Examining Teachers' Personal and Professional Use ... - LearnTechLib

Jl. of Technology and Teacher Education (2012) 20(1), 71-88

Examining Teachers’ Personal and Professional Use of Facebook: Recommendations for Teacher Education Programming Trisha Steinbrecher University of New Mexico, USA [email protected] Juliet Hart Arizona State University, USA [email protected] Members of the Net Generation are increasingly using social networking sites to interact with individuals both on and off campus. In this study, we employed a quantitative approach with an exploration of descriptive data to examine Facebook site features pre-service educators use and how those features are used in personal and professional ways. Quantitative results indicate that interaction on Facebook is reciprocal. That is, the number of posts made to a wall was significantly related to the number of updates made by the profile owner. In addition, over 50% of profiles included pictures depicting heavy alcohol/binge drinking, 17% contained at least one sexually explicit photo, and 10% included pictures and names of K-12 students from practicum/internship assignments. Descriptive data indicated limited use of Facebook in professional ways. However, where professional interactions were noted, profile owners used peers for instructional ideas and ongoing classroom support. Recommendations for future research are described.

Online social networking (SN) sites (i.e. Facebook, MySpace) are fast becoming a personal mechanism for communication and support by Internet

72

Steinbrecher and Hart

users of all ages. Nine to 17 year olds report that they spend as much time on social networking sites as they do watching television (National School Boards Association, 2007) and 73% of teens (12-17) have social media accounts (Lenhart, Purcell, Smith, & Zickuhr, 2010). Facebook, the fastest growing online SNs, reports over 500 million active accounts (Facebook, 2010). Over 70% of young adults, aged 18-29, use Facebook with 50% visiting their social network accounts at least once per day (Lenhart, et al.,, 2010). The use of these SN sites by inservice teachers has sparked media interest. Instances of sexually explicit, heavy alcohol use and questionable online conversations have been noted in open access, in-service teacher profiles (Horvath, 2008; Shapira, 2008). Such indiscretions have resulted in job loss and, in one instance, loss of teacher certification (Read, 2007). As a result, many districts and states are scrambling to write workable SN policy that governs SN use by teachers without squelching potentially useful technology (Sullivan, 2010). Facebook began in 2004 as a social network for college students. It has since expanded to allow membership for all ages. Like other SN sites, Facebook users present themselves in an online profile complete with audio, video or still pictures, view other user’s profiles, and accumulate ‘‘friends’’ who can post comments on each other’s “walls”. Users have various privacy options where they can choose to share their profile information with anyone in the network, with friends of friends, or with “friends” only. Facebook members can also join virtual discussion groups based on common interests, see what classes they have in common, and learn about each others’ hobbies, interests, romantic relationship status, and other personal information through the profiles. University students have been found to engage in academic online interaction through computer-mediated communication (CMC) as a mechanism of support, employing interpersonal strategies that motivate and encourage their peers (Fahy, 2003). CMC has been found to be a means of encouraging higher order, critical thinking (Gabriel, 2004; Thomas & Macgregor, 2005) and increased collaboration between students (Orrill, 2002; Schrire, 2004) resulting in a supportive community of practice (Anderson, 2004; Assaf, 2005; Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000; Fahy, 2003; Orrill, 2002; Schrire, 2004). Students report better knowledge and understanding (Killian & Willhite, 2003) but prefer blended environments over either fully faceto-face or fully online CMC (Rovai & Jordan, 2004). This aligns with the finding that 50% of teens and tweens reported using SN as a mechanism for discussing schoolwork (National School Boards Association, 2007). Facebook acts as a bridge connecting current students with graduates at the collegiate and high school levels (Ellison et al., 2007). This virtual

Examining Teachers’ Personal and Professional Use of Facebook

73

world is a mechanism for maintaining relationships as individuals move from one offline community to another. Prior research involving discussion boards and online chat programs supports similar relationships in academic uses of CMC, finding that CMC lends itself to building a supportive network between participants (Anderson, 2004; Assaf, 2005; Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000; Fahy, 2003). In the more successful academic implementations of CMC, behaviors indicative of an online community were observed. These included: sharing of resources (Anderson, 2004; Assaf, 2005; DuttDoner & Powers, 2000; Eilon & Kliachko, 2004); feelings of trust (Hough, Smithey, & Evertson, 2004); positive interdependence behaviors (Ikpeze, 2007; Thomas & Macgregor, 2005); and community-building interactions (Rovai, 2001; Rovai & Jordan, 2004). Students reported that they had less stress (Frank, 2004) and better defined roles (Hough et al., 2004). It should be noted that none of these studies involved Facebook, Myspace, or other social networking sites. Researchers have, however, noted some limitations in CMC interactions. Low-level thinking (Fung, 2004; Sing & Khine, 2006) that mainly consisted of reproduction of information (Eilon & Kliachko, 2004; Sing & Khine, 2006) and sharing or comparing anecdotes (Hew & Cheung, 2003a, 2003b; Pawan, Paulus, Yalcin, & Chang, 2003; Sing & Khine, 2006) were observed. This surface level knowledge was often unquestioned by peers and even provocative topics resulted in little debate, argumentation, or critical discourse (Orrill, 2002; Pawan et al., 2003; Sing & Khine, 2006; Wickstrom, 2003). Concerns about high rates of socio-cultural, community building conversation such as “how are you?” or other kinds of small talk, over task-oriented interactions - targeted dialogue related to assigned work or discussion questions - were noted throughout. Yet, the challenges faced by these CMCs may be indicative of a definitive developmental cycle wherein participants must progress through socio-cultural stages prior to engagement in online collaboration (Rovai, 2001; Waltonen-Moore, Stuart, & Newton, 2006). Facebook, in contrast, is intended for socio-cultural not task-oriented interaction. Users regularly participate in socio-cultural discussions with peers modeling early stages of Rovai’s Sense of Community (2001). These socio-cultural discussions on Facebook should build the foundation for better online collaboration. In further contrast to the aforementioned studies on academic online CMC where students were often required to participate, Facebook participation is ubiquitous and entirely voluntary. Individuals often update their profiles once a day or more. Teens and tweens report spending the largest proportion (40%) of their social networking time posting messages to their

74


or others’ pages (National School Boards Association, 2007). This directly conflicts with research findings regarding structures necessary for implementation of successful academic CMC communities of practice. Regular, mandatory participation was one of the most oft-cited facilitator structures necessary for successful implementation of computer-mediated educational communities of practice (Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000; Fung, 2004; Gilbert & Dabbagh, 2005; Hough et al., 2004; Ikpeze, 2007; Jeong, 2006; Rovai, 2001; Vonderwell & Zachariah, 2005). Theoretical Rationale Adult learning theories may explain the rapid growth of adult users on Facebook and other SN sites. Adult learning is often characterized by the transformation of experiences and knowledge (Kolb, 1984). This learning is a process involving feeling, thinking, seeing, and behaving where knowledge is created through the application of beliefs and ideas to a topic. Based on the Theory of Andragogy (Knowles, 1980) adult learning has five main guiding assumptions: a) adults are self-directed learners; b) adults use experiential knowledge as resources for learning; c) adults have changing social roles that often impact learning needs; d) adults prefer learning that is problem-centered and can have immediate application to their real life; and e) adults are intrinsically, rather than extrinsically motivated. In addition, Tinto (1987) proposed that adults interact through social and educational communities. Such communities allow adults to communicate in ways that are important to them. According to Schlossberg (1989) adults feel that they matter through: a) attention, such that the adult feels they are noticed or known; b) importance, presented as the idea that a adult feels that someone cares about their presence; c) ego extension, the idea that their knowledge is positively regarded and that their peers will empathize with their troubles; and d) interdependence, that one’s presence is missed and that their contribution is needed. All of these needs are uniquely met in SN sites such as Facebook. Likewise, the Theory of Validation (Rendon, 1994) further supports this noting that through social engagement and academic connection to their occupation, adults’ sense of self worth and their feelings that their contributions are valued are heightened. In addition, prior research analyses provide a theoretical basis for exploring the mechanisms used for interaction and the types of interactions (e.g, social-cultural or task-oriented) in which participants engaged. Rovai (2001) found that the sense of community was tied to both task-oriented and


75

socio-cultural interactions. In a complementary study, students progressed along certain stages - introduction, identification, interaction, involvement, and inquiry - prior to engagement in true online collaboration (WaltonenMoore, et al., 2006). Previous CMC findings and our theoretical rationale lead us to ask the following research questions: • Which Facebook features are most predominantly used by preservice education majors and are they being used in socio-cultural or professional, task-oriented ways? • In what ways are these features being used that may apply to resolving instructional issues and developing professional communities of practice? The purpose of this study was to explore how a sample of pre-service educators used social networking sites, such as Facebook, in ways that address a variety of instructional dilemmas and may facilitate professional communities of practice. Methods Following Institutional Review Board approval, we examined pre-service educators’ Facebook pages to determine which features are used and how they are deployed by education majors at a large public institution in the Midwest United States. This project employed a quantitative approach with a descriptive analysis of interaction, text, and picture data. Students with public profiles were identified via Facebook searches by school status, college year (graduation year), and area of concentration. Participants and Variables Participants included pre-service educators with active accounts on Facebook, who specified education as their concentration area, and were current students at the University where and when the research took place. Participants were identified through a friend search on active, public profiles that identified individuals in the university network who listed an anticipated graduation date of 2008 or 2009 and specified education as their major. (Due to changes in Facebook features, this type of search is no longer possible.) The majority of the sample were female, Caucasian, and between 20- 23 years. This group is reflective of current demographic trends in the

76


education profession that indicate 88% of the teaching population is white, and suggest an overall increase in younger teachers entering the profession (Planty, et al., 2007). Generation Y members—those born between 1977 and 1995—presently account for nearly one-fifth of the teaching population (Behrstock-Sherratt & Coggshall, 2010). While there are currently large numbers of teachers over the age of 50 in classrooms, one-third of these are expected to retire by 2013 (National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, 2009) and approximately 48 percent of public school teachers have fewer than 10 years of classroom experience (Coopersmith & Gruber, 2009). Eighteen per cent of the sample was comprised of older, non-traditional students ranging from age 24-55. Since over 200 pre-service educators at the institution currently maintain Facebook profiles, we included only those graduating in 2008 or 2009. From the 138 participants who met criteria (2008-2009 anticipated graduation date and major concentration of education), and because of the immense amount of data contained for each user, 54 (40%) were randomly selected for more intensive, descriptive and quantitative analyses. These analyses included classification of the types of pictures posted to the account; the number of wall posts and updates to an account within a one week period; descriptive analysis of the types of interactions in the wall and update posts; frequency counts of friends, video and audio files, and group membership; and demographic information provided in the profile. The investigators selected profiles based on random selection and then collected publicly accessible data on those profiles. Data Analysis Since Facebook users construct an online profile complete with audio, video or still pictures, view other user’s profiles, and accumulate ‘‘friends’’ who can post comments on each other’s “walls,” several variables were identified for analysis. These variables include: number of friends; use of the wall, video, pictures, networks, and groups; number of updates made by the user to their profile per week; number of wall posts made by the user and others to the identified user’s profile per week; whether groups were personal or professional; and demographic variables such as age, ethnicity as identified by profile photos, and gender. Updates to user profiles and wall posts were tracked over a one-week period in the fall that did not correspond with major holidays or vacation time. In addition, as we began identifying the number of pictures per user, we noticed a large number of sexually explicit or alcohol-related pictures and subsequently included whether


77

users had these types of pictures associated with their profile as a variable. Considering recent media focus on teachers’ SN profiles (Horvath, 2008; Shapira, 2008), profile pictures - including the picture included as a profile picture and all album pictures - were coded as sexually explicit if they involved nudity or engaging in a sexual activity or alcohol-related if they provided evidence of binge or heavy drinking (e.g. four or more alcoholic beverages per person [National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2010] in the picture). In total, of the 54 profiles originally examined we collected data on 15,336 pictures, 22 videos, 1,620 groups, 83 networks, 435 wall posts, and 216 profile updates over a one-week period. Prior to quantitative data analysis, data prescreening was performed. Extreme outliers were identified in two variables: number of pictures and number of friends. These two variables are considered major features of Facebook and were highly kurtotic and negatively skewed which resulted in a far larger mean and questionable standard deviation that was not reflective of the group. Transformation was considered but deemed inappropriate. Thus, extreme outliers with values larger or smaller than 2.5 standard deviations were removed resulting in N=48. Exploratory quantitative analyses provide a snapshot of the extent of Facebook usage (e.g., through frequencies and other descriptive statistics of student participation in various groups). In addition, data collected were analyzed using multiple regression techniques to determine variables significantly related to increased outside interaction with the individual profile or increased updates by the profile account owner. Additionally, analysis of these publicly accessible profiles permitted examination of various interaction types and variables established in the literature - namely student-to-student (e.g. wall postings and updates) and interface (e.g. picture, video, and audio files) variables - that promote engagement in social networking sites. Descriptive data included text in the form of written messages (e.g., wall postings and updates), profile information and pictures and video. These interaction data were evaluated using descriptive analysis that centered on developing an understanding of the nature of interactions among preservice teachers on Facebook. We specifically attended to any interactions that reflected an effort to use Facebook for professional, educational, or schoolbased purposes such as conversations about current teaching assignments, instructional strategies, or professionally-oriented group membership, indicative of professional, task-oriented CMC. Finally, we addressed the potential misuse of Facebook namely through analysis of user pictures that were sexually explicit, involved binge alcohol or illicit drug use, or that involved disclosure of information on K-12 students the pre-service teacher worked with during student teaching.


78

Results Descriptive statistics on the sample are presented in Table 1 and include a number of variables. These findings indicate a large variance in the activity of users. Some users had relatively low numbers of individuals posting to their wall (wall posts) while others experienced upwards of 50 posts in a single week. Pre-service educators belonged to a number of social groups (M = 33.76) and networks (M = 1.53) that appeared to be predominantly personal rather than professional. Examples of such groups include university athletics support, music, political, and religious groups. In general, participants were members of the local university, the local city, and their hometown networks. On average, these Facebook users had 411 friends and updated their profile 4.42 times per week. Ranges and standard deviations in participatory activities such as profile updates and pictures were quite large even with extreme outliers removed. Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for Usage and Activity Variables Variable

N

Mean

SD

Age

45

24.40

7.83

Wall Posts/Week

47

8.23

9.03

Pictures

48

284.25

302.86

Updates/Week

48

4.42

5.58

Friends

48

367.10

273.37

Video

48

0.40

1.03

Networks

48

1.52

0.68

Groups

48

30.29

25.62

Quantitative Findings Quantitative analyses indicate that interactions with others through asynchronous wall posts accounted for the greatest amount of variance (∆R2=.290, ∆F (1, 34) =76.683) in the number of weekly updates after accounting for major features and demographic variables. These relationships, however, appear cyclical since individual account owners were more likely to update their profile more frequently if “friends” posted more often to their wall. Reverse regression analysis, where the number of wall posts was the


79

dependent variable, showed identical significant findings indicative of this cyclical relationship. As can be seen in Table 2, age (t43=2.666, p>.05) and group membership (t43=2.135, p>.05) variables were also significantly related to the number of weekly updates an individual made to his or her profile. Surprisingly, older students more frequently updated their profiles. In addition, membership in Facebook interest groups also resulted in more frequent updates. Based on these findings and the resultant regression equation, older students who are members of more groups and have more wall posts per week are more likely to update their walls with information (Y’ = -3.842 + (.142)Age + (.038)Groups + (.448)Wallposts). Table 2 Predictors of Frequency of Facebook Profile Updates per Week

Facebook profile updates per week Model 4

Variable

Model 1 B

Constant

Model 2 B

Model 3 B

B

95% CI

3.890

0.477

-3.842

[-9.690, 2.006]

Gender

-8.125***

-8.27**

-7.740**

-1.666

[-5.056, 1.724]

Ethnicity

1.346

2.078

-1.390

-0.196

[-5.359, 4.967]

Age

0.251**

0.279**

0.299**

0.142*

[0.034, 0.250]

Pictures

0.002

0.002

0.000

[-0.003, 0.004]

Video

0.447

0.309

0.141

[-0.697, 0.979]

Networks

-0.205

0.875

1.376

[-0.240, 2.991]

Friends

0.001

-.002

-.002

[-0.007, 0.002]

0.07*

0.038*

[0.002, 0.073]

0.448***

[0.344, 0.552]

Groups Wall Posts/Week R2

0.492

0.519

0.581

0.933

F

12.889***

5.541***

6.060***

25.556***

0.027

0.062

0.290

0.507

5.185*

76.683***

∆R2 ∆F

Note. N=43. CI = confidence interval. * p < .05. **p< .01. ***p < .001


80

Considering recent media focus on teachers SN profiles (Horvath, 2008; Shapira, 2008), pictures were further examined to determine if preservice teachers had pictures depicting binge drinking or images that might be considered sexually explicit. Findings indicated that over 50% of the profiles examined had pictures depicting excessive alcohol or binge drinking while 17% of the profiles contained at least one sexually explicit photo. Neither the number of alcohol-related pictures nor the number of sexually suggestive photos were significantly related to increased interaction with peers evidenced through wall posts or increased updates evidenced by profile updates. Alarmingly, four (10%) profiles also had pictures of K-12 students and those students’ names from recent student teaching assignments. This finding was surprising given that students at the institution under study were specifically directed in pre-internship meetings that inclusion of student pictures and/or student names was a breach of confidentiality. Descriptive Findings Although purposeful professionally-related interaction in many groups was limited, further exploratory analyses evidenced participants’ efforts to seek out advice on instructional ideas, approaches, and dilemmas, as well as to vent frustrations related to issues they face as early career educators. Furthermore, at least two Facebook groups had been formed related to specific content in certain courses. Many students belonged to Facebook groups for certain classes. One undergraduate reading class started their own group for sharing notes and forming study groups. We were unable to ascertain whether these groups were suggested by the professor but did note that the professor did not have a publically or privately accessible Facebook account within the university network. One illustrative case from the data was Dave, an undergraduate senior and pre-service teacher in secondary education with over 700 friends and regular participation through wall postings. Dave posted the following message on his wall, a request for assistance in generating ideas for teaching secondary social studies content: Dave needs to find a way to teach Populism to high school kids and prevent them from falling asleep. 5:09pm “Sarah” 5:12pm I typically just use a chronological timeline of events to show cause/effect and the events leading to the movement.


81

“Marvin” 5:18pm maybe use the Wizard of Oz as a parable of populism? At least it keeps it interesting. “Kevin” 5:26pm what parts of populism are you focusing on? and you are talkin of the 1890-1920ish populism yeah? “Dave” at 5:33pm I’d actually been considering doing the Wizard of Oz comparison thing, but now that you mention it again, I think it’s a really good idea. Thanks for the idea.

Times are noted to indicate the speed with which Dave’s friends replied to his query for assistance. In another exchange, Dave commented further on challenges he experienced in the classroom: “Kayla”: How’re things? “Dave”: Just great, although some of my students are driving me quite batty, and I was disappointed that so many today didn’t realize that the Civil War came before World War I. Oh well... how about you? Finally, here Dave and four “friends” in education respond to Dave’s wall posting and share thoughts on high-stakes assessment and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), as well as the law’s impact on the teaching of content area history: Dave can’t believe that several people raised their hands in class when the instructor asked “Does anybody NOT know what the New Deal was?” “Karl” Two or three years ago, multiple people in my senior government class thought Ronald Reagan was the current vice president under Bush II. “Collin” “Alright, would everybody who just raised their hand please put one of these blindfolds on and stand against that wall over there. I’m going to go get my shotgun.”


82

“Clayton” Sadly Dave, with no child left untested, civics and history are being put even further on the back burner than in recent years. “Megan” Yeah... when my sister was teaching 3rd grade in Michigan... they weren’t even ALLOWED to teach social studies anymore so that they could devote more time to test prep for … No Child tests. And if it’s that way at the 3rd grade level... what’s happening in the older age groups? “Dave” That’s what I fear most - that I won’t have any time to teach anything because of the standardized testing madness Discussion Both quantitative and descriptive analyses suggest that Facebook is primarily used for socio-cultural interactions via real-time communications accomplished by text, pictures, video, and audio postings. In the following sections, we examine the Facebook features predominantly used by pre-service educators and how they apply those features to instructional and professional issues. We then examine limitations of our study and recommendations for future research. Facebook Features Predominantly Used Some features of Facebook show promise for building and increasing voluntary contributions and interactions within professional communities of practice in education. These include ways to personalize a profile, including video and pictures, as well as methods to promote asynchronous interaction (such as Facebook’s wall and interest groups) between the profile owner and individuals who visit that profile site. Quantitative and exploratory analysis indicated that interaction was significantly related to continued active involvement by the profile owner and vice versa via frequent profile updates and wall posts and interaction. While the majority of wall interactions were socio-cultural in nature, the relatively limited application to professional interactions including instructional strat-


83

egy idea generation and classroom support is still quite promising. Prior academic CMC research indicated that such task-oriented behaviors required careful scaffolding and mandatory student participation requirements (Sing & Khine, 2006) unless socio-cultural needs are met, resulting in strong community building (Rovai, 2001). Based on this study, Facebook features such as photo and video sharing, asynchronous wall postings, and profile updates help meet socio-cultural needs resulting in spontaneous, voluntary participation in task-oriented, professional interactions. Application to Instructional and Professional Issues Based on this study, preservice educators used Facebook mechanisms in ways that facilitated sharing of resources (Anderson, 2004; Assaf, 2005; Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000; Eilon & Kliachko, 2004), feelings of trust (Hough, et al., 2004), positive interdependence behaviors (Ikpeze, 2007; Thomas & Macgregor, 2005), and community-building interactions (Rovai, 2001; Rovai & Jordan, 2004). These interactions were most prevalent in wall posts and were evidenced in the results shared above and other more socio-cultural posts. While the Facebook interactions were predominantly socio-cultural in nature, these findings are promising for the inclusion of necessary features of online professional learning communities. Based on regression analysis, it would appear that the traditional graduate student (age 25 or older) more frequently participates in Facebook interactions but that these interactions are based primarily in social presence established through online group membership and regular interactions with electronic friends. Lastly, our findings indicated that over 50% of the profiles examined had pictures depicting excessive alcohol or binge drinking while 17% of the profiles contained at least one sexually explicit photo. Four (10%) profiles also had pictures of K-12 students and those students’ names from recent student teaching assignments. As a result, we recommend that teacher educators and school administrators provide professional development and enact explicit policies on the use of social networking. Teacher educators should inform pre- and in-service teachers of the prevalence of employer checks on social networking sites, previous negative incidents involving social networking and teachers, and specific information on K-12 student confidentiality (e.g. photography and video captures, revealing student names). Specific examples include inviting local district human resources to speak to pre-service teachers and requiring pre- and in-service teachers to research social networking policy in their district.

84


Limitations Our results are rather limited for generalization. We reported on a small, homogenous group representative of pre-service teacher educators at a large Midwest university. Most of the participants were traditional undergraduates between 20-23 years old, but a small percentage of the population (20%) fell within non-traditional demographics. While this sample may not be representative of teacher education as a whole, it is consistent with national statistics describing the teaching population with respect to gender (Coopersmith & Gruber, 2009), ethnicity, and age (Planty, et al., 2007). This study was also performed in a very limited time-span to determine the feasibility of a future long-term, large research study. In addition, this study was conducted to explore the ways in which Facebook is used by a sample population and lacks experimental control or interventions such as scaffolding or redirecting that may provide more insight into CMC. Our purpose was to examine which features in Facebook contribute to increased overall interaction, not to determine if those features lead to greater task-oriented, professional interactions. Recommendations for Future Research More research on using Facebook for professional communities of practice is needed. Currently, those 35 years old and older are the fastest growing Facebook demographic (“Facebook,” 2009) thus extending the potential for collaboration between pre- and in-service educators. In addition, businesses and professional organizations are increasing their online presence via Facebook profiles. Currently, the Facebook profile of the Council for Exceptional Children, a premier professional organization for special educators, has over 4,000 friends. Research on the types of interactions that take place on these professionally-oriented Facebook profiles is imperative, particularly in fields with high attrition such as special education. A d ditional research is needed on the types of social networking features that lead to greater interaction between users. While this descriptive study identified some key features that were utilized by users such as group membership and wall interaction, more empirical studies are needed. These studies should examine the various features alone and in combination using rigorous methodology including control and experimental groups. It is hoped that such studies would allow researchers to identify those features that contribute the largest variance to increased online interaction.


85

Conclusion Our study examined the types of Facebook features used by preservice teacher educators which contribute to increased interaction. We found that individuals who updated their profiles more frequently were more likely to experience greater interaction with peers through wall postings. In addition, some of those wall postings showed evidence of professional, task-oriented interactions which allowed individuals to share resources, collaboratively construct innovative instructional strategies, and provide support and mentorship. Individuals engaged in community-building, socio-cultural activities such as posting of pictures, sharing of personal information and data, and engaging in small talk (e.g. statements such as: how are you? how’d the test go?) prior to engagement in these task-oriented interactions. Third, we found evidence of binge and heavy drinking, sexually explicit, or confidentiality-violating images in over 50% of the profiles. Findings indicated that over 50% of the profiles examined had pictures depicting heavy alcohol or binge drinking, 17% of the profiles contained at least one sexually explicit or suggestive photo, and 10% of profiles included pictures and names of K-12 students from current student teaching assignments. These findings are important to future technology-based mentorship and professional learning communities and may provide insight into why SN’s such as Facebook have experienced greater community-building success and better long-term involvement over previous academic CMC. References Anderson, B. (2004). Dimensions of learning and support in an online community. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 19(2), 183-190. Assaf, L. C. (2005). Staying connected: Student teachers’ perceptions of computer-mediated discussions. The Teacher Educator, 40(4), 221-237. Behrstock-Sherratt, E., & Coggshall, J.G. (2010). Realizing the promise of Generation Y. Educational Leadership, 67(8), 28-34. Coopersmith, J., & Gruber, K.J. (2009). Characteristics of public, private, and Bureau ofIndian elementary and secondary school teachers in the United States: Results from the2007-2008 Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES 2009-324). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved March 9, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009324.pdf. Dutt-Doner, K. M. & Powers, S. M. (2000). The use of electronic communication to develop alternative avenues for classroom discussion. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 153-172.

86


Eilon, B. & Kliachko, S. (2004). The contribution of a substance-oriented forum to the study of human biology in science teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 5-24. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends:’’ social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143-1168. Facebook. (2009). Retrieved 10/10, 2009 from http://www.Facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics. Facebook. (2010). Retrieved 3/16, 2010, from http://www.Facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics. Fahy, P. J. (2003). Indicators of support in online interaction [Electronic Version]. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4. Retrieved June 23, 2007, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/129/600 Frank, A. M. (2004). Integrating computer mediated communication into a pedagogical education course: Increasing opportunity for reflection. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 20(2), 81-89. Fung, Y. Y. H. (2004). Collaborative online learning: Interaction patterns and limiting Factors. Open Learning, 19(2), 135-149. Gabriel, M. A. (2004). Learning together: Exploring group interactions online. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 54-72. Gilbert, P. K. & Dabbagh, N. (2005). How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 5-18. Hew, K. F. & Cheung, W. S. (2003a). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part I. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(3), 247262. Hew, K. F. & Cheung, W. S. (2003b). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part II. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(4), 355366. Horvath, S. (2008). Area teachers post questionable content on Facebook [Electronic Version]. South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Retrieved 10-20-08, from http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/education/sfl-flpfacebook0601pn jun01,0,370501.story Hough, B. W., Smithey, M. W., & Evertson, C. M. (2004). Using computer-mediated communication to create virtual communities of practice for intern teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(3), 361-386. Ikpeze, C. (2007). Small group collaboration in peer-led electronic discourse: An analysis of group dynamics and interactions involving preservice and inservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(3), 383-407. Jeong, A. (2006). Gender interaction patterns and gender participation in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(4), 195-210.


87

Killian, J. & Willhite, G. L. (2003). Electronic discourse in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(3), 377-395. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to androgogy (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge Books. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media and mobile internet use among teens and young adults. Retrived from Pew Internet and American Life Project website: http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media// Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Social_Media_and_Young_ Adults_Report_Final. pdf . National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (2009). Learning teams: Creating what’s next. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved September 3, 2009, from http://www.nctaf.org/documents/NCTAFLearningTeamsPolicyBriefFINAL.pdf National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2010). Underage drinking research initiative. Retrieved 2-15-2010 from http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/ AboutNIAAA/NIAAASponsoredPrograms/underage.htm. National School Boards Association. (2007). Creating & connecting: Research and guidelines on online social — and educational — networking. Retrieved 4-15-2008 from http://files.nsba.org/creatingandconnecting.pdf. Orrill, C. H. (2002). Supporting online pbl: Design considerations for supporting distributed problem solving. Distance Education, 23(1), 41-57. Pawan, F., Paulus, T. M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C.-F. (2003). Online learning: Patterns of engagement and interaction among in-service teachers. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 119-140. Planty, M., Provasnik, S., Hussar, W., Snyder, T., Kena, G., Hampden-Thompson. G., et al. (2007). The condition of education: 2007 (NCES 2007-064). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved March 9, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007064.pdf Read, B. (2007). A MySpace photo costs a student a teaching certificate [Electronic Version]. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 10-20-08 from http://chronicle.com/blogPost/A-MySpace-Photo-Costs-a-Stu/2994/. Rendon, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33-51. Rovai, A. P. (2001). Building classroom community at a distance: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 33-48. Rovai, A. P. & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses [Electronic Version]. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5. Retrieved June 23, 2007, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/192/795. Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. New Directions for Student Services(48).

88


Schrire, S. (2004). Interaction and cognition in asynchronous computer conferencing. Instructional Science, 32(6), 475-502. Shapira, I. (2008). When young teachers go wild on the web [Electronic Version]. The Washington Post. Retrieved 10-20-2008, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/27/AR2008042702213.html. Sing, C. C. & Khine, M. S. (2006). An analysis of interaction and participation patterns in online community. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 250261. Sullivan, B. (2010). Teachers, students and Facebook: A Toxic mix [Electronic Version]. MSNBC: The Redtape Chronicles. Retrieved 12-9-2010, from http://redtape.msnbc.com/2010/10/the-headlines-conjure-up-every-parentsnightmare-teachers-fired-for-flirting-on-facebook-with-students-the-newyork-post-r.html. Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Thomas, W. R. & Macgregor, S. K. (2005). Online project-based learning: How collaborative strategies and problem solving processes impact performance. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(1), 83-107. Vonderwell, S. & Zachariah, S. (2005). Factors that influence participation in online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2), 213. Waltonen-Moore, S., Stuart, D., & Newton, E. (2006). From virtual strangers to a cohesive online learning community: The evolution of online group development in a professional development course. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(2), 287-311. Wickstrom, C. D. (2003). A “Funny” Thing happened on the way to the forum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(5), 414-423.