A critical review of the literature of social media’s affordances in the classroom

E-Learning and Digital Media

Volumn 12, Issue 5-6, 2015, Pages 481-501

  Stewart, Olivia G ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

context; education; learning; literacies; literacy practices; mobile apps; qualitative; Social media; social networking sites

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993929543     PISSN: 17418887     EISSN: 20427530     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2042753016672895     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Ajayi L, (2008) Meaning-making, multimodal representation, and transformative pedagogy: An exploration of meaning construction instructional practices in an ESL high school classroom. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 7(3/4): 206–229. http://dx.doi.org/:10.1080/15348450802237822.
2. Anderson T, Dron J, (2011) Three generations of distance education pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 12(3): 80–97.
3. Archer A, (2006) A multimodal approach to academic “literacies”: Problematising the visual/verbal divide. Language and Education 20(6): 449–462. http://doi.org/10.2167/le677.0.
4. Arizpe E, Styles M, (2008) A critical review of research into children's responses to multimodal texts. In: Flood J, Heath SB, Lapp D, (eds) Handbook of Research on Teaching Literacy Through the Communicative and Visual Arts, Volume II: A Project of the International Reading Association, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 363–373.
5. Barton D, Hamilton M, Ivanič R, (2000) Situated Literacies: Reading and Writing in Context, Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
6. Beauchamp G, Kennewell S, (2010) Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning. Computers & Education 54(3): 759–766. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.033.
7. Bezemer J and Kress G (2014) Young people, Facebook and pedagogy: Recognizing contemporary forms of multimodal text making. Manuscript prepared for Kontopodis M, Varvantakis C, Dafermos M, et al. (eds.) Youth, Tube, Media: Qualitative Insights and International Perspectives (submitted May 2014). Berlin: Waxmann. Available at: http://www.academia.edu/6916873/Young_people_Facebook_and_Pedagogy_Recognizing_Contemporary_Forms_of_Multimodal_Text_Making (accessed 19 September 2015)
8. Bialostok SM, (2014) Metaphors that teachers live by: A cultural model of literacy in the era of new literacies. Language and Education 28(6): 501–520. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.905591 (accessed 22 September 2015).
9. Blaschke LM, (2014) Using social media to engage and develop the online learner in self-determined learning. Research in Learning Technology 22(1): 1–23. http://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.21635.
10. boyd D, (2011) Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In: Papacharissi Z, (ed.) Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network sites, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 39–58.
11. boyd DM, Ellison NB, (2007) Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(1): 210–230. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x.
12. Brabazon T, (2011) “We’ve spent too much money to go back now’: Credit-crunched literacy and a future for learning. E-Learning and Digital Media 8(4): 296–314. http://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2011.8.4.296.
13. Buck A, (2012) Examining digital literacy practices on social network sites. Research in the Teaching of English 47(1): 9–38. Available at: http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/RTE/0471-aug2012/RTE0471Examining.pdf (accessed 35 September 2015).
14. Cochrane TD, (2014) Critical success factors for transforming pedagogy with mobile Web 2.0: Transforming pedagogy with mobile web 2.0. British Journal of Educational Technology 45(1): 65–82. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01384.x.
15. Collin R, Street BV, (2014) Ideology and interaction: Debating determinisms in literacy studies. Reading Research Quarterly 49(3): 351–359. http://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.75.
16. Conole G, Dyke M, (2004) What are the affordances of information and communication technologies? ALT-J 12(2): 113–124. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/14186.pdf (accessed 19 October 2015).
17. Crook C, (2012) The “digital native” in context: tensions associated with importing Web 2.0 practices into the school setting. Oxford Review of Education 38(1): 63–80. http://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2011.577946.
18. Curwood JS, (2013) The hunger games: Literature, literacy, and online affinity spaces. Language Arts 90(6): 417–427. Available at: http://www.jensc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Curwood-Literature-Literacy-and-Online-Affinity-Spaces.pdf (accessed 15 December 2015).
19. Dabbagh N, Kitsantas A, (2012) Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education 15(1): 3–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002.
20. Daer AR, Hoffman R and Goodman S (2014) Rhetorical functions of hashtag forms across social media applications. ACM Press 1–3. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2666216.2666231 (accessed 16 March 2016)
21. Dalton B, Palincsar A, (2007) Reading to Learn: Investigating General and Domain Specific Supports in a Technology-Rich Environment with Diverse Readers Learning from Informational Text, Washington, DC: Institute for Education Sciences.
22. DuBose C, (2011) The social media revolution. Radiologic Technology 83(2): 112–119.
23. Edwards-Groves CJ, (2011) The multimodal writing process: Changing practices in contemporary classrooms. Language and Education 25(1): 49–64. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2010.523468.
24. Edwards-Groves CJ and Langley M (2009) i-Kindy: Responding to home technoliteracies in the kindergarten classroom. Bridging Divides Conference Papers. Paper presented at the AATE/ALEA National 2009. Hobart, Australia
25. Ellison NB, Steinfield C, Lampe C, (2011) Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media and Society 13(6): 873–892.
26. English R, Duncan-Howell J, (2008) Facebook goes to college: Using social networking tools to support students undertaking teaching practicum. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 4(4): 596–601. Available at: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no4/english_1208.pdf (accessed 30 March 2016).
27. Forkosh-Baruch A, Hershkovitz A, (2012) A case study of Israeli higher-education institutes sharing scholarly information with the community via social networks. The Internet and Higher Education 15(1): 58–68. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.08.003.
28. Gee JP, (2015) Unified Discourse Analysis: Language, Reality, Virtual Worlds and Video Games, Abingdon, UK; New York, NY: Routledge.
29. Greenhow C, Gleason B, (2012) Twitteracy: Tweeting as a new literacy practice. The Educational Forum 76(4): 464–478. Available at: http://blog.iliou-melathron.de/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/TEF764_Greenhow_Gleason-2.pdf (accessed 24 October 2016).
30. Greenhow C, Gibbins T, Menzer MM, (2015) Re-thinking scientific literacy out-of-school: Arguing science issues in a niche Facebook application. Computers in Human Behavior 53: 593–604. Available at: http://fulltext.study/preview/pdf/350136.pdf (accessed 24 October 2016).
31. Greenhow C, Robelia B, Hughes JE, (2009) Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher 38(4): 246–259. http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09336671.
32. Guzzetti BJ, Gamboa M, (2004) Zines for social justice: Adolescent girls writing on their own. Reading Research Quarterly 39(4): 408–436.
33. Halverson ER, (2009) Shifting learning goals: From competent tool use to participatory media spaces in the emergent design process. Cultural Studies of Science Education 4(1): 67–76. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9136-7.
34. Hew KF, Cheung WS, (2013) Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review 9(1): 47–64. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.08.001.
35. Hughes JM and Morrison L (2014) The impact of social networking and a multiliteracies pedagogy on english language learners' writer identities. Writing & Pedagogy 6(3): 607–631. http://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v6i3.607
36. Hull GA, Nelson ME, (2005) Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication 22(2): 224–261. http://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304274170.
37. Hull GA, Stornaiuolo A, Sterponi L, (2013) Imagined readers and hospitable texts: Global youth connect online. In: Alvermann D, Unrau N, Ruddell R, (eds) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, 6th edition. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp. 1208–1240.
38. Jimoyiannis A, Angelaina S, (2012) Towards an analysis framework for investigating students’ engagement and learning in educational blogs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28(3): 222–234.
39. Kalantzis M, Cope B, (2005) Learning by Design, Melbourne, Australia: Victorian Schools Innovation Commission and Common Ground Publishing.
40. Kalantzis M, Cope B, (2008) Language education and multiliteracies. In: Hornberger N, (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Education, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 195–211. Available at: http://newlearningonline.com/_uploads/springerhandbook.pdf (accessed 19 October 2015).
41. Kaplan AM, Haenlein M, (2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons 53(1): 59–68. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003.
42. Kaufer D, Gunawardena A, Tan A, (2011) Bringing social media to the writing classroom: Classroom salon. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 25(3): 299–321. http://doi.org/10.1177/1050651911400703.
43. Kellner D, (2000) New technologies/new literacies: Reconstructing education for the new millennium. Teaching Education 11(3): 245–265. http://doi.org/10.1080/713698975.
44. Kress G, (2003) Literacy in the New Media Age, Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
45. Kress G and Van Leeuwen T (2001) Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Vol. 312. London: Arnold
46. Liew W (2010) Digital hidden transcripts: Exploring student resistance in blogs. Computers and Composition 27: 304–314
47. Lankshear C, Bigum C, (1999) Literacies and new technologies in school settings. Pedagogy, Culture & Society 7(3): 445–465. http://doi.org/10.1080/14681369900200068.
48. Lankshear C, Knobel M, (2007) Researching new literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives. E-Learning 4(3): 224–240. http://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2007.4.3.224.
49. Lee CKM, (2007) Affordances and text-making practices in online instant messaging. Written Communication 24(3): 223–249. http://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307303215.
50. Lenhart A (2015) Teens, Social Media and Technology Overview 2015. Pew Research Center, April 2015. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/04/PI_TeensandTech_Update2015_0409151.pdf (accessed 19 October 2015)
51. Leu DJ, Kinzer CK, Coiro J, (2013) New literacies: A dual level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In: Alvermann DE, Unrau NJ, Ruddell RB, (eds) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp. 1150–1181.
52. Lewis S, Pea R, Rosen J, (2010) Beyond participation to co-creation of meaning: Mobile social media in generative learning communities. Social Science Information 49(3): 351–369. http://doi.org/10.1177/0539018410370726.
53. Luke C (2000) Cyber-schooling and technological change. In Cope B and Kalanzis (eds) Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. South Yarra, Australia: Macmillan, pp. 69–91
54. Mackey M, (1998) The Case of Peter Rabbit: Changing Conditions of Literature for Children, New York, NY: Garland.
55. Madge C, Meek J, Wellens J, (2009) Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’. Learning, Media and Technology 34(2): 141–155.
56. Magrino W, Sorrell P, (2014) Teaching the new paradigm: Social media inside and outside the classroom. Writing and Pedagogy 5(2): 357–373. http://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v5i2.357.
57. Manca S, Ranieri M, (2013) Is it a tool suitable for learning? A critical review of the literature on Facebook as a technology-enhanced learning environment: Is Facebook a tool suitable for learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 29(6): 487–504. http://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12007.
58. Mao J, (2014) Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior 33: 213–223. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.002.
59. Matthewman S, Blight A, Davies C, (2004) What does multimodality mean for English? Creative tensions in teaching new texts and new literacies. Education, Communication & Information 4(1): 153–176. http://doi.org/10.1080/1463631042000210944.
60. McLoughlin C and Lee MJ (2007) Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings Ascilite Singapore 2007, pp.664–675. Available at: http://dlc-ubc.ca/dlc2_wp/educ500/files/2011/07/mcloughlin.pdf (accessed 14 October 2015)
61. McLoughlin C and Lee MJ (2008) Mapping the digital terrain: New media and social software as catalysts for pedagogical change. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings Ascilite Melbourne 2008, pp.641–652
62. McLoughlin C, Lee MJ, (2010) Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 26(1): 28–43.
63. McVee MB, Bailey NM, Shanahan LE, (2008) Teachers and teacher educators learning from new literacies and new technologies. Teaching Education 19(3): 197–210. http://doi.org/10.1080/10476210802250216.
64. Mills KA, (2009) Multiliteracies: Interrogating competing discourses. Language and Education 23(2): 103–116. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500780802152762.
65. Moje EB, (2009) Standpoints: A call for new research on new and multi-literacies. Research in the Teaching of English 43(4): 348–362.
66. Moran M, Seaman J and Tinti-Kane H (2011) Teaching, Learning, and Sharing: How Today's Higher Education Faculty Use Social Media. Babson Survey Research Group, April 2011. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535130.pdf (accessed 10 August 2015)
67. Nelson M, (2006) Mode, meaning and synaesthesia in multimedia L2 writing. Language Learning and Technology 10(2): 56–76. Available at: http://llt.msu.edu/vol10num2/nelson/default.html (accessed 10 May 2013).
68. New London Group (2000) A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review 66(1): 60–92. Available at: http://newarcproject.pbworks.com/f/Pedagogy%2Bof%2BMultiliteracies_New%2BLondon%2BGroup.pdf (accessed 12 August 2015).
69. Nichols S (2007) Exploring creativity support systems for the ne‘x’t generation. In IADIS, In- ternational Conference Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction. Lisbon, Portugal: International Association for Development of the Information Society (IADIS), pp. 67–74. Available at: http://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30007940/nichol-exploringcreativitysupport-2007.pdf (accessed 22 October 2015)
70. O'Byrne B, (2009) Knowing More than Words Can Say: Using multimodal assessment tools to excavate and construct knowledge about wolves. International Journal of Science Education 31(4): 523–539.
71. O’Byrne B, Murrell S, (2014) Evaluating multimodal literacies in student blogs: Evaluating multimodal literacies in student blogs. British Journal of Educational Technology 45(5): 926–940. http://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12093.
72. Okoro EA, Hausman A, Washington MC, (2012) Social media and networking technologies: An analysis of collaborative work and team communication. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER) 5(4): 295–300.
73. O'Reilly T, (2007) What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies 65(1): 17–37.
74. Perrin A (2015) Social Networking Usage: 2005–2015. Pew Research Center, 8 October 2015. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/10/PI_2015-10-08_Social-Networking-Usage-2005-2015_FINAL.pdf (accessed 16 September 2015)
75. Perrin A and Duggan M (2015) Americans’ Internet Access: 2000-2015. Pew Research Center, 26 June 2015. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/06/2015-06-26_internet-usage-across-demographics-discover_FINAL.pdf (accessed 16 September 2015)
76. Pierce TA, Vaca R, (2008) Distracted: Academic performance differences between teen users and non-users of MySpace and other communication technology. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics 6(3): 67–71. Available at: http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV/sci/pdfs/E214BL.pdf (accessed 24 September 2015).
77. Prinsloo M and Rowsell J (2012) Digital literacies as placed resources in the globalised periphery. Language and Education 26(4): 271–277
78. Rambe P, (2012a) Activity theory and technology mediated interaction: Cognitive scaffolding using question-based consultation on Facebook. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 28(8): 1333–1361.
79. Rambe P, (2012b) Critical discourse analysis of collaborative engagement in Facebook postings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 28(2): 295–314.
80. Rambe P, (2012c) Constructive disruptions for effective collaborative learning: Navigating the affordances of social media for meaningful engagement. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning 10(1): 132–146.
81. Rambe P, (2013) Converged social media: Identity management and engagement on Facebook Mobile and blogs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 29(3): 315–336.
82. Ranker J (2008) Composing across multiple media: A case study of digital video production in a fifth grade classroom. Written Communication 25(2): 196–234
83. Redecker C, Ala-Mutka K, Bacigalupo M, et al. (2009) Learning 2.0: The Impact of Web 2.0 innovations on education and training in Europe. Final Report. JRC Scientific and Technical Report. EUR JRC56958 EN. Available at: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC55629.pdf (accessed 15 September 2015)
84. Robbins SP, Singer JB, (2014) From the Editor—The medium is the message: Integrating social media and social work education. Journal of Social Work Education 50(3): 387–390.
85. Roblyer MD, McDaniel M, Webb M, (2010) Findings on 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): 134–140. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002.
86. Sam C, (2012) Activity theory and qualitative research in digital domains. Theory into Practice 51(2): 83–90. http://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.662856.
87. Santo R, (2011) Hacker literacies: Synthesizing critical and participatory media. International Journal of Learning and Media 3(3): 1–5.
88. Selwyn N (2009) Challenging educational expectations of the social web: A web 2.0 far? Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 4(2): 72–85. http://www.idunn.no/dk/2009/02/art04?mode=abstract_en&skipDecorating=true (accessed 15 November 2015)
89. Shirky C, (2008) Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations, New York, NY: Penguin.
90. Siemens G, Weller M, (2011) Higher education and the promises and perils of social network. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC) 8(1): 164–170. Available at: http://oro.open.ac.uk/28418/1/1076-1505-2-PB.pdf (accessed 12 September 2015).
91. Staarman JK, (2009) The joint negotiation of ground rules: Establishing a shared collaborative practice with new educational technology. Language and Education 23(1): 79–95. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500780802152796.
92. Stornaiuolo A, Higgs J, Hull GA, (2013) Social media as authorship: Methods for studying literacies and communities online. In: Albers P, Holbrook T, AS Flint AS, (eds) New Methods of Literacy Research, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 224–237.
93. Street B, (2003) What’s “new” in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education 5(2): 77–91. Available at: http://www.tc.columbia.edu/cice/pdf/25734_5_2_Street.pdf (accessed 25 February 2015).
94. Street B, (2013) Literacy in theory and practice: Challenges and debates over 50 years. Theory into Practice 52(supplement1): 52–62. http://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.795442.
95. Unsworth L, (2006) E-Literature for Children: Enhancing Digital Literacy Learning, London, UK: Routledge.
96. Unsworth L, Chan E, (2009) Bridging multimodal literacies and national assessment programs in literacy. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 32(3): 245–257. Available at: http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/48286/80076_1.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 16 October 2015).
97. van Lier L, (2004) The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: A Sociocultural Perspective, Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
98. Vie S, (2015) What’s going on: Challenges and opportunities for social media use in the writing classroom. The Journal of Faculty Development 29(2): 33–44.
99. Warman M (2011) UK students ‘most distracted by social media. The Telegraph, 22 September 2011. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8781704/UK-students-most-distracted-by-social-media.html (accessed 12 April 2016)
100. Watters A (2011) Texting in the Classroom: Not just a distraction. Edutopia, 9 September 2011. Available at: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/texting-classroom-audrey-watters (accessed 25 October 2016)
101. Wodzicki K, Schwämmlein E, Moskaliuk J, (2012) “Actually, I wanted to learn”: Study-related knowledge exchange on social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education 15(1): 9–14. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.008.
102. Zammit KP, (2011) Connecting multiliteracies and engagement of students from low socio-economic backgrounds: Using Bernstein’s pedagogic discourse as a bridge. Language and Education 25(3): 203–220. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2011.560945.