The enhancement of student success and engagement through collaborative student/staff online networking

Abstract

This preliminary student-led research was carried out, over a few months in 2012, to find out if students on an undergraduate English degree, at Sheffield Hallam University, would find a social networking site shared with staff useful for building a sense of course identity. The project also explored the feasibility of students jointly administering the site with staff, to enable staff student dialogue to enhance the student experience. The Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) used on the course was examined in terms of its effectiveness for building course coherency. The research was informed by one to one interviews with both staff and students, plus focus groups with students.

Keywords:

• social networking
• online networking
• staff-student collaboration
• collaborative online learning
• virtual learning environment

Introduction

This research into staff-student collaboration on an undergraduate English degree used the following research questions:

1. Is there a course identity on the undergraduate English degree?

2. Would students find staff and student course social network sites useful in building a sense of course identity? If so should they be jointly managed by staff and students and could the current Blackboard site be used in this way?

Literature

This preliminary research focuses on staff and student social networking interaction as a means to create a collective course identity. Wenger (2000) writing about communities of practice, argued that new understandings and perspectives are enabled through communication.

“Learning so defined is an interplay between social competence and personal experience. It is a dynamic, two-way relationship between people and the social learning systems in which they participate.”

(Wenger 2000, p227)

Kear (2011) illustrated how students and staff learn from each other with reference to Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the ‘zone of proximal development’ (ZPD) where with support from others around them students exceed their expected level of competence. Kear states that this collaboration and communication is an inherent aspect of online communities.

Bryson & Hand (2007) have written much about the importance of student engagement in relation to student retention and academic success. Gammon & White (2011) write that contemporary students require educators to equip them with the skills to live in the information-rich world that surrounds them. Social media plays an important part in this information-rich world, particularly in enhancing student success and engagement, and building a sense of course identity amongst students.

“Students will be paying more and therefore demanding more from their university experience. They will now have the added pressure of uncertainty and a sense of being ‘hard done by’ to their fears about starting university.”

(The Guardian 2011)

Ranging across ages and in terms of Internet literacy Prensky (2001) described students who have grown up in this era as Digital Natives, fluent in computers, video games, email, instant messaging and the Internet. He wrote:

“Today’s students think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors.”

(Prensky 2001, p1)

Prensky argued that our education system was not designed to teach students to acquire and enhance these skills through new technologies. Thomas stated that today’s students are bringing in learning based on interactivity and collaboration, offering a social inclusiveness in online communities with an emotional and intellectual openness to others. Kear wrote of the changing role of the educator from being the single source of information giving, instruction and assessment, to becoming rather a guide to:

1. Find, evaluate and use suitable learning resources;

2. Learn via discussion and collaborative work;

3. Take part in peer feedback and assessment.

(Kear 2011, p168)

Lipton (2011) confirmed the need for educators to be informed users of online tools. Lipton models responsible use of Facebook and is clear that students are not ‘friends’. He actively collaborates in learning with students using Facebook, and during lectures projects Facebook onto the screen inviting students to write upon the Facebook wall using it to ‘constrain and contain class discussion’ (Lipton 2011, p3). Lipton states that individuals do not have a single self and writes:

“your identity-at any given time is a function of the relationship or situation that you’re in.”

(Lipton 2011, p4)

Acknowledging the part Facebook plays in the building group identity, Lipton demonstrates a safe way to use it for educational advantage. Gammon & White (2011) also consider that the ‘responsibility for media literacy must be shared’ (p343) between students and educators, on the internet. Koole (2010) also stated that the process of online communication with others is akin to the processes of offline identity. Koole argues that this online community of communication is just as much a part of contemporary communication and a conduit for academic and social interaction.

Koole therefore attributes online group identity like offline group identity to formation through having a shared purpose, norms of behaviour, continuity and history. In terms of the BA English degree studied, both students and educators have a shared purpose of achieving student success and engagement, following on from such a tradition within Sheffield Hallam University.

Methods

Criteria for selection

Qualitative one to one student interviews and focus groups were secured by directly contacting course representatives and lecturers; email requests through the Blackboard site; and making appeals for interviewees at the end of course lectures and seminars. The availability of funding for the project meant the fieldwork had to take place when students were within two months of handing in course assignments. Thus there was just over one month to source interviewees and conduct the interviews. Students had a priority of completing course work for submission deadlines that affected their availability to participate in research interviews. Staff also had a tight timescale prior to the commencement of marking students submitted work. A flexible approach was therefore taken with regard to the planning of the interviews, at times to suit the students and staff. The criteria for interviewee selection was that they were either a student or lecturer on the BA English degree, agreed to the rationale for the project and consented to take part voluntarily in the audio recorded interviews and for anonymous quotes from the interviews to be used in reports and publications.

Eleven students participated in the form of focus groups and individual interviews. Having made prior contact seven students agreed to hold a focus group after their seminar and two students formed a small focus group directly after a course lecture. Two further students agreed to individual interviews at predetermined times compatible with their availability and work-load. Ten teaching staff agreed to be interviewed following an email invitation to participate in the research.

Interviews

Interviews with students and staff used similar questions and, as stated above, used further questions to seek clarification in response to answers and to explore new areas revealed by responses. The questions asked of both staff and students covered the following areas: what makes students feel part of the course; how do students make their views known to the tutors; views of the Blackboard site; social networking to create course identity and views on staff and students jointly managing an online social networking platform; students maintaining student led closed social networking platforms alongside a university managed online platform; the use of visual, audio and video on an online platform; the use of mobile apps for the course.

Findings

The findings are grouped into the main areas covered by the interviews under subheadings.

Students feeling part of the course

In some instances the students interviewed had set up their own student group Facebook sites and considered that social networking in this way helped them to feel part of the course. They saw this as a way of supporting one another, especially during exams, and as a conduit for sharing of information, advice and common anxieties: ‘it’s really good to help each other’ (Student 2, BA English, 25/4/12). The approachability of the tutors along with Twitter and emails from staff were also considered by students as good means of keeping them connected to the course.

Both students and staff spoke of the difficulty in creating course identity as the BA English is one of a suite of English degrees. Some staff stated that they did not have a clear sense of the BA English student group, but students stated that they liked the subject choice available to them and said:

“If we have any issues or anything, if we don’t go directly to the tutor then it’s through our reps.”

(Student 2, on focus group, 27/4/12)

Coupled with tutorials, work-based group projects and small seminar groups over a longer period of time, many staff strongly perceived the need for a conducive physical space as key to building course identity. Some staff recalled a former clearly defined physical space that the English department had in a Victorian house. In this physical space the kitchen was a centre for social interchange where drinks were made and notices read on a physical notice board. Many staff considered that the current physical space with staff offices on a locked corridor was inadequate:

“I don’t think the space we have is terribly conducive to collegiality, there’s not really a common room or much of a common space, so I don’t think that helps.”

(Staff 5, 2/5/12)

One staff member went further to say that:

“I think that if things are pushed more into virtual relationship, we are going in the wrong direction. That’s strongly felt.”

(Staff 2, 30/4/12)

None of the students interviewed highlighted the issue of physical space, but this could be due to an acceptance of the situation on induction. Although staff complained about the inadequacies of the physical space some did appreciate that online networking with students could be advantageous, as outlined later.

Views on the Blackboard Site

Blackboard is the VLE used by Sheffield Hallam University. The students varied in their relationship and usage of the site. This ranged from only using it when they felt they had to, to getting missed information such as lecture slides, up to liking the opportunity to access learning support materials and timetables in advance. Some staff considered that Blackboard was useful as a ‘repository of information’ for some teaching, and as a place to access materials in advance of lectures. However, some students found that aspects of Blackboard were not easy to use and cited problems of technical breakdown for over 24 hours, lack of consistency of module site layout, and too many tabs and boxes.

Staff highlighted the need for staff consistency in Blackboard usage:

“We possibly need to agree much more clearly on what we title our folders. Where we have standard things, what do we put in module folders, what do we put in learning materials, what do we put in assessment.”

(Staff 7, 8/5/12)

Some staff described Blackboard as 'clunky', dated and lacking intuition unlike the visually aesthetic 'slickly driven advertising websites' that students are used to.

“I find Blackboard a bit ugly and I wish it had been designed by Google, or by Facebook.”

(Staff 3, 2/5/12)

Other staff members considered that Blackboard was rather like a filing cabinet and that it lacked user-friendly facets:

“It’s not unplanned social interaction, which I think is something which helps build group identities.”

(Staff 10, 16/5/12)

There were very few instances where staff or students used the current VLE as a conduit for social networking apart from an occasional online discussion forum. Most interviewees did not equate the current VLE with social networking, but saw it as a piece of cumbersome academic software that lacked the accessibility of online social networking sites that students used often. Whilst the current VLE site has blog and forum functions, on the whole, students made little use of them by the few staff that set them up.

Creation of course identity through collaborative social networking and issues of management

Further interview questions considered interviewees’ views on social networking as a means of creating course identity. Ways in which Blackboard could be enhanced to fulfil this were considered together with other sites that could support this. From the research, students cleared placed emphasis on social networking as a valid tool to enable course identity to appear and mature, especially in view of the complexities of establishing a physical course identity due to the suite of English courses and shared module groups. The Facebook social networking group sites set up independently by students appeared to create a collective sense and shared experience. The ease of access to Facebook also made it appealing to students along with the fact that students associated it with enjoyable personal interaction.

“Social networking helps in terms of it’s something that’s used by everyone on a personal basis, so if it was used for your course, it would be helpful in terms of making friends with other people … helping each other out with things that they didn’t understand.”

(Student 1, 20/4/12)

Students who were part of a current student-led course Facebook group said it made them feel part of the course and that they felt supported because other students responded to queries about the coursework no matter when the query was raised. This apparently prevented the feeling of isolation and lessened anxiety. They described Facebook messaging and writing on the Facebook wall as ‘talking’, and viewing what others had written on the Facebook wall as comforting. Although often working alone on assignments, it helped them to get a sense of the stage others were at and felt that students who were not on Facebook missed out on course communications.

The interview questions moved on to consider students and staff collaboratively using social networking online. Both staff and students used Facebook outside of the educational setting, but not with each other, and viewed it as an informal virtual space. This informality posed issues for both staff and students. Some students liked being informal online with one another, but considered that communication with staff was inherently formal. Staff also echoed the concerns of having an expected formal presentation to students:

“I’ve got my profile on Facebook that is, it’s the me that is not at university, it’s the me that’s outside of university, and I wouldn’t want that on Facebook … it’s not a self presentation of me that they would expect. ”

(Staff 6, 4/5/12)

Some staff members acknowledged the benefits of creating course identity through having a shared social networking site with students, but expressed concerns as they were aware of problems that had arisen in other institutions where staff had accepted ‘friends requests’ from students.

“I’ve had students requesting to be my friend on Facebook, which wouldn’t really do because I think it’s crossing a boundary between one’s personal and professional lives.”

(Staff 5, 2/5/12)

Staff members also expressed concerns about students spreading negativity about staff members through Facebook on a site that they were not able to access, but acknowledged students may want and need a Facebook page. Some staff members considered using Facebook with students if they could ensure that privacy settings were in place to prevent students from seeing family photographs, for example. Staff considered other online forums that include an element of social networking along with the facilities of virtual learning. Staff cited sites such as Moodle, used in some other universities, Google networking and academia.edu, an academic version of LinkedIn, which has facilities for uploading academic papers and podcasts plus followers in a similar way to Twitter.

In the main staff acknowledged that the building of course identity through a user friendly and chatty online networking tool would be helpful to facilitate student engagement. Staff appreciated and understood that students were generally familiar with easy to use sociable and visually attractive online networking tools. They also commended the benefits of the use of visuals, podcasts, audio links and video links to create interactive learning environments for students in keeping with the lively online world that students are used to, in other arenas. Paid staff time to upload such material and to manage social networking led by the university was a major concern. One staff member who regularly used social networking in various forms both professionally through twitter, and personally outside of university, set up a discussion board on the Blackboard site, checked it daily and found it useful to intervene in cases of students misinforming one another. This would not have been possible on the closed student Facebook page that the staff member had no access to.

Staff often described Blackboard as ‘clunky’ and as an academic tool set up to post information that the staff thought students should have rather. Staff considered that it would be preferable to have an online networking tool that was attractive to students and encouraged them to take an active part in collaborative learning with staff and fellow students. In terms of a student and staff jointly managed site, students and staff saw a way forward with both elected student course representatives and staff jointly managing such a site. Students and staff agreed that initial face to face meetings between elected student course representatives and staff could agree acceptable online behaviour for such a site.

Conclusion

The literary research and findings highlighted the need for staff to appreciate the importance that social networking plays in student life, as a means for collaborative learning and student engagement. Students valued the approachability of staff face-to-face and online interaction with staff as a means of creating a sense of course identity. Those who had access to the student-led Facebook page valued the support of fellow classmates in terms of support, reduction of anxiety and isolation, as a marker for progress and easily accessible informal collaborative learning, in a forum exclusive to staff. Students online communications helped to create course identity. Although students liked the flexibility of choosing modules from a suite, the course researched could be experienced as lacking a defined identity. Several staff members considered that the physical space prevented course identity, students expressed more emphasis on the importance of having course representatives and the need for the course timetable to enable course representatives to attend meetings, and had in some cases elected to form their own course Facebook page.

Staff and students both considered that Blackboard, the current VLE, acted as a good repository for information, but staff felt that as a piece of academic software it lacked a user-friendly exciting interface, in keeping with the wider online world. Students also complained of confusion in using Blackboard due to too many boxes that prevented easy navigation plus the experience of technical problems causing Blackboard to be out of action. Students and staff agreed on the need for staff to use a common approach to how information was stored on Blackboard.

Staff accepted the need for students to have an exclusively student social networking site, but expressed anxiety about possible negativity towards staff and misinformation about the course being spread on social networking sites. Staff expressed the need to protect their professional boundaries and the need for their own privacy outside of work and therefore felt that it was not appropriate for them to share Facebook accounts with students. Both staff and students gave acknowledgement that a student and staff collaborative learning site with an element of social networking may be useful in enhancing student success and engagement, but Facebook was not considered to be the answer. It would seem that whilst Lipton (2011) models safe professional use of Facebook in lectures, the small sample interviewed in this research considered that the concerns over the blurring of professional boundaries was too great. Staff and students were both keen to learn collaboratively with one another and recognised a positive step forward would be through social networking, but without an agreed online tool. Both students and staff saw some benefits of collaborative learning through Blackboard, but the difficulty of engagement with the site, due to its interface, viewed it as out of step with the contemporary online world, and technical breakdown problems meant that alternative solutions were considered. Suggestions made in terms of possible software that could achieve this such as Moodle, aacedmia.edu and Google networking.

Staff and students agreed that if an online platform with a social networking dimension was agreed it should be jointly managed by staff and elected student course representatives with ground rules agreed by initial face-to-face meetings. If the control of such a site was mutually managed both students and staff were open to engaging into social networking to enhance collaborative learning, whilst having reservations about entering into this new territory. Staff expressed concerns regarding the staff time required to manage this level of networking, with those who had sometimes uploaded videos or podcasts to Blackboard noting that it was a very time consuming activity, although beneficial to student engagement.

From this preliminary research with a sample group of students and staff it is evident that students value the benefits of online social networking in terms of enhancing course identity and collaborative student learning. For this sample of interviewees collaborative learning through social networking between students and staff was an unknown territory that both were willing to enter into, given jointly owned and managed criteria for behaviour. As a society we communicate globally within the fast moving, easy to access, information-rich online world. Many of us are part of online communities outside of universities where Kear (2011) states communication and collaboration is key. As Thomas (2011) stated contemporary students come into university with the experience of communicating and learning through online communities. Not only do universities need to keep up with the wider online world of collaborative learning to meet the experience of students pre-university, they are missing an important opportunity to advance collaborative learning between students and staff through appropriate social networking, unless a solution is found to address this. The research, whilst preliminary, showed that students benefit from what they perceive as a comfortable virtual space where they can discuss issues in relation to learning. The relaxed and informal manner in which this takes place appears to be easily accessible to them and offers a forum for learning in which they exceed what they may have learnt working alone on a project in their room. From the research, students expressed the need for a place where they can voice their concerns, that were then easily dissipated by the knowledge that others felt the same, or by others offering solutions. If this form of collaborative learning could be opened up to include staff the learning could be greater, not only for students, but also for staff. It would give an opportunity for staff to better understand what students need to know, but also increase their own knowledge base, as students bring into the online collaborative learning community all that they are learning from wider online communities. It would seem important given the literary research and this primary research for Universities to invest in addressing the issues highlighted to enhance the student experience, improve upon student success and retain students. It is hoped the findings from this project will form the basis of further research to inform both students and practitioners, specifically in informing innovative change in course practice to increase a sense of course identity to enhance student engagement through collaborative student and staff learning.

Acknowledgment

Panni Poh Yoke Loh completed her PhD with the Manchester Institute for Research and Innovation in Art and Design at Manchester Metropolitan University in 2010 on impact of cultural experiences on the work of five British Chinese artists. Panni has had papers published on learner engagement, British Chinese Artists, cultural diversity and has presented at conferences internationally (UK, Spain, China, South Korea, Australia). She worked as a qualified Social Worker for Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council for over 10 years co-ordinating a respite care scheme for Children and Young People with Disabilities and has worked in community engagement, environment, the arts, and education for various organisations in both the statutory and community voluntary sectors with a particular interest in creating harmony between diverse groups using creativity. She is currently working as a researcher for Sheffield Hallam University whilst studying on a Creative Writing Masters degree, working freelance as an artist exhibiting internationally, and leading creative thinking courses for businesses.