Cited by 83English Language Learning and TeachingEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningMobile Learning in Education

A comparative study of Facebook vs. paper-and-pencil writing to improve L2 writing skills

Dizon, Gilbert·2016·Computer Assisted Language Learning

Abstract

Facebook has best leveraged the rapid technological and societal changes over the past decade to grow into the world's largest social-networking site (SNS). However, research of Facebook has lagged behind other Web 2.0 technologies, particularly in regards to investigating its efficacy versus a control group to improve L2 writing. This study, which involved 30 Japanese university English as a foreign language (EFL) students, aims to fill this gap in the literature by examining three areas of L2 writing, namely – writing fluency, lexical richness, and grammatical accuracy – in an experimental group using Facebook (n = 16) and a control group (n = 14) using paper-and-pencil. Both groups underwent a 12-week treatment of two in-class focused freewritings a week. Three writing assessments were administered at the start, middle, and end of the treatment to assess its effectiveness. Results from the Mann–Whitney test showed that the experimental group made more significant gains in terms of writing fluency. On the other hand, neither group made significant progress in lexical richness nor grammatical accuracy. These findings strengthen previous research in support of the use of Facebook in L2 classes and highlight the need for additional studies comparing Facebook with other writing mediums.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09588221.2016.1266369

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dizon, G.
Affiliations
Himeji Dokkyo University (JP)
Corresponding author
Dizon, Gilbert
Venue
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Published
2016-11-16
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
1249-1258
ISSN
  • 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3210
OpenAlex
W2562430402
Cited by
83
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 3
FWCI
20.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
Keywords
Facebook, social networking sites, second language writing, English as a foreign language, writing fluency, lexical diversity, grammatical accuracy, Japanese university students

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