Educational Media International, 2014

Vol. 51, No. 2, 135–145, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.924664

Evaluation of Facebook© to create an online learning community

in an undergraduate animal science class
Alexandra L. Whittaker*, Gordon S. Howarth and Kerry A. Lymn

School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, Australia

(Received 10 February 2014; accepted 3 May 2014)

There has been widespread comment on the use and impact of Web 2.0 technol-
ogies in education. Given the use of such technologies, particularly social net-
working sites such as Facebook amongst the student body, it would be remiss of
educators to not consider their use as part of a pedagogical strategy. This paper
provides a preliminary investigation into the success of Facebook as a tool for
formation of an online learning community amongst a group of undergraduate
science students. A quantitative examination of participant numbers and traffic
on the site was undertaken. In order to determine functionality of the group, a
semi-qualitative examination of category of response posting was also per-
formed. It was concluded that Facebook is a promising tool to establish an
online educational community under the conditions imposed in our study. The
main benefits are in establishment of affective communication, social support,
and a problem-solving strategy.
Keywords: Facebook; online community; web-based teaching; social networking

1. Introduction
1.1. Social constructivism
The social constructivist approach to teaching and learning suggests that an individ-
ual’s learning occurs within a social context and that collaboration between individu-
als in this social environment is a required component of the learning experience
(Jaworski, 1994; Maor, 2003). Reported benefits of collaboration have included;
increased motivation (Slavin, 1990), promotion of learning outcome attainment
(Johnson, 1991), and other social and psychological benefits (Panitz, 1997). Tech-
nologies used in learning are increasingly available to the masses and focused on
collaboration and interactivity (Squires, 2000) and hence are well equipped to pro-
mote a social constructivist educational approach. Such an approach is student cen-
tric by focusing on dialogue, and collaborative construction of knowledge through
peer and instructor co-learning. The instructor thus assumes a facilitation role
(O’Connor, 1998).

1.2. Online learning communities

McMillan and Chavis (1986) proposed a model of community comprising of four
main elements: membership, influence, fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional

*Corresponding author. Email: Alexandra.whittaker@adelaide.edu.au

© 2014 International Council for Educational Media

136 A.L. Whittaker et al.

connection (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). These elements can be directly applied to
the creation of online communities in an educational context, bearing in mind that the
key definitive element in the establishment of a successful community is the creation
of emotional connectivity (McMillan, 1996). Approaches to development of online
learning communities are varied. Asynchronous online learning communities, with
collaboration, are popular choices. One study found asynchronous collaboration to be
as effective as face-to-face collaboration when examining learning outcomes, solution
content, and resulting satisfaction. However, in terms of the experiential nature of the
learning, online learners were significantly less satisfied in terms of the group interac-
tion process, and the quality of group discussions (Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999). Social
presence is another critical factor that influences success of the online learning com-
munity, and has been found to be predictive of the satisfaction of online learners with
their learning (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997). Social presence and social relationships,
in addition to the tasks being engaged in, have all been shown to impact on learning
outcomes (Tu & Corry, 2002a), as do communication styles and personal characteris-
tics (Tu & McIsaac, 2001). Therefore, it appears that in order to develop an ideal
online learning community, teachers should increase the level of social presence. This
is likely to be best achieved by use of well-constructed software which supports
group activities and interactions (Tu & Corry, 2002b).

1.3. Web 2.0 technologies as educational tools

Web 2.0 refers to “the internet viewed as a medium in which interactive experience,
in the form of blogs, wikis, forums, etc, plays a more important role than simply
accessing information” (Collins English Dictionary, n.d.). The utility and effect of
Web 2.0 and social networking tools on education has been widely discussed
amongst education researchers. It is therefore timely that teachers consider whether
these technologies can meet the needs of their students, and if so, how best to imple-
ment them (English & Duncan-Howell, 2008). Likewise, institutions are recognizing
that the enrolled student body is increasingly Web 2.0 proficient and are making use
of such applications in both an educational and marketing context. Facebook is one
such technology, whereby users create a personal space for online conversations and
sharing of content based typically on “profile” sharing. In such spaces, users repre-
sent themselves through the display of personal information, interests, photographs,
etc. Users maintain their own profile and access the profiles of others on the network
who are chosen “friends” (Selwyn, 2009). Mason has suggested that social network-
ing sites (SNS) offer many of the desirable qualities of good “official” education
technologies in that they allow peer feedback, and provide a social context to inter-
action (Mason, 2006). They are collaborative and encourage active participation and
have shown that students are willing to invest time in relationship building based on
common interests (Maloney, 2007). This has led to increased research focus into
both the effects on education of Facebook use in general, and the potential of social
networking to improve conventional educational interactions. Many of these studies
have investigated the general use of SNS in providing collegial support and enhanc-
ing networking opportunities (Bosch, 2009; Madge, Meek, Wellens, & Hooley,
2009; Wodzicki, Schwämmlein, & Moskaliuk, 2012).
Heiberger and Harper (2008) found positive correlations between social network-
ing website use and college student engagement as evidenced by a higher percentage
of high users of social networking websites having greater participation in campus
 Educational Media International 137

organizations than low users (Heiberger & Harper, 2008). The work of Junco
illustrated a complex relationship between use of Facebook and levels of
institutional student engagement depending on the technological applications used.
For example, time spent on Facebook was positively predictive of time spent in
co-curricular activities, whilst playing games on Facebook was negatively predictive
(Junco, 2012). Wang showed that Facebook was a useful tool for cross-cultural
collaboration between groups of international students but required much individual
effort to maintain friendships (Wang, 2012). Facebook has also found utility in an
institutional context as a way of maintaining communication and group cohesion
following natural disaster in the wake of the 2010 Canterbury earthquake (Dabner,
2012).
A number of studies have examined students’ views on faculty use of Facebook.
It was reported that only 15% of students would feel that their privacy had been
invaded if faculty encouraged educational uses of Facebook and in fact this study
found that students were more interested than faculty in using Facebook for educa-
tional purposes (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, & Witty, 2010). A survey con-
ducted by Mazer, Murphy, and Simonds 2007 found that students whose instructors
engaged in greater levels of self-disclosure on Facebook reported greater motivation
and higher levels of learning (Mazer et al., 2007). Conversely, one investigation of
online community student/faculty relationships implied that one-third of students
believed that faculty should not be present on Facebook at all (Hewitt & Forte,
2006).
Moran, Seaman, and Tinti-kane (2011) found that 77% of faculty engaged in per-
sonal uses of social media and some 60% reported using social media in class. How-
ever, only 4% of those faculty surveyed reported using Facebook in class (Moran
et al., 2011). These data might explain the relative dearth of published literature sur-
rounding specific educational uses of Facebook in the classroom. Two case studies
have used the site as a means of promoting peer review of fellow student’s submis-
sions. McCarthy (2009) reported the effectiveness of this application (at least in
terms of the student experience) in an architecture class involving uploading of
images onto the site for students to review (McCarthy, 2009). However, Bassford
and Ivins (2010) using Facebook similarly for peer review of uploaded images
reported negative outcomes based on technology limitations, with the lack of ability
to create albums and to input a review score being cited as the main issues (Bassford
& Ivins, 2010). English provided a more qualitative study of student’s use of
Facebook in an online community setting designed to encourage collaboration and
support, whilst students were on an external teaching practicum placement. This
small-scale study suggested that the majority of student postings were associated
with affective communication, which included group reinforcement, encouragement,
and support. It is proposed that the strength of Web 2.0 technologies lies in this
domain, and may provide a solution to the problem of providing personalized
support to geographically distant students (English & Duncan-Howell, 2008).

2. Research question
The author has noted that discussion group participation using a traditional learning
management system is generally associated with a scarcity of responses if not
attached to formal assessment. It is hypothesized that use of a student-friendly SNS
such as Facebook may overcome this contribution reluctance. The purpose of the
138 A.L. Whittaker et al.

present study was to carry out a quantitative and qualitative examination of students’
uses of a Facebook group page dedicated to their enrolled unit of study. The main
characteristics of interest include student rates of participation and type of postings,
in order to assess whether a successful online community had been established.

3. Methodology
The Facebook group was setup by the lecturer as a “closed group.” This group status
required that students requested permission to join the group through the group
administrators and thus access could be restricted to enrolled students of the unit. This
functionality also allows maintenance of privacy of Facebook pages held by the stu-
dents or the administrating staff, which likely contains information that is more per-
sonal. Two “administrators” who were both involved in the course delivery were
appointed. These individuals could approve membership requests and were responsi-
ble for checking the site regularly to provide timely feedback where needed and to
remove any inappropriate comments. Students were informed of the existence of the
group during a face-to-face classroom session with a reminder follow up email sent
through the course’s Blackboard learning management system. The latter ran parallel
to the group page throughout the semester. No marks or requirement to engage in
page discussions were assigned since the study aim was to evaluate whether a sponta-
neous online community could be seeded using the Facebook technology.
All students were enrolled in an on-campus undergraduate Animal Science
degree, which requires compulsory face-to face attendance for the majority of learn-
ing activities, and in which students generally move through as a cohort. Participants
were almost exclusively in the third year of the program. As such, most students
were already well acquainted with each other, perhaps encouraging more active par-
ticipation in this form of educational social media use.
All activity (except for one student’s posting of an assignment file) was found to
be on “the wall” which has been described as “the space on your profile where you
and friends can post and share” (Facebook Help Center Glossary, 2012). It is postu-
lated that the use of this area is encouraged by its nature as a front page application
on the group page making it highly visible, its common use on personal Facebook
profiles, and newly added content being subject to notification to other users or
“friends” via the Facebook system. The latter ensures rapid and up-to-date notifica-
tion of page activity especially when the Facebook app is coupled with the use of
mobile devices e.g. smart phones or tablets.
A general descriptive analysis of participation rates and administrator vs. student
input to problem solutions was performed. In order to evaluate level and type of
interaction on the page, the wall posts were analyzed and categorized into themes
based on their content. Five themes were chosen: course content query, administra-
tive query, problem solution, joke, and other. Within these areas, frequency of posts
and a qualitative review of posts’ nature was performed over the semester time
course of the unit.

4. Results
4.1. General descriptive statistics
In total, there were 44 enrolled students in the unit of study, 42 students requested
Facebook group access from one of the two administrators i.e. 95% of students. To
 Educational Media International 139

determine participation rates in the page, the number of students who made an active
contribution to the group was determined, where active contribution was defined as
“the number of students that contributed at least one posting.” The use of the Face-
book “Like” functionality was not analyzed, however, this was used on occasion,
and interestingly was used by a number of students who failed to contribute overall
by submitting a wall posting. Over the semester time course (14 weeks), the number
of active contributors was 33 students i.e. 78% of the students who had joined the
group, and between all participants (including administrators), a total number of wall
postings of 685 was amassed. Whilst other students failed to contribute a posting, at
a number of points in the semester it was clear that all students had viewed the post-
ings as determined by the Facebook comment “seen by everyone.” This shows that
whilst not all students were actively engaged and collaborating on the site they were
checking in regularly, and it is to be hoped were gaining some value from its pres-
ence. The mean number (±SD) of posts contributed by the active students was 18.0
(±13.3). Figure 1 shows the frequency distribution of number of student postings.
The number of starting posts (akin to threads on a discussion board) numbered
135. Administrators rarely started wall posts except on occasion to make students
aware of administrative notices affecting the course (n = 22), and there was no delib-
erate posting of discussion topics in attempts to foster discussion and collaboration.
However, administrators did regularly seed posts with answers to student queries
especially when these were not receiving feedback from other class members. The
number of comments posted in response to a single post ranged from 0 to 23.

4.2. Theme analysis

The Facebook page data was analyzed to identify emerging themes for posts. Five
broad themes were identified which best described the type of comment posted.
Posts were only assigned to one category for simplicity, although on occasion two
themes emerged. In order of frequency, the number of comments within each theme

Figure 1. Frequency distribution for student postings on the Facebook group page.
140 A.L. Whittaker et al.

was: other (n = 284), problem solution (n = 198), course content query (n = 94),
administrative query (n = 69), and joke (n = 40).

4.2.1. Other
This category contained the largest number of posts (n = 284) and largely included
posts thanking others for problem solutions, disclosing emotional state, or concur-
ring with answers given by other group members, for example:
I’m so lost
So it turns out the primary applicant for my ethics application (assignment topic) was a
key suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks. Just an interesting tidbit for you all ….
I’m jealous that you’re not having to do your feedlot assignment (different study unit)
atm!
Also included in this category were comments where unsolicited disclosure of
course material was provided e.g. students providing copies of their graphs or calcu-
lations to aid others in their attempts. There were a number of comments where stu-
dents provided unsolicited feedback on how the course might be improved which
were presumably targeted at the administrators. As a course evaluation strategy this
is a useful finding since comments were more detailed and numerous than would be
received through standard university feedback mechanisms. Examples include:
I think having a tutorial to help us figure out how we should analyze the results would
have been helpful
Considering that this assignment is worth 30% of our grade there should have been
more information provided for us ….
Posts were generally associated with affective communication between
members and were generally positive in nature offering encouragement and
support. These comments were usually made in response to problem postings,
once solutions were posted. Interestingly, a number of posts related to other
subjects the students were involved in or advertised student social activities, and
were thus placed in this category. This demonstrates that there appears to be a
high motivation and utility in this site, which could be utilized in other subject
areas (aided in this case by the cohort-forming nature of the program). In the vast
majority of cases, responses were posted within a short time. It seems that if there
was no response within 24 h then a post was unlikely to attract any comments.
This indicated that students were regularly online, or at least easily able to receive
notifications of postings and rapidly log on to the page.

4.2.2. Course content query

This category contained the third largest number of posts (n = 94) and largely
included posts that were related to assignments that the students were working on,
either in terms of lack of understanding of what a question was expecting, or confu-
sion related to the subject material itself. There was a peak in activity of this type of
response just prior to assignment hand in. Comments were posted relatively quickly
and multiple responses were usually posted in a short period (usually a day). This
 Educational Media International 141

was likely to be essential for queries of this nature given the time pressure of the
imminent assignment due date. Examples of such comments include:
How do we fill out the power calculation part?
Hey all, with question 5, is it meant to be calculate the cumulative variation or the
coefficient of variation
Generally, these questions could be easily answered with knowledge of the
subject material. Administrators endeavored to provide a response to each of these
starting posts either to clarify the position, or suggest a source of further information
by weblink or referral to class notes. Anecdotally, it seemed that course lecturers
were receiving fewer personal enquiries or emails posing such questions than in
previous years of teaching this subject. It is proposed that problems of this nature
were rapidly finding acceptable solutions via this online mechanism, and were
therefore not being raised by more traditional problem-raising mechanisms. This
finding could have valuable implications in courses with large student numbers to
reduce the administrative time spent by individual lecturers responding to queries.

4.2.3. Administrative query

This category contained the fourth largest number of posts (n = 69) and generally
related to administrative questions regarding face-to-face teaching activities (loca-
tions, times etc.) or assignment hand in. As before, responses were rapid and were
often resolved by student responses. For example:
Is this due strictly at 9am tomorrow? Cause my computer died and I lost everything
long night for me haha
Where do we find the stuff we need to read for 2moro? I’ve blanked on where it is
again lol and do we need to print anything out or make sure to bring for 2moro?

4.2.4. Problem solution

This category contained a relatively large number of responses made in response to
either a course content or administrative question (n = 198). It should be noted that
the total number of course content and administrative-related queries i.e. problems
closely aligns with the number of solutions provided, although there were often mul-
tiple solutions posted in relation to one particular problem question. This indicates
that this tool is an effective problem-solving mechanism. Responses often included a
direct answer being given (usually a student posting), or in the case of an adminis-
trator response to a content-related question, some guidance as to where to find fur-
ther information without disclosing the answer itself. In this category, responses
often included weblinks to further information or even posting of student’s own
work to provide the answer. One response used the file functionality of the group
page in order to upload an assignment graph. As the semester progressed, it became
clear that the students themselves were taking a more active role in providing solu-
tions to problems, rather than waiting for an administrator response. Of the total
number of solutions posed, administrator responses numbered 80 (40%), whilst stu-
dent responses number 118 (60%). Examples include:
142 A.L. Whittaker et al.

At the end of the day a power calculation requires an indication of the type II error
that’s acceptable. Generally you would find a common acceptable type II error would
be 20% so requires a power of 80% (student response to problem question)
Yeah I did it here [webpage link] (student response to problem question)
This is mine. Looks dodgy though ahaha (jpg graph file uploaded)
Check out [link to article on journal webpage]. Might be some clues there! (adminis-
trator response to problem question)

4.2.5. Joke
This category contained the smallest number of posts (n = 40) but showed a positive
social dynamic existed between students. Such posts were probably important in
maintaining group cohesions and reducing stress around assignment submission
time. These posts attracted few comments but often triggered Facebook “like”
responses. Posts were often amusing cartoon pictures or triggered by a previous seri-
ous comment to lighten the mood, for example:
Interpretive dance works best in microbiology … re: Spirochaete dance (Darren’s
favorite). (in answer to question regarding whether visual aids were needed for student
oral presentation)

5. Discussion
This case study supports the use of Facebook groups’ functionality in development
of an online learning community. Our results suggest that a thriving community
developed that successfully undertook problem-solving activities and appeared to
develop an emotional connection, at least in those students that participated actively
in it. Community penetration into the class was high (95%) and whilst active student
participation rate was lower (78%) this figure remains fairly high and is likely to be
higher than that seen spontaneously in face-to-face class teaching situations. How-
ever, it needs to be considered that the class was already well acquainted with each
other, and met regularly through on-campus classes. It would be interesting to repeat
the exercise amongst first year or distance education students to determine if partici-
pation rates are similar. The class was also relatively small (44 students) and in a lar-
ger class size a smaller proportion of students might be seen to be active
participants, perhaps due to the greater difficulty in building rapport, and reluctance
to express oneself amongst a larger number of individuals.
The majority of posts were associated with the types of skills one generally asso-
ciates with the establishment and maintenance of social relationships. These include
reassurance and encouragement statements, statements of thanks, and finding com-
monality of ground. This also reinforces the sense of community that appears to
have developed. The use of the page for discussing other student issues and adver-
tising social events suggests that it was seen as an efficient forum for getting infor-
mation disseminated. There were a number of comments implying a perceived
greater value of the page over the standard university Blackboard course site, and
other communication methods utilized. This is a key finding both for academics
administering courses and in a broader university context for administrators looking
for effective student communication strategies. Examples include:
 Educational Media International 143

Just because it’s easier to ask here than go hunting on myuni (Blackboard system) is
there …
Had everyone forgotten about that animal science group in response to question on a
degree program related topic. Reply: “this gets more hits”
Problem-solving also appeared to be an important purpose of the group with the
majority of problems posted being solved in a rapid and satisfactory manner. Inter-
estingly, the majority of the solutions were initiated by student posting rather than
administrator input. However, we believe that a key contributor to the success of this
group, particularly in the early days of the project, was brought about by proactive
lecturer input to provide comment and guide direction of discussion. As the group
takes on a life of its own this lecturer input might become less important.
This research has taken a quantitative and semi-qualitative examination of the
success of such a group. Future research should examine aspects of the student
experience by performing surveys on perceived value and technology suitability of
the group for the purpose designed. Additionally it would be useful to perform
controlled comparison studies with other commonly used online community strate-
gies such as learning management system discussion boards, which anecdotally in
the author’s experience are not well utilized, or different SNS technologies. Since, it
also appears that the problem-solving nature of the group may have reduced the
number of approaches for information by traditional means such as email or
face-to-face lecturer questioning, this would be another interesting aspect to
investigate. This finding has the potential to be of value in terms of reducing lecturer
workload, especially in courses with large numbers of students, whilst still ensuring
adequate levels of support and pastoral care.

6. Conclusion
This research provides preliminary evidence for the ability to successfully establish
an online learning community using the Facebook group functionality. In addition to
establishing a form of group cohesion which might be particularly useful for stu-
dent’s self-care, and establishment of lifelong networking contacts, there appears to
be a strong problem-solving function of the group. The widespread use of Facebook
as a social networking strategy is likely to have contributed substantially to this suc-
cess by ensuring user uptake, familiarity, and timely notification of and response to
postings.

References
Bassford, M., & Ivins, J. (2010). Encouraging formative peer review via social networking
sites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, E67–E69.
Bosch, T. E. (2009). Using online social networking for teaching and learning: Facebook use
at the University of Cape Town. Communication, 35, 185–200.
Collins English Dictionary (n.d.). Retrieved June 4, 2014, from http://www.collinsdictionary.
com/dictionary/english/web-2-0?showCookiePolicy=true
Dabner, N. (2012). ‘Breaking ground’ in the use of social media: A case study of a university
earthquake response to inform educational design with Facebook. Internet & Higher Edu-
cation, 15, 69–78.
English, R., & Duncan-Howell, J. (2008). Facebook© goes to college: Using social network-
ing tools to support students undertaking teaching practicum. MERLOT Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, 4, 596–601.
144 A.L. Whittaker et al.

Facebook Help Center Glossary. (2012). Wall. Retrieved September 18, 2012, from http://
www.facebook.com/help/glossary
Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction
within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance
Education, 11, 8–26.
Heiberger, G., & Harper, R. (2008). Have you facebooked Astin lately? Using technology to
increase student involvement. New Directions for Student Services, 2008, 19–35.
doi:10.1002/ss.293.
Hewitt, A., & Forte, A. (2006). Crossing boundaries: Identity management and student/fac-
ulty relationships of Facebook. Paper presented at CSCW06, Banff.
Jaworski, B. (1994). Investigating mathematics teaching: A constructivist enquiry. London:
Falmer Press.
Johnson, W. D. (1991). Student-student interaction: The neglected variable in education. Edu-
cational Research, 10, 5–10.
Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Face-
book activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58, 162–171.
Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (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 & Technology, 34, 141–155.
Maloney, E. (2007). What Web 2.0 can teach us about learning. Chronicle of Higher Educa-
tion, 53, B26.
Maor, D. (2003). The teacher’s role in developing interaction and reflection in an online
learning community. Educational Media International, 40, 127–138.
Mason, R. (2006). Learning technologies for adult continuing education. Studies in Contin-
uing Education, 28, 121–133.
Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook”: The effects
of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning,
and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56(1), 1–17.
McCarthy, J. (2009). Utilising Facebook: Immersing Generation-Y students into first year
university. Ergo, 1, 39–49.
McMillan, D. W. (1996). Sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 315–
325.
McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory.
Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6–23.
Moran, M., Seaman, J., & Tinti-kane, H. (2011). Teaching, learning, and sharing: How today’s
higher education faculty use social media. Retrieved September 20, 2012, from http://
www.babson.edu/Academics/Documents/babson-survey-research-group/teaching-learning-
and-sharing.pdf
O’Connor, M. C. (1998). Can we trace the efficacy of social constructivism? Review of Edu-
cational Research, 23, 25–71.
Ocker, R. J., & Yaverbaum, G. (1999). Asynchronous computer-mediated communication
versus face-to-face collaboration: Results on student learning, quality and satisfaction.
Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 427–440.
Panitz, T. (1997). The case for student centred instruction via collaborative learning para-
digms. Retrieved September 18, 2012, from http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/
coopbenefits.htm
Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on
Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and per-
ceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 134–140.
Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students’ education-related use of Facebook.
Learning, Media & Technology, 34, 157–174.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning theory, research and practice. Needham, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Squires, D. (2000). Peripatetic electronic teachers in higher education. ALT_EJ, 7, 52–63.
Tu, C., & Corry, M. (2002a). A paradigm shift for online community research. Distance Edu-
cation, 22, 245–263.
Tu, C., & Corry, M. (2002b). Research in online learning community. Retrieved from www.
ascilite.org.au/ajet/e-jist/docs/Vol5_No1/chtu_frame.html
 Educational Media International 145

Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. S. (2001). Community of practice for mentoring. Paper presented
at the Annual Conference of American Educational Research Association (AERA),
Seattle, WA.
Wang, C.-M. (2012). Using Facebook for cross-cultural collaboration: The experience of stu-
dents from Taiwan. Educational Media International, 49, 63–76.
Wodzicki, K., Schwämmlein, E., & Moskaliuk, J. (2012). “Actually, I wanted to learn”:
Study-related knowledge exchange on social networking sites. Internet & Higher
Education, 15, 9–14.
Copyright of Educational Media International is the property of Routledge and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.