Informal Reasons for using Social Networking sites

Dr.Almarwaey, Prof,Sung-Taek

2018 IIER 386th International Conference on Psychology, Language and Teaching (ICPLT)

Informal Reasons for using Social Networking sites (SNSs) in learning English Language and Students’ SelfEfficacy (SE) Alyaa Omar Almarwaey, Lim, Sung-Taek Lecturer of ESL Curricula & Instruction, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology & Statistics [email protected] , [email protected] Abstract— This study aimed to explore what are the informal reasons that college students prefer to use SNSs in learning English Language through self-efficacy theory to explain how using SNSs will affect students’ beliefs. The study used questionnaire and collected data of 286 participants from Umm AL-Qura University. The findings clearly reflect that there is a significant positive correlation between informal reasons for using SNSs and students’ SE. Multiple regression analysis showed informal reasons for using SNSs has a positive effect on the students’ SE. The results suggest that using SNSs in the

enjoyable learning purposes for informal reasons will promote students’ SE. Index Terms—: SNS, self-efficacy, English Language, informal learning, college students.

I. INTRODUCTION In the last recent years, social-networking sites (SNSs) such as Facebook, Twitter, My Space, I-talkie…etc are considered as a fundamental tool for social interacting, communication, and sharing of information. They enable individuals to join virtual groups and explore hobbies, tendencies, interests, and other specific knowledge of group members. Hence, SNSs give individuals the opportunity to express themselves and keep in touch with their family members, relatives, old friends, colleagues or establishing new relationships in an open and liberal way. Furthermore, through social-networking applications, users can achieve many advantages with access to a different set of information from wide range of sources (Meyen et al, 2002; Yu et al., 2010). Additionally, many researchers in previous studies confirmed that youth people today use social media in the most common useful and professional ways, both for learning and social purposes (Arnold & Paulus, 2010; Ryberg & Christiansen, 2008;Vrocharidou & Efthymiou, 2012; Wang & Wu, 2008;Wodzicki et al, 2011), and proved that college students are combining SNSs in their academic experiences both formally and informally in blended or online environments (Arnold & Paulus, 2010; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2011; Kabilan, Ahmad, & Abidin, 2010; Northcote & Kendle, 2011). It is important to utilize the significance of students’ self-efficacy in Saudi students’ academic life through using SNSs technology as methods of learning English language. There are limited studies in educational field that show the effect of informal using SNSs technology as a way of learning English language on students’ self-efficacy in higher education, in particular, on Saudi students. Thus, the importance of this study is shown in following objectives:

Dr.Almarwaey, Prof.Sung-Taek

1- To illustrate the informal reasons (INR) for using social networking sites (SNSs) by Saudi students in higher education in English language. 2- To find the relationship between the INR for using SNSs and academic self-efficacy. 3- To enhance using SNSs technology as a learning instrument in educational environment and students’ life to promote their self-efficacy (SE), thus lead them to achieve success through effective using of SNSs as a methods of learning English language.

Reasons for Using SNSs

informal Reasons (INR)

Students’ SelfEfficacy (SE)

Figure 1. The framework of the study II. LITERATURE REVIEW The complexity and energy of using SNSs for under graduate students’ experiences are not present only as academic learning but also as social and acculturation learning (DeAndrea et al, 20111; Tian et al, 2011; Yu et al, 2010). Social learning refers to communication and interaction with friends, colleagues, and acquaintances based on shared interest to present homogenous group more than existing friendship (Ryberg & Christiansen, 2008) In general, social networking sites and electronic media influence students’ acculturation, social observation and interaction (DeAndrea et al., 2011; Wodzicki et al, 2011). They are explained by social cognitive theory, in particular, self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997, DeAndrea et al, 2011) to direct


students’ behavior and beliefs (DeAndrea et al, 2011). There are many argues around the effect of SNSs on college students for informal and cultural learning, and socialization (DeAndrea et al, 2011) which reflect informal reasons for using SNSs in this research such as to find like-minded group or people and share organized knowledge with them. Some researchers have examined the relationship between engagement on Facebook, socialization, selfefficacy, and learning outcomes (Nadkarni & Hofmann, 2012; Yu et al, 2010) and promoting students to achieve or set their goals (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2011; Yu et al, 2010). The results confirmed the benefits of Facebook usage for students’ socialization at university and its learning outcomes (Nadkarni, & Hofmann, 2012; Yu et al, 2010). Further research revealed that college students mostly use SNSs to form their identity, communication, and endorse social integration (Wodzicki et al, 2011). This in turn minimizes the gap between using SNSs and students’ selfefficacy (Yu et al, 2010) of perceived benefits. These benefits are presented as enjoyment, usefulness, and interacting with peers and colleagues correlate with student’ selfefficacy to enhance their academic performance through effective SNSs usage (Lin & Lu, 2011; Nadkarni & Hofmann, 2012; Yu et al, 2010). Furthermore, SNSs system constructs and encourages culture and collaboration of sharing on SNSs among students and faculty with similar interests or learning and teaching circumstances across courses (Churchill et al, 2009).

factors involved different kinds of measurements, one of them was INR for using SNSs as independent variable, and the second factor was about SE as dependent variable. The measurements were taken on 5-point Likert-scale with endpoints ranging from 5 = “Strongly agree” to 1 = “Strongly disagree.” The questionnaire items of the second part were adopted from previous studies, which have been validated and believed to be highly reliable in data collection. The measures of informal reasons (INR) for using SNSs was also adopted from previous studies. Among the items used as measure of informal reason, 3 items were reported by Hung and Yuen (2010), 1 item was from Wodzicki et al. (2011), and 5 items were from Lin and Lu (2011) with Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.82 to 0.91. Examples of NAR items: (I think I use Social Networking Sites in general because: They would be easy to find any information that I need it in my life, they can be able me to create my own group). In the current study, the Cronbach’s alpha for nonacademic reasons was (α = 0.937) for 9 items. The measure of self-efficacy (SE) was derived from 8 items adopted from motivated strategies for learning questionnaires (MSLQ) that developed by Bong (2001), and Pintrich et al. (1991) and were reported in several studies (Bong, 1997; Joo et al, 2000) with reliable scale was assessed (α=0.93). Examples of SE items: (I believe I will receive excellent grades in my courses this semester, I expect do well in my courses this semester). Cronbach’s alpha for selfefficacy in the current study was (α = 0,90) for 8 items. A whole Cronbach’s alpha for all study factors was (α = 0,94).

III. METHOD This study was carried out in Umm Al-Qura University (UQU). It included 286 participants—146 participants of them were females and 140 were males. All participants were volunteered students from English Language Department from girl’s UQU and boy’s UQU in Mecca in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Over 90% of routine interaction with faculty or colleagues, whether they have SNSs group(s) for academic courses or not, they use English language in e-mail and mobile messages as they said. The data was collected at the middle of summer semester in Saudi Arabia between the last week of June and third week of July in 2012. Firstly, participants were divided into groups each consists of 25-30 students. Five groups were chosen randomly from boys’ UQU and six groups of similar size were from girls’ UQU. Total time allotted for collection of data from each group was 25 minutes. The participants were given a full description of the procedures to answer the questionnaire components for the first five minutes of each session, and then, participants were asked to give their responses accurately and fill all parts of the questionnaire within next 20 minutes. The tool used for data collection in this study was a questionnaire that was divided into two main parts: The first part was consists of general information that could be measured in semantic scale (e.g., gender, have an account on SNSs, checking account). The second part contained two Dr.Almarwaey, Prof.Sung-Taek

IV. RESULTS The results of the study analyzed data by statistic package for social science (SPSS) version .19 for each part and factor of the study according to study objectives. The results of research arrangement organize as follows. A. Descriptive Statistics Students’ responses to questions of the first part of the study indicate that most of male students have the good and excellent familiarity with using the SNSs regardless of whether they have academic group on it or not. As shown in Table 1, an independent-sample t-test conducted to compare the means’ scores of familiarities with using SNSs for males and females. There were no significant differences in scores for males (Mean = 3.02, standard deviation (SD) = 1.063) and females (Mean = 2.88, SD = 0.883) with t = 0.233. Participants’ gender Male Female Total

Number 140 146 286

Mean 3.02 2.88 2.95

SD 1.063 0.883 0.976

t 0.233

Table 1 Measure of Familiarity With SNSs in Male and Female Students The most famous SNSs usage by college students was Facebook in both male and female students as shown in Table 2.


Frequency Percent (%) Male Female Male Female Facebook 68 124 48.6 84.9 Twitter 3 11 2.1 7.5 All of the previous 47 7 33.6 4.8 None of the previous 22 4 15.7 2.7 Total 140 146 100.0 100.0 Table 2 Students’ Personal Accounts on SNSs As presented in Table 3, checking of accounts from one to five times per day ranged higher in male participants’ responses ranged 34.3%, while 47.9% of female participants’ responses. In addition, as shown in Table 4, number of academic group on SNSs, there are 50.0% of male participants do not have any SNS group for academic course, 40.7% have one academic group on SNS, and 9.3% have two academic groups on SNSs. While female participants’ responses show that 34.9% have two academic groups on SNSs, 30.8% have one academic group on SNS, 10.3% have three groups on SNSs, and only 24.0% do not have any academic group on SNSs.

Once a day One to five times per day Six to10 times per day More than 10 times a day Never Total

Frequency Male Female 36 38

Percent (%) Male Female 25.7 26.0

48

70

34.3

47.9

31

34

22.1

23.3

3

0

2.1

0.0

22

4

15.7

2.7

100.0

100.0

140 146

Table 3 Trend of Checking Accounts on SNSs Frequency Percent (%) Male Female Male Female One group 57 45 40.7 30.8 Two groups 13 51 9.3 34.9 Three groups and more 0 15 0.0 10.3 None 70 35 50.0 24.0 140 146 100.0 100.0 Total

above mean score = 2.05. As shown in table 6, participants agreed on using SNSs technology informally for most important reasons as following: because it would be easy for them to find appropriate group that is close to their hobbies tendencies through friends’ profiles (mean score = 2.13), will let them share their personal interest with others and vice versa ( mean score = 2.12), be able to shape many pages to express their individuality and creativity ( mean score = 2.10), and will improve their efficiency in sharing information and connecting with others ( mean score = 2.05). Items I think I use Social Networking Sites in general because: 1.

They would be easy to find appropriate group that is close to my hobbies tendencies through friends’ profiles. 2. They can be able to let me share my personal interest with others. 3. They can be able to shape many pages to express individuality and creativity. 4. They will improve my efficiency in sharing information and connecting with others. 5. They enable me to know more people from same or different culture(s). 6. They can be able me to create my own group. 7. They will be a useful service for interaction between members. 8. They would be easy to find any information that I need it in my life. 9. I could let me share my knowledge with others and vice versa. Table 5. Informal reasons for using SNSs

M

SD

2.13

.997

2.12

1.003

2.10

.925

2.05

.891

2.03

.960

2.01

1

1.97

.843

1.92

.867

1.90

.867

C. The relationship between INR for using SNSs, and ASE Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to assess the relationship between informal reasons for using SNSs and self-efficacy. There was a significant positive

Table 4 Number of Academic Group(s) on SNSs B. Informal Reasons for using SNSs In table 5, students in the second factor (informal reasons) of the study expressed their common opinions for all 9 items of using SNSs for informal reasons which are Dr.Almarwaey, Prof.Sung-Taek

correlation between informal reasons and students’ selfefficacy (r = 0.346, p < 0.01); as shown in table 6. That


means the higher levels of informal reasons for using SNSs

individuality and creativity; and (3) interacting with others

between students are associated with students’ self-

from same and different culture (s).

efficacy. In general, the increasing in reasons for using SNSs

The effect of informal reasons for using SNSs had a

were correlated

significant positive effect on students’ self-efficacy. This

with increasing in self- efficacy

result consists with previous studies (DeAndrea et al, 2011;

Factors 1. Informal Reasons 2. Students' Self-Efficacy

1 1 .346**

2

Lin & Lu, 2011), suggests the positive influence of

1

usefulness correlated to informal learning of using SNSs for indorsing

** P > 0.01 Table 6. The relationships between three factors

self-efficacy

to

find

information,

share

knowledge, find appropriate groups, connecting and interacting with others, and share personal interests.

D. The effects of reasons for using SNSs on students’ selfefficacy Multiple regression analysis showed informal reasons for using SNSs explained 13.6 % of students’ self-efficacy (F = 19.925, p < 0.001), as shown in table 7. Controlling the effect of informal reasons for using SNSs. Controlling the effect of informal reasons for using SNSs have a significant positive effect on students’ self-efficacy (β = .300, p < .05).

Depending on social learning interaction, especially such as Facebook or Twitter, the people will have a good chance to improve their learning and acquire different language skills easily. Due to students and faculty recognition of the importance of the matter, it is utmost necessary to imply new resource technology as SNSs in teaching and learning circumstances. In addition to informal reasons for using SNSs for

Predictors

B

Β

P

0.239

0.300***

.000

enjoyment, and usefulness learning as appraised in this Informal Reasons

research, the results showed that participants had positive *** P < .001 Table 8. Model summary of multiple regression

response toward using SNSs to find appropriate group(s), sharing personal interests, expressing creativity and

V. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION The second factor discusses if SNSs can posit as useful and

individuality, sharing information with others (Lin & Lu,

enjoyable environment, acculturation, and socialization.

2011; Hung & Yuen, 2010; Wodzicki et al, 2011) .

According to Yu et al (2010) hypothesis that express

In multiple regression analysis when controlling the

interacting with peers on SNSs to strength the ties between

other variable’s effect, informal reasons for using SNSs had

social support and sense of belonging through many facets

significant positive effect on students’ self-efficacy. There

(1) find same group to share hobbies, knowledge, personal

are many reasons explained these results. Firstly, most of

interests, and meet new or old people; (2) express

scholars agreed that youth use SNSs technology for supporting emotions, to feel more freedom, and to



improve their social life. These findings are almost correspondent to the results of recent studies (Lin & Lu, 2011; Wodzicki et al, 2011). In addition, there are many proofs that college students use SNSs technology for getting a positive effect of socialization at universities, and social learning outcomes (Lin & Lu, 2011; Nadkarni & Hofmann, 2012; Wodzicki et al, 2011). Related to this study. Future works might examine the students’ perceptions when they are using SNSs informally for

learning

English

language

within

arrangement

experiences, academic achievements, and personal goals. REFERENCES Acar, A. (2008). Antecedents and Consequences of Online Social Networking Behavior: The Case of Facebook. Journal of Website Promotion, 3 (1/2), 62 – 83. Alebaikan, R. & Troudi, S. (2010). Blended learning in Saudi universities: challenges and perspectives. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology,18 (1), 49–59. Al-Garni, M. M. (2000). The Impact of Family Structure and Family Function Factors on the Deviant Behaviors of High School Students in Makkah City, Saudi Arabia. Doctor dissertation, The Ohaio State Univirsity. Alheqal ,S., (1998 ). Education System and Policy in Saudi Arabia: History, Bases and Objectives. (12th ed). Riyadh: KSA, (in Arabic). Alkahtani, N. (2012). The impacts of social media and electronic mediating: improving educational outcomes for Saudi women within an electronic social networking environment. A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Electronic Commerce at The University of Waikato. Almunajjed, M. (1997). Women in Saudi Arabia Today. United States: St. Martins Press. Alrasheed, M. (1992). Saudi Arabia and the gulf war. USA International institute of technology, Inc. Alzahrani, I. & Woollard, J. 16-17 April (2012). The Potential of Wiki Technology as an E-Learning Tool in Science and Education; Perspectives of Undergraduate Students in Al-Baha University, Saudi Arabia. 2nd International Conference on E-Learning & Knowledge Management Technologies (ICEKMT). Malaysia. Arnold, N. Paulus, T. (2010). Using a social networking sites for experiential learning: appropriating, lurking, modeling and community building. Internet and Higher Education, 13 (4), 188196. Bahgat, G. (1999).Education in the Gulf Monarchies: Retrospect and Prospect. International Review of Education. 45 (2), 127-136. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: the exercise of control. NY: Freeman. Bong, M. (1997). Congruence of measurement specificity on relations between academic self-efficacy, effort, and achievement indexes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL.


Bong, M. (2001) Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26 (4), 553- 570. Boyd, d. m., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. Brady, K. P., Holcomb, L. B., & Smith, B. V. (2010). The use of alternative social networking sites in higher educational settings: a case study of the e-learning benefitsof Ning in education. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9 (2), 151-170. Bunt-Kokhuis, S. V., & Sultan, N. (2012). Servant-leadership: the online way! E-learning where community building is key. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. http://www.eurodl.org/?article=472. Elango, R. Gudep, V. K. & Selvam, M. (2008). Quality of eLearning: An Analysis Based on e-Learners’ Perception of eLearning. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 6 (1), 31 – 44. Chu, M., & Meulemans, Y. N. (2008). The Problems and potential of My Space and Facebook Usage in academic libraries. Internet Reference Services Quarerly, 13 (1), 69-85. Churchill, D. Wong, W. Law, N. Salter, D., & Tai, B. (2009). Social bookmarking-repository-networking: possibilities for support of teaching and learning in higher education. Serials Review 35 (3), 142-148. Clarke, P.; Ainscow,(2004). M., eds. Third millennium schools: a world of difference in effectiveness and improvement, p. 107–24. Lisse, The Netherlands,Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas A. (2011). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: a natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet and Higher Education, 15 (1), 3-8. DeAndrea, D. C., Ellison, N. B., Larose, R., Steinfield, C., & Fiore, A. (2011). Serious social media: On the use of social media for improving students' adjustment to college. Internet and Higher Education, 15 (1), 15-23. Finamore, D. C. D., Hochanadel, A. J., Hochanadel, C. E., Millam, L. A., & Reinhardt, M. M. (2012). Electronic media: a motivational strategy for student success. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 15. Gangadharbatla, H. (2008). Facebook me: collective self-esteem, need to belong, and internet self-efficacy as predictors of the igeneration's attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8 (2), 5-15. Harrison, R., & Thomas, M. (2009). Identity in online communities: social networking sites and language learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society,7, (2), 109 – 124. Hart, J., Ridley, C., Taher, F., Sas, C., & Dix, A. (2008). Exploring the facbook experience: a new approach to usability. (pp. 471-474). NY: ACM. Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28, 561-569. Hung, H., & Yuenb, S. C. (2010). Educational use of social networking technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 15 (6), 703 - 714. International Exhibition &Conference on Higher Education (IECHE). 17 - 20 April (2012). Riyadh, International Convention & Exhibition Center. Joo, Y., Bong, M., & Choi, H. (2000). Self-efficacy for selfregulated learning, Academic Self Efficacy, and Internet Self Efficacy in Web based Instruction. ETR & D, 48 (2), 5-17. Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 13 (4), 179-187.


Khan, B. H. (2001). Virtual U: A hub for excellence in education, training and learning resources (pp. 491-506). NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Kim, J. (2012). A study on learners’ perceptional typology and relationships among the learner’s types, characteristics, and academic achievement in a blended e-Education environment. Computers & Education, 59, 304-315. Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Lei, J. (2012). What factors predict undergraduate students’ use of technology for learning? A case from Hong Kong. Computers & Education, 59 (2), 569-579. Lin, K., & Lu, H. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in human behavior, 27 (6), 11521161. Liu, G., Liu, Z., & Hwang, G. (2011). Developing multi-dimensional evaluation criteriafor English learning websites with university students and professors. Computers &Education, 56, 65-79. Meyen, E. L., Aust, R. Gauch, J. M., Hinton, H. S., Isaacson, R. E., Smith, S. J., & Tee, M. Y. (2002). E-Learning: a programmatic research construct for the future. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17 (3), 37-46. Miller, R., Parsons, K., & Lifer, D. (2010). Students and social networking sites: the posting paradox. Behavior & Information Technology, 29 (4), 377-382. Ministry of Information,(2001). King Fahd National Library. Riyadh: Saudi Arabia. Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 243-249. Northcote, M., & Kendle, A. (2001). Informal online networks for learning: Making use of incidental learning through recreation. Paper presented at the International Education Research Confrence, December 2-6. Australia: Fremantle. Paul A., & Gore, Jr. (2006). Academic Self-Efficacy as a Predictor of College Outcomes: Two Incremental Validity studies. Journal of Career Assessment, 14 (1), 92-115. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). National center for research to improve postsecondary teaching. Michigan: Ann Arbor. Robin, M., & Frank, R. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: resources for higher education. New York: Taylors & Francis. Roblyera, M., McDanielb, M., Webbc, M., Hermand, J., & Wittye, J.V. (2010). Findingson Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13 (3), 134140. Ryberg, T., & Christiansen, E. (2008). Community and social networking sites as technology enhanced learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17 (3), 207-219. SALEH, M. A. (1986). Development of higher education in Saudi Arabia. Higher Education, 15, 17- 23. Schunk, D. H. (2009). Learning theories an educational perspective (5th ed.). Pearson Education, New Jersey. Sultan, N., Bunt-Kokhuis, S. V. D., Davidson, C., Sentini, A., & Weir, D. (2012). E- Learning in the Arab Gulf: Responding to the Changing World of Education. The GCC Economics, 1, 33-48. Tian, S. W., Yu, A. Y., Vogel, D, L., Kwok, R. C. (2011). The impact of online social networking on learning: a social integration perspective. International Journal of Networking and virtual Organizations, 8 (3-4), 264-280. Vrocharidou., A., & Efthymiou I. (2012). Computer mediated communication for social and academic purposes: Profiles of use and University students’ gratifications. Computers & Education, 58 (1), 609-616.


Wang, S., & Wu, P. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web based learning: The Social Cognitive Perspective. Computers & Education, 51 (4), 1589-1598. Wodzicki, K., Schwämmlein, E., & Moskaliuk, J. (2011). “Actually, I wanted to learn”: study-related knowledge exchange. Internet and Higher Education, 15 (9), 9-14. Wu, S., Wang, S., Liu, E. Z., Hu, D., & Hwang, W. (2012). The influences of social self-efficacy on social trust and social capital – a case study of Facebook. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11 (2), 246-254. Yen, J., & Lee, C. (2011). Exploring problem solving patterns and their impact on learning achievement in a blended learning environment. Computers & Education, 56, 138-145. Yu, A. Y., Tian, S. W., Vogel, D., & Kwok, R. C. (2010). Can learning be virtually boosted? An investigation of online social networking impacts. Computers & Education, 55 (4), 1494-1503.