See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/301913235

Students' engagement in Distance Learning: Creating a scenario with LMS

and Social Network aggregation

Conference Paper · November 2015

DOI: 10.1109/SIIE.2015.7451646

CITATIONS READS

6 1,815

3 authors:

Inês Messias Lina Morgado

ISCTE-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa Universidade Aberta
13 PUBLICATIONS   50 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   269 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Maria Potes Barbas

Universidade Aberta
15 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Uptake_ICT2life-cycle: digital literacy and inclusion to learners with disadvantaged background View project

Competências Digitais View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Inês Messias on 22 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Students’ engagement in distance learning: creating
a scenario with LMS and Social Network
aggregation
Inês Messias Lina Morgado
LE@D- Laboratório de Educação a LE@D -Laboratório de Educação a Maria Barbas
Distância e Elearning, Distância e Elearning ESE Santarém, Instituto Politécnico
Universidade Aberta, Portugal Universidade Aberta, Portugal Santarém, Portugal
[Link]@[Link] [Link]@[Link] mariapbarbas@[Link]

Abstract— Already a part of our daily lives, Web 2.0 is focused on education.” While for Anderson [4] “engagement is
becoming also a part of Education, as it evolves to accompany developed through interaction.” As for Chickering & Gamson
society, education is becoming more personal, and with a focus on [5] they state that among other factors this is centered on the
knowledge, reflection, social connection and engagement, as to student’s interaction, i.e. “learner interaction in online
include both digital natives and immigrants [1]. According to learning environments has implications on learner engagement
Siemens [2] today’s learning depends on connectivity among and collaboration.” Whit this in mind this study will focus on
individuals and it tends to dissolve frontiers between formal and analyzing the frequency of interaction among the participants
informal learning. This paper presents a study1, that aims to in the study, so to verify the level of interaction among students
comprehend how an informal platform (such as Facebook) while
in both platforms.
complement of a formal platform (such as Moodle) can
contribute to a greater engagement by the Higher Education level As for collaboration, several authors associate online
students’, as well as to measure the impact these tools can have collaboration with the quality of students’ contributes. For
on the knowledge acquisition process. Embedded on the Higher Valle et al. [6], Hiltz et al. [7] and Khan [8] collaboration can
Education context, the study is centred in the levels of the be measured by the “improvement in volume and quality of
students’ engagement and on the frequency and quality of their student involvement, satisfaction, engagement, and higher-
contributions in Forums, being its participants, lecturers and order learning”. Moreover, group discussions in online learning
students of this level of education. Since it is objective of the
environments through collaborative involvement increase not
study to understand how interaction and collaboration contribute
only the productivity of the group but also individuals’ ability
to students’ involvement in elearning hybrid contexts the adopted
theoretical framework is the Activity Theory, and the
to think critically [9] [10].
methodological approach chosen is of a mixed nature, using Hence, this study’s questions are:
Social Network Analysis tools (SNA).
1- How can Facebook, when used as a complement for
Keywords—Web 2.0; Facebook; Moodle; engagement; Moodle, contribute to students’ higher engagement in their
collaboration; distance learning. learning in Higher Education?
2- How can engagement and collaboration be measured
I. INTRODUCTION in these platforms?
This study aims to comprehend how a formal LMS These questions take us to the goals of this study:
(Learning Management System), such as Moodle, when
associated with an online social network such as Facebook can To know the level of engagement, the quality of interaction
contribute to influence the students’ engagement in their and collaboration, to help define strategies to not only reduce
learning process. To measure this, was necessary to first list the the number of students’ dropouts in e-learning contexts, as to
common characteristics of these two environments, by defining contribute to a greater quality of learning. Another
both, and to also define what is understood by engagement and consequence can be increasing students’ satisfaction. As such
collaboration. this study can make impact in other institutions that have
adopted or aim to adopt these tools in their teaching activities.
According to Oncu & Cakir [3] “Learner engagement is
defined as the effort learners devote to activities that are In order to first implement the study, it will be necessary to
know the students’ and the teachers’ profile, in order to
1 contextualize the study environment. Having this into
Initial phase of the investigation framed on a doctoral program, specializing
in Distance Education and eLearning (eDeL) at the Universidade Aberta. consideration the main goal of this study is: To understand the
relevance of Web 2.0 tools to engagement and to quality of devices only occurs after the year 2000. Thus, for this study,
learning in e-learning contexts. we can only consider i-genners as those born after 2000 and
these are only expected to start arriving to universities in about
This goal can be subdivided into more specific goals, in 4 or 5 years (2020), being important for teachers to start
order to analyze students’ engagement in both platforms: preparing for these students.
1- To know the profiles or the students and teachers As such it is important to know the learning profile of these
involved in this study; students. I-Generation is described by Rosen [28] as having
2- To gather data of the frequency and quality of grown up with digital technology literally since they were born,
interactions between the study’s participants, in the being the center of their lives. They are constantly connected,
groups/forums of both tools; always reachable, do multitasking, and social interaction
online, where they create and share content. They learn best by
3- To gather data about the students’ quality of touch, move, do and experience, need constant motivation and
contributions in forums/groups of both tools; have strong family ties. They are confident, open to change, are
4- To analyze the gathered data. used to collective reflection and instant gratification.
Also according to Rosen [28] each of us can fall into one
II. TODAY’S STUDENT PROFILE generation, provided the context and environment in which we
In order to best understand what students aim form with grow. The author suggests a chronological order: 1) Baby
their studies and how they learn it is necessary to first set out Boomers (1946-1964); 2) Generation X (1965-1979); 3)
their characteristics. According to several authors today’s Generation Net (1980-1989); 4) i Generation (after 1990). And
students have grown surrounded by digital technology and are though the author delimit the i-Geners as to all born after 1990,
used to utilize several tools simultaneously, being regarded as in Portugal, by this time, the circumstances presented by the
multitaskers. Some consider them as being digitally-savvy, by author, have not yet verified. In fact, only for the last 10 years
using any kind of device almost intuitively. But what are the or less, it can be said that the Portuguese young people live in
specific characteristics of the students of nowadays? Some this context, with the means to acquire the features that are part
authors present specific terms for the different generations of of the i Generation. Thus, we propose the following timeline,
students. Some older terms, other more current, describing a slightly modified:
generation increasingly more linked to digital. Jones and Shao
[11] list some of the most referenced terms such as
"Millennials", used by Howe and Strauss [12] [13] [14], "Net
generation", defended by Tapscott [15] [16] and Oblinger &
Oblinger [17] the terms "Digital Natives / Digital Immigrants"
used by Presnky [1] [18] [19] and Palfrey and Gasser [20], the
term Generation Y, described by Jorgensen [21], Weiler [22]
and McCrindle [23]; The term IM Generation used by Lenhart,
Rainie and Lewis [24], the term "Gamer generation", described
by Carstens and Beck [25] and "Homo Zappiens" defended by Fig. 1. Proposed chronological order for students profiles
Veen [26]. Jones and Shao [11] note that each of the terms
presented by these authors differ depending on the social While no one completely belongs to a specific generation
context in which they are involved, but appear to have similar and may show mixed features, and although these terms and
terms between them. As for the most current terms the author characteristics can be applied to a particular time interval, this
refers to two generations: the "Google generation" with the may be different depending on the country's development level,
term assigned by Rowlands et al. [27] and the i-Generation, even the family financial capacity can influence.
identified by Rosen [28].
Although in the previous schematic the Google generation
For this study it is important to understand if today’s is placed to those born after 2000, this is the proposed timeline
Portuguese students have the same characteristics proposed by of the study, adapted to the Portuguese reality. As for
these international authors, or if there is the need to adapt some Rowlands et al. [27], it is propose that all born after 1993 can
of the characteristics and, hence, the teaching and learning fit the profile, has it gathers all that have born surrounded by
strategies. As such, it was done first a gathering of all the terms internet. Although initially this description is very simplistic,
mentioned above, that will later on be tested under the form of the authors consider some features for this profile. They
a questionnaire that the students involved in the study must believe those belonging to the Google-Gen to feel more
answer to. But first, it is important to present the characteristics comfortable with a computer with a pen and paper, or use the
of the two more recent mentioned terms: the Google search engines, like Google, to do research instead of more
Generation and the i-generation. secure means where they can be sure of the validity of the
content. They state that these young people prefer quick
The definition of "i-generation" attributed by Rosen [28] is searches to the slower but more effective research when it
more specific, since the "i" is due to the wide use students comes validity, concluding that students are not able to assess
make of iPods, iTunes, Wii, iChat, iHome and iPhone. The the relevance of the results of research they do, and
author suggests that this term can be applied to those born after
1990, however, in Portugal, the widespread use of these
consequently, the contents absorbed by them are most of the  Allows activities control and keeps record of all
time show as superficial. activities and actions made by students and teachers.
Other authors such as Johnson et al. [29] [30] [31] refer to Moodle allows three user levels: The administrator role, the
the fact that students already spend much of their time on the teacher and the student. They all have different permissions:
Internet, not only socialize but learn, exchange ideas and new Administrator can manage the whole environment, the teacher
information, and believe that the institutions should take this can manage events, courses and subjects within areas
into account and bring the web 2.0 for their teaching practices, previously defined by the administrator, and the student can
not only because the students here are comfortable, but because access and interact in events to which he subscribed. Apart
it can motivate them and provide new skills, either at the digital from the above mentioned features, Moodle has a simple
level as at the level of cooperation, collaboration and reflection. interface, divided by modules, allowing a rapid learning curve
They believe that students today have digital culture, i.e., know regarding its use. [33]
how to use a large number of basic web tools for their day-to-
day tasks, but note that to use these same tools for the However, some negative aspects have been noticed in
acquisition and creation of knowledge students need to know studies developed on this platform, including privacy issues,
how to reflect and learn how to adapt knowledge in an relating to questions on forums, because every time a student
innovative way. These skills should be given by teachers, makes a contribution to a forum an email is sent to all users
requiring the latter to master all the necessary skills to then who participate in it, leading to some students, feel inhibited to
teach the students. These authors believe that Web 2.0 learning ask questions or comments, as much as would be desired. [34]
when applied correctly can lead students to collaborative work, Wood [33] also noted that some of the students have never
to the debate of ideas and the construction of knowledge in had or do not have continuous contact with a computer. This
cooperation. “(...) emerging digital tools make it easier for same author reported that only a minority of students today are
students to ask and respond to each other's questions and for actually digitally savvy, having demonstrated some difficulties
instructions to provide feedback in real-time.” [29] when integrating on platforms with which they are not
acclimatized.
III. FORMAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS – LMS MOODLE
Noticing the continuous increase in the usage of technology IV. FACEBOOK AS AN INFORMAL LEARNING PLATFORM
academics have started to change the teacher-centered Learning in the digital age depends not only on individual
paradigm to a more student-centered one, adopting formal acquisition, storage or knowledge collection. According to
online closed platforms, where students and teachers can Siemens [2] today’s learning depends on connectivity. It is
interact in a formal online environment. Learning Management necessary that students acquire certain skills that help them
Systems (LMS) offer a set of tools that give the teacher the create knowledge networks, using of Web 2.0 tools
opportunity to create and manage online courses. Among professionally, even the tools that many of us only see it as
several LMS, the most used are: Moodle, BlackBoard, entertainment. In a society that calls itself digital, know how to
Toobook, WebCT. Moodle is of the above mentioned the most use all the tools that are available effectively is a necessity,
used, probably because it is an open source environment, especially for the student who frequents Distance Learning. For
which reduces financial costs with platform acquisition and this student, the isolation can be an obstacle, when eliminating
maintenance. [32] the chance of creating informal knowledge with study groups
Moodle (Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning and colleagues.
Environment) was developed by a PhD student in 1999 and According to Forbes, in December 2013, Facebook remains
opened to the public in 2001. According to Moodle’s online the social network with most users. "Facebook continues to
page the goal of this project is to allow educators to manage lead the pack in terms of number of active monthly users (15.1
and promote learning. It’s an online open source platform, billion at last count)." [35]
integrating a set of tools that allow to create and manage a
space where students can access content made available by In view of these data, we highlight Facebook between
teachers allowing synchronous and/or asynchronous social networks, as a possible platform to be used in distance
communication among users. According to Alves and Gomes education, seeking to understand what Facebook’s features are
the specific features of Moodle meet in four dimensions: and what role it may have for learning in distance education.

 Protected access and management of user's profiles - To feel that one belongs to a community is identified in
create a private web environment for participants, several studies as an essential aspect for students to be
allowing to assign different levels of permissions for motivated. According to Madge et al. [36] socialization was
teachers and students; one of the most significant contributions that Facebook has
brought to the university students. In their study it is mentioned
 Managing access to content, enabling the teacher to that 84% say they use this network every day and 68% say they
make available online content in various formats, feel part of the Facebook community. The feeling of belonging
manage the time students have access to it and even to a community helps not only the integration of students as
control how students interact with it; facilitates communication between those who belong to it. For
distance education students this may be a positive feature for
 It has tools for synchronous and asynchronous the adoption of Facebook in school context, while it can
communication, allows communication between users;
facilitate communication among peers and between students experienced more instructor self-disclosure on Facebook
and teachers, integrating the student and keeping close contact, reported more motivation and higher levels of learning.” [41]
thus making them feel part of the community.
According to Nentwich and Konig [37] Facebook V. THEORETICAL FRAME OF THE STUDY – ACTIVITY THEORY
demonstrates potential as a platform for public relations for Being object of this study to comprehend in what way
scientists, universities, institutes and school associations. The interaction and collaboration contribute to the students’
same authors report that platforms like Facebook can be used engagement in hybrid e-learning contexts, the chosen
for synchronous communication with specific reference to the theoretical frame is the Activity Theory, because its
contribution that they could bring elearning. By creating a fundamental components are interaction and relationship
network of contacts relevant to the areas of interest, you can between the subject and the object of study.
use Facebook not only as a means of communication but for
cooperation and motivation. Activity Theory is considered by several researchers as
facilitator and effective for studies about engagement and
A. The required skills and educative potential collaboration between students. According to Collins et al. [42]
and Christine (2002) “activity theory helps achieve efficiency
According to Bassani [38] online learning has had different and quality in the research by helping directly transfer the data
terminologies, such as e-learning, Web-based learning, into the artefacts and relationships in the model. Moreover,
distance learning, although all refer to the use of the Internet to they state that the given artefacts and the relationships are
access and interact with online content, with the teacher and enough to explain the major aspects of the activity under
other students, in order to obtain support during the learning investigation.” [3]
process and thus gain knowledge, to construct personal
meaning and grow professionally with the learning experience. Created by Engestrom [43] this theory establishes a
All these features can only be enhanced by social networks like schematic (Fig. 2) that helps to describe how people participate
Facebook. in activities, giving the researcher the opportunity to make a
profound analysis of the used tools, the bond that is established
But why suggest the use of Facebook instead of other social between the users and between the study’s goal and
network more dedicated to research? Professional social consequences.
networks are not attractive to most students, unlike Facebook,
which is part of their daily routines. "Research has suggested
that Facebook is a potentially useful tool for promoting
effective academic practice” [36] And although the creation of
a network with educational and scientific relevance can take
time, although its benefits are not able to glance at short term,
Nentwich and Konig [37] state that for the success of
educational investment in this network, skepticism must be
exceeded. An initial step might be to create groups of closed
access for students of a specific course or chair, where only
students belonging to the same institution or class can enter.
Social networks such as Facebook have the potential to
increase the frequency and diversity of collaborative works
between students and even among teachers and researchers.
Particularly for Distance Learning, where one of the problems
is the isolation of students, sometimes leading to academic
abandonment, these networks may contribute positively due to Fig. 1 Activity Theory squematics
their social side and as they allow frequent and close contact
with either colleagues or teachers, but also experts, creating the Using the schematics proposed by Engestrom, in this study
feeling of belonging to a community and enhancing the subjects will be the participants (students and teachers), the
integration, at the same time it enhances sharing and tools will be the ones used to succeed in achieving the goal of
collaboration. the study i.e. Moodle and Facebook), the object is the reason
that makes people use these tools, the purpose that makes
According to Burke et al. [39] the success of discussion students and teachers use them. And these are the 3 main
groups in a community depends on motivating participation, elements of this theory. After the project is implemented will
generated by a group with several participants, where the we have the outcome, what resulted of this study. The rules are
quantity and quality of contributions tend to grow with the the good practice norms for the use of the tools to be tested,
motivation of participants. Belonging to a community that does and the teachers involved on the study will establish what rules
not show itself enclosed on formal platforms but that is they use for their teaching strategies when applying the tools.
dynamic and open to the world and to collaboration as well as The community consists on the environment where the subjects
the social networks to which students already call theirs, may are, in this case, a Higher Education Institution. The division of
bring the necessary motivation to the higher distance education labor is the role each individual will have in these study.
student, not only to remain enrolled but also to excel in its
studies. “A small-scale survey [40] found that students who
 VI. METHODOLOGICAL DESIGN FUNDAMENTALS [7] S. R. Hiltz, N. Coppola, N. Rotter, M. Turoff, and R. Benbunan-
fich, “Measuring the Importance of Collaborative Learning for the
The research nature of this study is mixed, due to the need Effectiveness of ALN : A Multi-Measure , Multi-Method
of gathering both qualitative and quantitative data, using Approach,” Sloan Consort., vol. Volume 4, no. Issue 2, pp. 103–
different techniques to gather and analyze them. 125, 2000.

The qualitative data will be gathered from the students’ [8] B. H. Khan, “The Global E-Learning Framework,” in Stride
posts in Moodle discussion forums and in Facebook groups, Handbook - E-learning, 2009, pp. 42–51.
and from the open questions students will answer in the initial
and final questionnaires. They will then be analyzed with [9] C. Angeli, N. Valanides, and C. J. Bonk, “the quality of computer-
mediated interactions,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 31–
WebQDA. The quantitative data will the gathered using 43, 2003.
learning analytics tools, such as SNAPP and Gephi, and also
from some questions in the initial and final questionnaires. [10] D. R. Garrison, T. Anderson, and W. Archer, “Critical thinking,
cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance
As a methodology this study will use Social Network education,” Am. J. Distance Educ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 7–23, Jan.
Analysis (SNA), in order to analyze the students’ group 2001.
dynamics in both tools. SNA is an interdisciplinary
methodology developed by social psychology researchers in [11] C. Jones and B. Shao, “The Net Generation and Digital Natives:
the 60 and 70 decades, while working in collaboration with Implications for Higher Education,” 2011.
researchers in mathematics, computers and statistics. In the 90 [12] W. Strauss and N. Howe, Generations: The History of America’s
decades Wasserman & Faust described it as the analysis of Future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow and Company,
relationship patterns between individuals and the exchange of 1991.
resources during those relationships [44] More recently in
2004, Freeman [45] describes it as having 4 proprieties: “(1) It [13] N. Howe and W. Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great
involves the intuition that links among social actors are Generation. New York: Vintage Books, 2000.
important. (2) It is based on the collection and analysis of data [14] W. Strauss and N. Howe, Millennials Go to College: Strategies for
that record social relations that link actors. (3) It draws a New Generation on Campus, 2nd ed. New York: American
heavily on graphic imagery to reveal and display the Association of Collegiate Registrars, 2003.
patterning of those links. And (4) it develops mathematical and
computational models to describe and explain those patterns.” [15] D. Tapscott, Growing Up Digital by Don Tapscott. McGraw-Hill
[45] Inc.,US (1 Oct. 1997), 1998.

SNA differs from other methodologies because it [16] D. Tapscott, “Characteristics if a Generation: The Eight Net Gen
incorporates different levels of analysis. It can measure at Norms,” in Grown Up Digital: how the net Generation is changing
your world, McGraw-Hill, 2009, pp. 73–96.
group, local or network level, the decision on the appropriate
measure depends on the study and on what the researcher [17] D. Oblinger, J. Oblinger, G. Roberts, B. McNeely, C. Windham, J.
wants to show. Hartman, P. Moskal, C. Dziuban, R. Kvavik, J. Ramaley, L. Zia, A.
Clayton-Pedersen, J. Wager, A. Moore, J. Moore, S. Fowler, M.
Brown, J. Lippincott, C. Barone, and C. Dede, Educating the net
REFERENCES generation: A Handbook of findings for practice and policy.
Educause, 2005.
[1] M. Prensky, “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II: Do They
Really Think Differently?,” Horizon, NCB Univ. Press, vol. 9, no. 6,
2001. [18] M. Prensky, “[Link] Digital: From Digital Immigrants and
Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom,” Innovate, 2009.
[2] G. Siemens, “elearnspace. Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the
Digital Age,” Elearnspace, 2004. [Online]. Available: [19] M. Prensky, “From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom,” in From
[Link] [Accessed: Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom: Hopeful Essays for 21st Century
12-Apr-2014]. Education, California: Corwin - A SAGE company, 2012.

[3] S. Oncu and H. Cakir, “Research in online learning environments: [20] J. Palfrey and U. Gasser, Born Digital: Understanding the First
Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books, 2008.
Priorities and methodologies,” Comput. Educ., vol. 57, no. 1, pp.
1098–1108, Aug. 2011.
[21] B. Jorgensen, “Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Generation Y:
Policy Implications for Defence Forces in the Modern Era,”
[4] T. Anderson, “Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent
developments and research questions,” in Handbook of Distance Foresight, vol. 5, no. 4, 2003.
Education, 2003, pp. 129–144.
[22] A. Weiler, “Information-Seeking Behavior in Generation Y
Students: Motivation, Critical Thinking, and Learning Theory,” J.
[5] A. W. Chickering and Z. F. Gamson, “Seven Principles For Good
Practice in Undergraduate Education,” Washington Center News, Acad. Librariansh., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 46–53, 2005.
1987.
[23] M. McCrindle, “New Generations at Work: Attracting, Recruiting,
[6] R. del Valle, S. Öncü, N. F. Koksal, N. Kim, P. Alford, and T. M. Retraining & Training Generation Y,” 2006.
Duffy, “Effects of Online Cognitive Facilitation on Student
Learning,” [Link], 2007. . [24] A. Lenhart, L. Rainie, and O. Lewis, “Teenage life online: The rise
of the instant-message generation and the Internet’s impact on
frienships and family relationships,” 2001.
[25] A. Carstens and J. Beck, “Get Ready for te Gamer Generation,” socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing
TechTrends Link. Res. Pract. to Improv. Learn., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. work,’” Learn. Media Technol., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 141–155, Jun.
22–25, 2005. 2009.

[26] W. Veen and B. Vrakking, Homo Zappiens: Growing Up in a [37] M. Nentwich and R. Konig, “Academia Goes Facebook? The
Digital Age. A&C Black, 2006. Potential of Social Network Sites in the Scholarly Realm,” in
Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is
[27] I. Rowlands, D. Nicholas, P. Williams, P. Huntington, M. Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing,
Fieldhouse, B. Gunter, R. Withey, H. R. Jamali, T. Dobrowlski, and SPRINGER Open, 2014, pp. 107–124.
C. Tenopir, “The Google generation: the information behaviour of
the researcher of the future,” Aslib Proc. New Inf. Perspect., vol. 60, [38] P. B. S. Bassani, “Interpersonal exchanges in discussion forums: A
no. 4, pp. 290–310, 2008. study of learning communities in distance learning settings,”
Comput. Educ., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 931–938, May 2011.
[28] L. D. Rosen, M. L. Carrier, and N. A. Cheever, Rewired
Understanding the iGeneration and the Way They Learn. New [39] M. Burke, C. Marlow, and T. Lento, “Social Network Activity and
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Social Well-Being,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2010, pp. 1909–1912.
[29] L. Johnson, S. Adams Becker, V. Estrada, A. Freeman, P. Kampylis,
R. Vuorikari, and Y. Punie, “Horizon Report Europe > 2014 [40] J. P. Mazer, R. E. Murphy, and C. J. Simonds, “I’ll See You On
Schools Edition,” 2014. ‘“Facebook”’: The Effects of Computer-Mediated Teacher Self-
Disclosure on Student Motivation, Affective Learning, and
[30] L. Johnson, S. Adams, and M. Cummins, “NMC Horizon Report: Classroom Climate,” Commun. Educ., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1–17,
2012 Higher Education Edition,” 2012. 2007.

[31] L. Johnson, A. Levine, and R. Smith, “The Horizon Report 2009 [41] R. Junco, “The relationship between frequency of Facebook use,
Edition,” Texas, 2009. participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement,”
Comput. Educ., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 162–171, Jan. 2012.
[32] I. Messias and L. Morgado, “Facebook+Moodle: environments to
foster students’ involvement in distance learning,” in ICERI 2014, [42] P. Collins, S. Shukla, and D. Redmiles, “Activity Theory and
2014, pp. 4033–4040. System Design: A View from the Trenches,” Comput. Support.
Coop. Work, vol. 11, no. 1–2, pp. 55–80, Mar. 2002.
[33] S. L. Wood, “Technology for Teaching and Learning : Moodle as a
Tool for Higher Education,” Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ., vol. [43] Y. Engestrom, LEARNING BY EXPANDING AN ACTIVITY-
22, no. 3, pp. 299–307, 2010. THEORETICAL APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENTAL RESEARCH.
1987.
[34] M. Martinho, P. A. Almeida, and J. Teixeira-Dias, “Fostering
Students Questioning through Moodle: Does it Work?,” Procedia - [44] D. Schepis, “Social Network Analysis from a Qualitative
Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 116, no. iv, pp. 2537–2542, Feb. 2014. Perspective,” in ANZMAC, 2011, no. Scott 1991.

[35] J. DeMers, “The Top 7 Social Media Marketing Trends That Will [45] L. C. Freeman, “The Development of Social Network Analysis —
Dominate 2014 - Forbes,” Forbes, 2013. [Online]. Available: with an Emphasis on Recent Events,” 2011. [Online]. Available:
[Link] [Link]
social-media-marketing-trends-that-will-dominate-2014/.
[Accessed: 26-Mar-2014].

[36] C. Madge, J. Meek, J. Wellens, and T. Hooley, “Facebook , social

integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for

View publication stats