O nline engagement exploring student behaviour (with social media)

40
Online engagement exploring student behaviour (with social media) Guy Saward University of Hertfordshire [email protected] G

description

Bring it on. O nline engagement exploring student behaviour (with social media). Guy Saward University of Hertfordshire [email protected]. Get out of my face. Agenda. The techy bit. The teachy bit. The treacly bit. The Techy bit – thinking about messaging. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of O nline engagement exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Page 1: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Online engagement exploring student

behaviour(with social media)

Guy Saward University of Hertfordshire

[email protected]

Get out of my face

Bring it on

Page 2: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Agenda

The teachy bit

The treacly bit

The techy bit

Page 3: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The Techy bit – thinking about messaging

Page 4: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Messaging 3.0• Term used to refer to new crop of apps, e.g.

whatsApp, snapchat, line, kakao• Beyond social networks

– Facebook / Twitter /LinkedIn sooo 2.0• Way beyond original messaging

– email: old school electronic text, enclosures– sms: short, mobile, instant– instant messaging: free, internet, chat

• But original messaging raises questions of what+why which are just as relevant today

Page 5: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

communication

content

freq+sync

size+struct

wikiblog

2Life

forum

email

SMSmicro-blog

eConference

online chat

tumblelog

social bookmark

RSS

Technology Classification (2010)all

Page 6: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

communication

content

freq+sync

size+struct

wikiblog

2Life

forum

email

SMSmicro-blog

eConference

online chat

tumblelog

social bookmark

RSS

features• multimedia blog• tumblr/facebookcontent• video, images• low text contentcomms• comments/forum• track back

Technology Classification (2010)

Page 7: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

What’s in a 3.0 Message• New messaging has to offer some advantage

– 2nd gen covered different content types

• 3rd generation building on other aspects– WhatsApp : photo, video, audio, group -> cost– SnapChat: photo -> privacy– KakaoTalk: geography -> gaming– Line: API -> desktop (back to 1st gen IM!)

Page 8: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

What’s in the simplest message?

Page 9: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Message Features• Content is only part of the message

“Let’s meet, no coffee”• Need to consider (some of) …

– originator– audience– timing– tone– delivery (push/pull/synchronicity ) – invitation (to respond/take action)– conversation

• Tech platform is really only small part of how

Page 10: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The Teachy Bit – how do you use messaging

Page 11: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Why Message (your students)Three different scenarios (content+structure) • Broadcasting assessment info

– via news post, or tweet or paper hand out• Generating/responding to individual requests

– via online forms, email, forum• Feed back/feed forward

– via simple message, or EVS, or online QMP

Any scenario may prompt different issues/choices (snap chat assessment briefing, anyone?!)

Page 12: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The wider conversation• Online xMooc – eXtended, content focussed

– Pedagogy: associative– Messaging: for pacing / expectations (C&G),

feedback on performance (assessment?)• cMooc – connected, interaction focussed

– Pedagogy: social constructivist / situational– Messaging: sharing, reflection, building CoP

• Flipped classroom– Pedagogy: associative– Messaging: content transmission vs

assimilation feedback / clarification

Page 13: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Encouraging Engagement• Old research for StudyNet campus based module

– shows strong correlation between performance and online engagement

• Correlation not causation … but data collection is way of monitoring who may be at risk

Page 14: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Wider Engagement• Work on wider student engagement identifies

three types of engagement:1. In learning2. Rooted in identity3. In structures and processes

• For use of social media for L&T – starting from (2) – trying to harness it for (1) – and build it into (3)

Page 15: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Social Media BackgroundShamelessly borrowed …• Mark Stubbs blog post,

5 top tips to enhance your students’ experience (March 2013)

• Nancy White’s blog posts on online facilitation: (March 2014)

• Lis Parcell’s blog post, Listen, understand, act: social media for engagement (Jan 2014)

• Sally Jordan’s blog ‘e-assessment (f)or Learning’ (March 2014)

• Lots of other “stuff” from JISC, HEA, TEL community

Page 16: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

More Backgroud - What’s important

‘Guide on the side’ or‘Sage on the stage’

[pedagogy]‘Digital native’or ‘immigrant’

[skills]

Just visitingor moving in?

[attitude]

Do classifications / typologies matter? Where do you stand?

Page 17: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The Research – a bit sticky

Page 18: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Outcomes to date• Student survey

– integration attitudes, usage follow-up– focus groups

• Social media (faceboook) safety• Staff survey

– integration attitudes• StudyNet -> Facebook/Twitter integration

– Module sites– Programme pages

• Classification– 5 types, based on socMed usage + attitude

Page 19: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

From Refuseniks to Integrationists

“just don't - facebook are data thieving monkey scum! don't help the data miners” (sic)

Staff

Students

“real people in real life!:-) all of them… or more of them?(sic)

For separatists, more use of social networks doesn’t mean more desire for VLE integration

Use of social networksAgreement on VLE

integration

Page 20: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Combined Dataset (2012)

Page 21: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Top 3 UH Staff Issues (from 2012)

I don’t have a Facebook/Twitter account

<= skills concerns

I don’t want to use my account<= privacy concerns

I don’t have the time<= efficiency concerns

Page 22: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Student focus group (2013)Key findings • diverse media range/hierarchy, e.g. FB=> anyone ,

text/mob=> friend, email=> close friend• mixed messages on Facebook as study

aid/distraction• mobile/alerts is key benefit for study related

messaging

Key issues include privacy, inclusivity, focus, e-safety

Page 23: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Student Survey (2013)Changes from original survey (2012)• more likely to use Twitter (59% vs 44%) • more likely to use tablet (34% vs 18%) or

smartphone (84% vs 73%) for socNet access• less likely to report using other networks/devices

outside of the main categories explicitly surveyed

Other socNec/msg apps reported (unasked) include: instagram (11), linkedIn (3), pinterest, skype & tumblr

Note: socNet use is general, not specifically academic. Compare 59% to 3% for student Twitter use in Germany

Page 24: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

UH Online CSIT BSc – Social Networks

Source: M. Lilly, 2014, “Experiences of a programme tutor for an online distance learning programme in Computer Science”, UH LTI seminar

Page 25: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

UH Online BSc – Learning Interactions

Source: M. Lilly, 2014, “Experiences of a programme tutor for an online distance learning programme in Computer Science”, UH LTI seminar

• CSIT students prefer interaction with:– content > tutors (slightly) > peers=> xMooc over cMooc?

Page 26: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Future Work• Classification

– machine learning validation– identification of association rules (e.g.

multi-networks => separatist? fb addicts => integrationist?)

• Facebook/Twitter integration– more detailed analytics

• Staff survey– issues for social media (formal, online survey)

• Student survey (? would be useful?) => msg 3.0 apps, focus groups, KIT

Page 27: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Personal Reflections

Page 28: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The Plus Side – New Ways to Engage• Facebook polls - Like, Share, Comment• Online assessment• Gameification• Badges• But do

they work?

Page 29: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

The Down side – Info Overload

1 Mooc, first activity, 12 hours30 emails

Mobile learningPlatform fragmentation

Page 30: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

ConclusionsMessaging purpose should drive method (for me!)• Broadcast => get msgs to where the students are

(StudyNet+fb+twitter)• Personal contact => set rules + audit trail

(skype, email)• Supervised learning => provide accessible, safe

online space (StudyNet + fb? + twitter?)• Peer (assisted) learning => find their own space

(messaging 3.0?)Role for social media - but only a means, not an end

Page 31: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)
Page 32: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Bonus slides

Page 33: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Constructivist, Communities of Practice, eTivities …Chickering and Gamson (1987) good practice……encourages student-faculty contact…encourages cooperation among students…encourages active learning…gives prompt feedback…emphasises time on task…communicates high expectations…respects diverse talents /ways of learning

=> online? => social

media?

Online for good practice

Page 34: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

E-Tivities• Accessing the course

• Intros / messaging

• Learning resources

• Building discussions

• Sharing / linking

=> Easy in our VLE (see previous)=> Harder outside

Google analytics

Social media tools

Delicious

Page 35: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Who’s joined/following the course?• Facebook insights / query• https://

www.facebook.com/search/234897186606847/likers

Page 36: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Who’s accessed what resources?• Google analytics – post processes, anonymiosed

Page 37: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Who’s talking about it?• Twitter queries, #hashtags, @messages

http://topsy.com/s?q=UniofHerts

Page 38: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

Who’s talking to who?• Facebook graph queries -

http://graph.facebook.com/220745824653347 https://developers.facebook.com/tools/explorer

Page 39: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

discuss

Social Media Updates: Consuming RSS

student

student / staff

feed

publishnotify

RSS

RSS Graffiti

twitter.com/uh6com0265

Twitterfeed

facebook.com/uh6com0265

Page 40: O nline  engagement     exploring student behaviour (with social media)

VLEdiscuss

student

student / staff

feed

publishnotify

RSS

twitter.com/uh6com0265

Twitterfeed

facebook.com/uh6com0265

Multiple platforms

RSS Graffiti

dlvr.it