Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 526

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Facebook and the others. Potentials and obstacles of Social Media for teaching in higher education

Manca, Stefania, Ranieri, Maria·2016·Computers & Education
DOI 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.012
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Social Media tools are seen by many authors as powerful drivers of change for teaching and learning practices, in terms of openness, interactivity and sociability. However, extensive surveys about actual use that are carried out with large samples at a national level are rare. This study reports the results of a survey addressed to the Italian academic staff, with the aim of identifying the uses of Social Media in the field of university teaching practices. The response rate was 10.5%, corresponding to 6139. The respondents were asked to identify frequency of use, motivations, teaching practices and obstacles related to the use of a number of tools: generic social network sites (Twitter, Facebook), professional and academic networking services (LinkedIn, ResearchGate and Academia.edu), tools to write and comment (blogs, wikis) and to archive and retrieve content material for lectures and group work (podcasts, YouTube and Vimeo, SlideShare). Analyses of data tested which socio-demographic variables mostly affected frequency of use, and the relationships between motivations, ways of use, barriers to use and the scientific discipline. The results show that Social Media use is still rather limited and restricted and that academics are not much inclined to integrate these devices into their practices for several reasons, such as cultural resistance, pedagogical issues or institutional constraints. However, there are differences among academics in the ways they use Social Media or perceive them, mostly depending on the scientific discipline of teaching. Overall, the results emphasise ambivalent attitudes towards the benefits and challenges of Social Media in the context of higher education with obstacles prevailing over advantages. We examine the frequency of use of Social Media for teaching purposes.The variable most associated with frequency of use is scientific discipline.We present motivations and ways to use Social Media tools in teaching.A principal component analysis reveals three main factors as obstacles to use.Results show a complex scenario where potentials and barriers are intertwined.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.012

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 526

Metadata

Authors
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M.
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-04
Volume
95
Pages
216-230
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.012
OpenAlex
W2259026301
Cited by
526
References
49
FWCI
104.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.