthe Willems holds a Master’s degree in educational research and worked as a researcher at Eindhoven School of
Education, and as an assessment expert at the Dutch institute for assessment development (Cito). She currently works
as an assessment consultant at Summa College, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
ORCID
Antoine Van Den Beemt http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9594-6568
Marieke Thurlings http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7447-9750
References
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the review.
* Abdullah, S., Yaacob, A., & Rahim, F. A. (2013). When compelled to FB around academic texts: Postgraduate students
reflected on their online experience. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 10, 1–27.
* Abu-Shanab, E., & Al-Tarawneh, H. (2015). The influence of social networks on high school students’ performance.
International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 10(2), 44–52. doi:10.4018/IJWLTT.2015040104
* Ahern, L., Feller, J., & Nagle, T. (2016). Social media as a support for learning in universities: An empirical study of
Facebook groups. Journal of Decision Systems, 25, 35–49. doi:10.1080/12460125.2016.1187421
Ahn, J. (2013, April). What can we learn from Facebook activity? Using social learning analytics to observe new media
literacy skills. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Leuven,
Belgium.
* Al-Rahmi, W. M., Othman, M. S., & Musa, M. A. (2014). The improvement of students’ academic performance by using
social media through collaborative learning in Malaysian higher education. Asian Social Science, 10(8), 210–221.
doi:10.5539/ass.v10n8p210
* Alwagait, E., Shahzad, B., & Alim, S. (2015). Impact of social media usage on students academic performance in Saudi
Arabia. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1092–1097. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.028
* An, H., Shin, S., & Lim, K. (2009). The effects of different instructor facilitation approaches on students’ interactions
during asynchronous online discussions. Computers and Education, 53, 749–760. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.04.015
* Andersson, A., & Räisänen, K. (2014). Using class blogs in 1:1 schools: Searching for unexplored opportunities.
Computers in the Schools, 31, 173–196. doi:10.1080/07380569.2014.932622
* Arteaga Sánchez, R., Cortijo, V., & Javed, U. (2014). Students’ perceptions of Facebook for academic purposes.
Computers and Education, 70, 138–149. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.012
* Aydin, S. (2014). Twitter as an educational environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15, 10–21.
doi:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2009.00208.x
* Bahner, D. P., Adkins, E., Patel, N., Donley, C., Nagel, R., & Kman, N. (2012). How we use social media to supplement
a novel curriculum in medical education. Medical Teacher, 34, 439–444. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.668245
* Balakrishnan, V. (2014). Using social networks to enhance teaching and learning experiences in higher learning
institutions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51, 595–606. doi:10.1080/14703297.2013.863735
* Baran, B. (2010). Facebook as a formal instructional environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, E146–
E149. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01115.x
Bartlett-Bragg, A. (2006). Reflections on pedagogy: Reframing practice to foster informal learning with social software.
Retrieved from http://matchsz.inf.elte.hu/tt/docs/Anne20Bartlett-Bragg.pdf
Bate, F. (2010). A longitudinal study of beginning teachers’ pedagogical identity and their use of ICT. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 6, 1042–1061.
* Bélanger, C. H., Bali, S., & Longden, B. (2014). How Canadian universities use social media to brand themselves. Tertiary
Education and Management, 20, 14–29.
* Bicen, H., Ozdamli, F., & Uzunboylu, H. (2012). Online and blended learning approach on instructional multimedia
development courses in teacher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 22, 1–20. doi:10.1080/
10494820.2012.682586
* Bicen, H., & Uzunboylu, H. (2013). The use of social networking sites in education: A case study of Facebook. Journal of
Universal Computer Science, 19, 658–671.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
Bruneel, S., De Wit, K., Verhoeven, J., & Eelen, J. (2013). Facebook: When education meets privacy. Interdisciplinary Journal
of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 9, 125–148.
Brunton, G., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2015, October). Applying framework synthesis to understand complexity in systematic
reviews. Paper presented at Cochrane Colloquium, Vienna, Austria.
* Buus, L. (2012). Scaffolding teachers integrate social media into a problem based learning approach? The Electronic
Journal of E-Learning, 10, 13–22.
* Buzzelli, A., Holdan, E., Rota, D., & McCarthy, J. (2016). Utilizing Twitter for concept learning. International Journal of
Information and Communication Technology Education, 12, 69–82. doi:10.4018/IJICTE.2016010106
* Callaghan, N., & Bower, M. (2012). Learning through social networking sites: The critical role of the teacher. Educational
Media International, 49, 1–17. doi:10.1080/09523987.2012.662621
Carr, C., & Hayes, R. (2015). Social media: Defining, developing, and divining. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 23, 46–65.
CASE. (2011). Best practices in social media: CASE social media survey. Sloverlinett. Retrieved from https://www.case.org/
Documents/AboutCASE/Newsroom/CASE-2011-Social-Media-Survey-Findings.pdf
* Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in formal and informal learning.
The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13, 87–104. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1027
* Clarke, T., & Nelson, C. L. (2012). Classroom community, pedagogical effectiveness, and learning outcomes associated
with Twitter use in undergraduate marketing courses. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 20(2), 29–38.
* Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2012). Redesigning professional development: Reconceptualising teaching using social
learning technologies. Research in Learning Technology, 21(3), 1–19. doi:10.3402/rlt.v21i0.19226
* Cole, M., Brynn Hibbert, D., & Kehoe, E. (2013). Students’ perceptions of using Twitter to interact with the instructor
during lectures for a large-enrollment chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 90, 671–672. doi:10.1021/
ed3005825
Cotton, D., Winter, J., & Bailey, I. (2013). Researching the hidden curriculum: Intentional and unintended messages.
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37, 192–203.
* Cox, D., & McLeod, S. (2014a). Social media marketing and communications strategies for school superintendents.
Journal of Educational Administration, 52, 850–868. doi:10.1108/JEA-11-2012-0117
* Cox, D., & McLeod, S. (2014b). Social media strategies for school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 98, 5–25. doi:10.1177/
0192636513510596
* Deng, L., & Tavares, N. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students’ motivation and experiences in online
communities. Computers and Education, 68, 167–176. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.028
* Dermentzi, E., Papagiannidis, S., Toro, C., & Yannopoulou, N. (2016). Academic engagement: Differences between
intention to adopt social networking sites and other online technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 321–332.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.019
* Dickie, V. A., & Meier, H. (2015). The Facebook tutor: Networking education. Ubiquitous Learning, 8(2), 1–12.
* Donlan, L. (2014). Exploring the views of students on the use of Facebook in university teaching and learning. Journal
of Further and Higher Education, 38, 572–588. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2012.726973
* Dougherty, K., & Andercheck, B. (2014). Using Facebook to engage learners in a large introductory course. Teaching
Sociology, 42, 95–104. doi:10.1177/0092055X14521022
Duncheon, J., & Tierney, W. (2013). Changing conceptions of time: Implications for educational research and practice.
Review of Educational Research, 83, 236–272. doi:10.3102/0034654313478492
* Dyson, B., Vickers, K., Turtle, J., Cowan, S., & Tassone, A. (2015). Evaluating the use of Facebook to increase student
engagement and understanding in lecture-based classes. Higher Education, 69, 303–313. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9776-3
Edwards, R. (2015). Software and the hidden curriculum in digital education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23, 265–279.
* Ekoç, A. (2014). Facebook groups as a supporting tool for language classrooms. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 15(3), 18–26.
Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism: Comparing critical features from an
instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–72.
* Evans, B. (2013). Enhancing undergraduate teaching and feedback using social media: An engineering case study.
Engineering Education, 8(2), 44–53. doi:10.11120/ened.2013.00015
* Flanigan, A., & Babchuk, W. (2015). Social media as academic quicksand: A phenomenological study of student
experiences in and out of the classroom. Learning and Individual Differences, 44, 40–45. doi:10.1016/j.
lindif.2015.11.003
* Forgie, S., Duff, J., Ross, S., Ellison, N., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Purcell, K. (2013). Twelve tips for using Twitter as
a learning tool in medical education. Medical Teacher, 35, 8–14. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.746448
* Gan, B., Menkhoff, T., & Smith, R. (2015). Enhancing students’ learning process through interactive digital media: New
opportunities for collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 652–663. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.048
* Gikas, J., & Grant, M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with
cellphones, smartphones & social media. Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002
* Goktalay, S. (2013). Challenges facing higher education: Faculty’s concerns about technologies of social media.
International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 23, 67–90. doi:10.1504/
IJCEELL.2013.051767
* Gomez, K., & Lee, U. (2015). Situated cognition and learning environments: Implications for teachers on- and offline in
the new digital media age. Interactive Learning Environments, 23, 634–652. doi:10.1080/10494820.2015.1064447
* González-Ramírez, R., Gascó, J., & Taverner, J. (2015). Facebook in teaching: Strengths and weaknesses. International
Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 32, 65–78. doi:10.1108/IJILT-09-2014-0021
Gray, L. (2018). Exploring how and why young people use social networking sites. Educational Psychology in Practice, 34,
175–194.
* Greenhow, C., Gibbins, T., & Menzer, M. (2015). Re-thinking scientific literacy out-of-school: Arguing science issues in
a niche Facebook application. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 593–604. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.031
* Grosseck, G., & Holotescu, C. (2008, April). Can we use Twitter for educational activities? Paper presented at the 4th
eLearning and Educational Software for Education conference, Bucharest.
* Gupta, N., & Irwin, J. (2016). In-class distractions: The role of Facebook and the primary learning task. Computers in
Human Behavior, 55, 1165–1178.
* Henderson, M., Snyder, I., & Beale, D. (2013). Social media for collaborative learning: A review of school literature.
Australian Educational Computing, 28, 1–15.
* Hershkovitz, A., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2013). Student-teacher relationship in the Facebook era: The student
perspective. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 23, 33–52.
doi:10.1504/IJCEELL.2013.051765
Hew, K., & Cheung, W. (2013). Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based
practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47–64. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.08.001
* Hill, J., Thomas, G., Diaz, A., & Simm, D. (2016). Borderland spaces for learning partnership: Opportunities, benefits and
challenges. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 40, 375–393. doi:10.1080/03098265.2016.1144728
* Hoyos, J. (2014). Social networking sites in the classroom: Unveiling new roles for teachers and new approaches to
online course design. Ikala, 19, 269–283.
* Huang, Y. (2011). A study of social media impact on metacognition in an online inquiry learning activity. Journal of Next
Generation Information Technology, 2(4), 40–46. doi:10.4156/jnit.vol2.issue4.4
* Imlawi, J., Gregg, D., & Karimi, J. (2015). Student engagement in course-based social networks: The impact of instructor
credibility and use of communication. Computers and Education, 88, 84–96. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.015
* Irwin, C., Ball, L., Desbrow, D., & Leveritt, M. (2012). Students’ perceptions of using Facebook as an interactive learning
resource at university. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28, 1221–1232. doi:10.14742/ajet.798
* Jones, N., Blackey, H., Fitzgibbon, K., & Chew, E. (2010). Get out of MySpace! Computers & Education, 54, 776–782.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.008
* Jong, B., Lai, C., Hsia, Y., Lin, T., & Liao, Y. (2014). An exploration of the potential educational value of Facebook.
Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 201–211. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.007
* Junco, R. (2015). Student class standing, Facebook use, and academic performance. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 36, 18–29. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.001
* Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 119–132. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x
* Kabilan, M. (2016). Using Facebook as an e-portfolio in enhancing pre-service teachers’ professional development.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 19–31.
* Kamalodeen, J., & Jameson-Charles, M. (2016). A mixed methods research approach to exploring teacher participation
in an online social networking website. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 15, 1–14. doi:10.1177/
1609406915624578
* Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business
Horizons, 53, 59–68. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
* Kaufer, D., Gunawardena, A., Tan, A., & Cheek, A. (2011). Bringing social media to the writing classroom: Classroom
salon. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 25, 299–321. doi:10.1177/1050651911400703
* Kiili, K., Multisilta, J., Suominen, M., & Ketamo, H. (2010). Learning experiences of mobile social media. International
Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 4, 535–542. doi:10.1504/IJMLO.2010.037533
* Kirschner, P., & Karpinski, A. (2010). Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26,
1237–1245. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024
Kirschner, P., & Wopereis, I. (2003). Mindtools for teacher communities: A European perspective. Technology, Pedagogy
and Education, 12, 105–124. doi:10.1080/14759390300200148
* Kohtz, C., Gowda, C., Stockert, P., White, J., & Kennel, L. (2012). The use of web 2.0 technologies. Nurse Educator, 37,
162–167. doi:10.1097/NNE.0b013e31825a87b3
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The web as an information resource in K–12 education: Strategies for
supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75, 285–328.
doi:10.3102/00346543075003285
* Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for
teaching and learning? Internet and Higher Education, 15, 247–254. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.12.002
* Lai, C. (2016). Training nursing students’ communication skills with online video peer assessment. Computers and
Education, 97, 21–30. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.017
* Lee, J., Koo, Y., & Kim, M. (2016). Enhancing problem solving skills in science education with social media and an
e-collaboration tool. New Educational Review, 43, 248–259. doi:10.15804/tner.2016.43.1.21
* Lin, M., Hoffman, E., & Borengasser, C. (2013). Is social media too social for class? A case study of Twitter use.
TechTrends, 57(2), 39–45. doi:10.1007/s11528-013-0644-2
* Loving, M., & Ochoa, M. (2011). Facebook as a classroom management solution. New Library World, 112, 121–130.
doi:10.1108/03074801111117023
* Lowe, B., D’Alessandro, S., Winzar, H., Laffey, D., & Collier, W. (2013). The use of Web 2.0 technologies in marketing
classes: Key drivers of student acceptance. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12, 412–422. doi:10.1002/cb.1444
* Manasijević, D., Živković, D., Arsić, S., & Milošević, I. (2016). Exploring students’ purposes of usage and educational
usage of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 441–450. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.087
* Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016). Facebook and the others: Potentials and obstacles of social media for teaching in higher
education. Computers and Education, 95, 216–230. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.012
* Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital
technologies. Computers & Education, 56, 429–440. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
* Matzat, U., & Vrieling, E. (2016). Self-regulated learning and social media: A ‘natural alliance’? Evidence on students’
self-regulation of learning, social media use, and student–teacher relationship. Learning, Media and Technology, 41,
73–99. doi:10.1080/17439884.2015.1064953
* Mawdsley, A. (2015). Pharmacy students’ perceptions of social media in education. Pharmacy Education, 15, 108–110.
* Mbati, L. (2013). Online social media applications for constructivism and observational learning. The International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14, 543–544.
McCarthy, J. (2010). Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first year experience.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26. doi:10.14742/ajet.1039
* Menkhoff, T., Chay, Y., Bengtsson, M., Woodard, C., & Gan, B. (2015). Incorporating microblogging (‘tweeting’) in higher
education: Lessons learnt in a knowledge management course. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1295–1302.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.063
* Mills, K. (2010). A review of the ‘digital turn’ in the new literacy studies. Review of Educational Research, 80, 246–271.
doi:10.3102/0034654310364401
Minocha, S. (2009). Role of social software tools in education: A literature review. Education and Training, 51, 353–369.
doi:10.1108/00400910910987174
* Mueller, J., Della Peruta, M., & Del Giudice, M. (2014). Social media platforms and technology education: Facebook on
the way to graduate school. International Journal of Technology Management, 66, 358–370. doi:10.1504/
ijtm.2014.065005
* Neier, S., & Zayer, L. (2015). Students’ perceptions and experiences of social media in higher education. Journal of
Marketing Education, 37, 133–143. doi:10.1177/0273475315583748
* Nemetz, P., Aiken, K., Cooney, V., & Pascal, V. (2012). Should faculty use social networks to engage with students?
Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 20, 19–28.
* Nkhoma, M., Cong, H., Au, B., Lam, T., Richardson, J., Smith, R., & El-Den, J. (2015). Facebook as a tool for learning
purposes: Analysis of the determinants leading to improved students’ learning. Active Learning in Higher Education,
16, 87–101. doi:10.1177/1469787415574180
* O’Bannon, B., Beard, J., & Britt, V. (2013). Using a Facebook group as an educational tool: Effects on student
achievement. Computers in the Schools, 30, 229–247. doi:10.1080/07380569.2013.805972
Oliver, S., Clarke-Jones, L., Rees, R., Milne, R., Buchanan, P., Gabbay, J., . . . Stein, K. (2004). Involving consumers in research
and development agenda setting for the NHS: Developing an evidence-based approach. Health Technology
Assessment, 8, 15.
* Ostashewski, N., Moisey, S., & Reid, D. (2011). Applying constructionist principles to online teacher professional
development. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(6), 143–156.
* Pan, S., & Franklin, T. (2011). In-service teachers’ self-efficacy, professional development, and web 2.0 tools for
integration. New Horizons in Education, 59(3), 28–40.
* Paul, J., Baker, H., & Cochran, J. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Computers
in Human Behavior, 28, 2117–2127. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.016
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social science. Oxford: Blackwell.
* Pilli, O. (2015). The changes in social media usage: Students’ perspective. Anthropologist, 22, 345–354.
* Piotrowski, C. (2015). Academic applications of social media: A review of peer-review research in higher education.
Psychology and Education: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 52(3–4), 15–22.
* Prescott, J. (2014). Teaching style and attitudes towards Facebook as an educational tool. Active Learning in Higher
Education, 15, 117–128. doi:10.1177/1469787414527392
* Preston, J., Moffatt, L., Wiebe, S., Mcauley, A., Campbell, B., & Gabriel, M. (2015). The use of technology in Prince Edward
Island (Canada) high schools: Perceptions of educational leaders. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership, 43, 989–1005. doi:10.1177/1741143214535747
* Prestridge, S. (2014). A focus on students’ use of Twitter: Their interactions with each other, content and interface.
Active Learning in Higher Education, 15, 101–115. doi:10.1177/1469787414527394
Purser, E., Towndrow, A., & Aranguiz, A. (2013). From the field realising the potential of peer-to-peer learning: Taming
a MOOC with social media authors. eLearning Papers, 33, 1–5.
* Rinaldo, S. B., Laverie, D., & Tapp, S. (2011). Learning by Tweeting: Using Twitter as a pedagogical tool. Journal of
Marketing Education, 33, 193–203. doi:10.1177/0273475311410852
Rosen, L., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while
studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 948–958. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001
* Rouis, S., Limayem, R., & Salehi-Sangari, E. (2011). Impact of Facebook usage on students’ academic achievement: Role
of self-regulation and trust. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 961–994.
* Safuan, H., & Soh, R. (2013). The integration of authentic learning principles and Facebook in service learning. The
Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(4), 192–199.
* Sauers, N., & Richardson, J. (2015). Leading by following: An analysis of how K-12 school leaders use Twitter. NASSP
Bulletin, 99, 127–146. doi:10.1177/0192636515583869
* Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students’ education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and
Technology, 34, 157–174. doi:10.1080/17439880902923622
Selwyn, N. (2010). Schools and schooling in the digital age: A critical analysis. Oxford: Routledge.
* Sendurur, P., Sendurur, E., & Yilmaz, R. (2015). Examination of the social network sites usage patterns of pre-service
teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 188–194. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.052
* Shih, R. (2011). Can Web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating ‘Facebook’ and
peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27, 829–845. doi:10.14742/
ajet.v27i5.934
* Shraim, K. (2014). Pedagogical innovation within Facebook: A case study in tertiary education in Palestine.
International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 9(8), 25–31.
* Smith, D. (2014). iTube, YouTube, We Tube: Social media videos in chemistry education and outreach. Journal of
Chemical Education, 91, 1594–1599. doi:10.1021/ed400715s
* Sobaih, A., Moustafa, M., Ghandforoush, P., & Khan, M. (2016). To use or not to use? Social media in higher education in
developing countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 296–305. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.002
* Souleles, N. (2012). Perceptions of undergraduate graphic design students on the educational potential of Facebook.
Research in Learning Technology, 20, 241–252. doi:10.3402/rlt.v20i0.17490
* Suthiwartnarueput, T., & Wasanasomsithi, P. (2012). Effects of using Facebook as a medium for discussions of English
grammar and writing of low-intermediate EFL students. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9, 194–214.
* Takacs, Z., Swart, E., & Bus, A. (2015). Benefits and pitfalls of multimedia and interactive features in
technology-enhanced storybooks: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 698–739. doi:10.3102/
0034654314566989
* Tamim, R., Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P., & Schmid, R. (2011). What forty years of research says about the
impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational
Research, 81, 4–28. doi:10.3102/0034654310393361
* Taylor, R., King, F., & Nelson, R. (2012). Student learning through social media. Journal of Sociological Research, 3(2),
29–35. doi:10.5296/jsr.v3i2.2136
* Tenopir, C., Volentine, R., & King, D. (2013). Social media and scholarly reading. Online Information Review, 37, 193–216.
doi:10.1108/OIR-04-2012-0062
* Tess, P. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual): A literature review. Computers in
Human Behavior, 29(5), 60–68. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.032
* Thalluri, J., & Penman, J. (2015). Social media for learning and teaching undergraduate sciences: Good practice
guidelines from intervention. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13, 455–465.
Thurlings, M., & den Brok, P. (2017). Learning outcomes of teacher professional development activities: A meta-study.
Educational Review, 69, 554–576. doi:10.1080/00131911.2017.1281226
Thurlings, M., Evers, A., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Towards a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behaviour:
A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85, 430–471. doi:10.3102/0034654314557949
* Trocky, N., & Buckley, K. (2016). Evaluating the impact of wikis on student learning outcomes: An integrative review.
Journal of Professional Nursing, 32, 364–376. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.01.007
* Trust, T. (2012). Professional learning networks designed for teacher learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher
Education, 28, 133–138. doi:10.1080/21532974.2012.10784693
* Uzunboylu, H., Bicen, H., & Cavus, N. (2011). The efficient virtual learning environment: A case study of web 2.0 tools
and Windows Live Spaces. Computers and Education, 56, 720–726. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.014
Van Acker, F., Van Buuren, H., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2011). Why teachers use digital learning materials. Educational
Information Technology, 18, 495–514.
Van den Akker, J. (2003). Curriculum perspectives: An introduction. In J. van den Akker, W. Kuiper, & U. Hameyer (Eds.),
Curriculum landscapes and trends (pp. 1–10). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Van den Beemt, A., Akkerman, S., & Simons, P. R. J. (2010). Pathways in interactive media practices among young people.
Learning, Media and Technology, 35, 419–434. doi:10.1080/17439884.2010.531395
Van den Beemt, A., & Diepstraten, I. (2016). Teachers’ perspectives on ICT: A learning ecology approach. Computers and
Education, 92–93, 161–170.
Van Veen, K., Zwart, R. C., & Meirink, J. A. (2012). What makes teacher professional development effective? A literature
review. In M. Kooy & K. van Veen (Eds.), Teacher learning that matters (pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Routledge.
* Veira, A., Leacock, C., & Warrican, J. (2014). Learning outside the walls of the classroom: Engaging the digital natives.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30, 227–244. doi:10.14742/ajet.v30i2.349
* Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2013). Scholars and faculty members’ lived experiences in online social networks.
Internet and Higher Education, 16, 43–50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.01.004
Veletsianos, G., Kimmons, R., & French, K. (2013). Instructor experiences with a social networking site in a higher
education setting: Expectations, frustrations, appropriation, and compartmentalization. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 61, 255–278. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9284-z
* Vikneswaran, T., & Krish, P. (2015). Utilising social networking sites to improve writing: A case study with Chinese
students in Malaysia. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25, 287–300. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1030441
* Visser, R., Calvert Evering, L., & Barrett, D. (2014). Twitter for teachers: The implications of Twitter as a self-directed
professional development tool for K–12 teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46, 396–413.
doi:10.1080/15391523.2014.925694
* Wang, J. (2013). What higher educational professionals need to know about today’s students: Online social networks.
The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(3), 180–193.
* Welch, B., & Bonnan-White, J. (2012). Twittering to increase student engagement in the university classroom.
Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 4, 325–345.
* West, B., Moore, H., & Barry, B. (2015). Beyond the Tweet: Using Twitter to enhance engagement, learning, and success
among first-year students. Journal of Marketing Education, 37, 160–170. doi:10.1177/0273475315586061
* Whittaker, A. L., Howarth, G. S., & Lymn, K. A. (2014). Evaluation of Facebook to create an online learning community in an
undergraduate animal science class. Educational Media International, 51, 37–41. doi:10.1080/09523987.2014.924664
* Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task
multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers and Education, 58, 365–374. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2011.08.029
Wopereis, I. G. J. H., Sloep, P. B., & Poortman, S. H. (2010). Weblogs as instruments for reflection on action in teacher
education. Interactive Learning Environments, 18, 245–261. doi:10.1080/10494820.2010.500530
* Yakin, I., & Tinmaz, H. (2013). Using Twitter as an instructional tool: A case study in higher education. The Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology, 12(4), 209–218. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x
* Yang, Y., Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., & Quek, C. L. (2011). Using Facebook for teaching and learning: A review of the literature.
International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 21, 71–86. doi:10.1504/
IJCEELL.2011.039695
* Yuksel, D. (2013). Technology use in reflective teaching: A practicum research project. Anthropologist, 16, 145–152.

Towards An Understanding of Social Media Use in The Classroom: A Literature Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards An Understanding of Social Media Use in The Classroom: A Literature Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technology, Pedagogy and Education

ISSN: 1475-939X (Print) 1747-5139 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtpe20

Towards an understanding of social media use in

Antoine Van Den Beemt, Marieke Thurlings & Myrthe Willems

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1695657

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa

Published online: 28 Nov 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 405

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Towards an understanding of social media use in the classroom: a

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

1.1 Conceptual framework and research questions

2.1 Searching, screening and selecting studies

2.2 Data extraction

2.3 Synthesising and interpreting ﬁndings of included studies

Database selection Scopus Web of Science

Deduplication Duplicates = 1076

Title and abstract scan Off-topic = 4209

Full text scan Off-topic = 1602

Figure 2. Flowchart of the selection process.

3.1 Overview of included studies

Table 1. Descriptive results of included articles (271 studies).

3.2.3 Educational vision and policy on curriculum materials

3.3.1 Professional development for using social media

3.3.2 Professional development by means of social media

3.3.3 Experiences, skills and values

3.3.4 Learning goals

3.3.5 Pedagogical activities

3.4.2 Learning results

3.4.3 Experiences, skills and values

3.4.4 Interpersonal student–teacher relations

You might also like