This study investigates students' involvement in Facebook® as a course management system (CMS), Facebook acceptance, and the relationships between the two. The study used Facebook as a CMS in two freshman courses and employed mixed method as part of an action-research approach. Forty-two students participated in the study, and 12 of those students were selected for face-to-face interviews through maximum variation sampling. Quantitative data were collected through questionnaires and course Facebook page logs. Qualitative data were collected through the interviews. The quantitative data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and correlation analyses. The findings indicate that the relationships between course Facebook page involvement and Facebook acceptance differed according to the course. The findings support that Facebook as a CMS has the potential to increase student involvement in discussions and out-of-class communication among instructors and students.
AcquistiA.GrossR. (2006) Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. In: DanezisG.GolleP. (eds) Privacy enhancing technologies, Berlin, Germany: Springer, pp. 36–38.
2.
AjjanH.HartshorneR. (2008) Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education11: 71–80.
3.
AjzenI. (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes50: 179–211.
4.
AjzenI.FishbeinM. (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5.
AmmenwerthE.IllerC.MahlerC. (2006) IT-adoption and the interaction of task, technology and individuals: A fit framework and a case study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making6(3): 1–13. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-6-3.
6.
AstinA. W. (1984) Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel25: 297–308.
7.
BogdanR. C.BiklenS. K. (2007) Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods, 5th. Boston, MA: Pearson International Edition.
8.
BoschT. E. (2009) Using online social networking for teaching and learning: Facebook use at the University of Cape Town. Communicatio: South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research35(2): 185–200. doi:10.1080/02500160903250648.
9.
BowmanN. D.AkcaogluM. (2014) “I see smart people!”: Using Facebook to supplement to cognitive and affective learning in the university mass lecture. Internet and Higher Education23: 1–8.
10.
BoydD. M.EllisonN. B. (2007) Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1): 210–230.
11.
BradyK. P.HolcombL. B.SmithB. V. (2010) The use of alternative social networking sites in higher educational settings: A case study of the e-learning benefits of Ning in education. Journal of Interactive Online Learning9(2): 151–170.
12.
CainJ. (2008) Online social networking issues within academia and pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education72(1): Article 10.
ChenB.BryerT. (2012) Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in formal and informal learning. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning13(1): 87–104.
15.
ChenB.SivoS.SeilhamerR.SugarA. (2013) User acceptance of mobile technology: A campus-wide implementation of Blackboard's mobile learn application. Journal of Educational Computing Research49(3): 327–343.
16.
CondeM. A.GarcíaF.Rodríguez-CondeM. J.AlierM.García-HolgadoA. (2014) Perceived openness of learning management systems by students and teachers and technology courses. Computers in Human Behavior31: 517–526. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.007.
17.
CoreyS. M. (1954) Action research in education. The Journal of Educational Research47(5): 375–380.
18.
CornellR. M.EiningM. M.HuP. J. (2011) The effects of process accountability on individuals' use of a familiar technology. Journal of Information Systems25(1): 109–128.
19.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2007) Designing and conducting mixed methods research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
20.
DavisF. D. (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
21.
DengL.TavaresN. J. (2013) From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students' motivation and experiences in online communities. Computers & Education68: 167–176.
22.
DunlapJ. C.LowenthalP. R. (2009) Tweeting the night away: Using Twitter to enhance social presence. Journal of Information Systems Education20(2): 129–135.
23.
DuttaA.RoyR.SeetharamanP. (2013) Course management system adoption and usage: A process theoretic perspective. Computers in Human Behavior29: 2535–2545. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.010.
24.
DuttonW. H.CheongP. H.ParkN. (2004) The social shaping of a virtual learning environment: The case of a university-wide course management system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning2(1): 69–80. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.101.1869.
25.
Escobar-RodriguezT.Monge-LozanoP. (2012) The acceptance of Moodle technology by business administration students. Computers & Education58: 1085–1093. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.012.
26.
FarmerA. D.Bruckner HoltC. E.CookM. J.HearingS. D. (2009) Social networking sites: A novel portal for communication. Postgraduate Medical Journal85(1007): 455–459.
27.
FetscherinM.LattemanC. (2008) User acceptance of virtual worlds. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research9(3): 231–242.
28.
FishbeinM.AjzenI. (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, behavior: An introduction to theory and research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29.
GefenD.StraubD. (1997) Gender difference in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly21(4): 389–400.
30.
HewK. F.CheungW. S. (2012) Use of Facebook: A case study of Singapore students' experience. Asia Pacific Journal of Education32(2): 181–196. doi:10.1080/02188791.2012.685560.
31.
HewK. F. (2011) Students' and teachers' use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior27: 662–676. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020.
32.
JongB.LaiC.HsiaY.LinT.LiaoY. (2014) An exploration of the potential education value of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior32: 201–211. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.007.
33.
JuncoR. (2012) The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education58: 162–171. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004.
34.
KemmisS. (2007) Action research. In: HammersleyM. (ed.) Educational research and evidence-based practice, London, England: SAGE Publications, pp. 167–181.
35.
KhanM. L.WohnD. Y.EllisonN. B. (2014) Actual friends matter: An internet skills perspective on teens' informal academic collaboration on Facebook. Computers & Education79: 138–147.
36.
Kord, I. J. (2008). Understanding the Facebook generation: A study of the relationship between online social networking and academic and social integration and intentions to re-enroll (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Kansas.
37.
KültürC. (2009) Factors affecting faculty intention to use course management systems in a private university, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University: Turkey.
38.
KvavikR. B.CarusoJ. B.MorganG. (2004) ECAR study of students and information technology 2004: Convenience, connection, and control, Boulder, CO: Educause Center for Applied Research.
39.
LampeC.WohnD. Y.VitakJ.EllisonN.WashR. (2011) Student use of Facebook for organizing collaborative classroom activities. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning6: 329–347. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9115-y.
40.
LeeY.KozarK. A.LarsenK. R. T. (2003) The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems12: 752–780.
41.
MalikowskiS. R.StevenR.ThompsonM. E.TheisJ. G. (2007) A model for research into course management systems: Bridging technology and learning theory. Journal of Educational Computing Research36(2): 149–173.
42.
MartinhoM.AlmeidaP. A.Teixeira-DiasJ. (2014) Fostering students questioning through Moodle: Does it work?Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences116: 2537–2542. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.607.
43.
MathiesonK. (1991) Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research2(3): 173–191.
44.
MazmanS. G.UsluelY. K. (2010) Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers & Education55(2): 444–453.
45.
MckayJ.MarshallP. (2002) Action research: A guide to process and procedure. Proceedings of European Conference on Research Methods, 219–227.
46.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
MorganG. (2003) Key findings: Faculty use of course management systems, Boulder, CO: Educause Center for Applied Research.
48.
PérezT.AraizaM. J.DoerferC. (2013) Using Facebook for learning: A case study on the perception of students in higher education. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences106: 3259–3267. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.375.
49.
QuinL.KimY.TanX.HsuJ. (2009) The effects of privacy concern and social influence on user acceptance of online social networks. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2009), San Francisco, CA.
50.
RoblyerM. D.McDanielM.WebbM.HermanJ.WittyJ. V. (2010) Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. Internet and Higher Education13: 134–140.
51.
Rosen, P. A., & Sherman, P. (2006). Hedonic information systems: Acceptance of social networking websites. Proceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1218–1223), Acapulco, Mexico.
52.
SelwynN. (2009) Faceworking: Exploring students' education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology34(2): 157–174.
53.
SharknessJ.DeAngeloL. (2011) Measuring student involvement: A comparison of classical test theory and item response theory in the construction of scales from student surveys. Research in Higher Education52: 480–507.
54.
Shen, J., & Eder, L. (2008). Intentions to use virtual worlds: An exploratory study. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (pp. 2–7), Toronto, ON, Canada.
55.
SubrahmanyamK.ReichS. M.WaechterN.EspinozaG. (2008) Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology29(6): 420–433.
56.
ŠumakB.HerickoM.PušnikM. (2011) A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior27: 2067–2077. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005.
TeoT. (2012) Examining the intention to use technology among preservice teachers: An integration of the technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior. Interactive Learning Environments20(1): 3–18.
59.
VovidesY.Sanchez-AlonsoS.MitropoulouV.NickmandG. (2007) The use of e-learning course management systems to support learning strategies and improve self-regulated learning. Educational Research Review2: 64–74.
60.
WangQ.WooH. L.QuekC. L.YangY.LiuM. (2012) Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology43(3): 428–438. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01195.x.
61.
WuS.HouH.HwangW.LiuE. Z. (2013) Analysis of learning behavior in problem-solving-based and project-based discussion activities within the seamless online learning integrated discussion (solid) system. Journal of Educational Computing Research49(1): 61–82. doi:10.2190/EC.49.1.c.
62.
YuehP. H.HsuS. (2008) Designing a learning management system to support instruction. Communication of the ACM51(4): 59–63.
