Facebook and Cell Phones: Great Communication Tools Too Great for Today's Schools?
By: David Nutbean
Dec 03/07
Introduction
The relevance and importance of schools today is often questioned by students, not necessarily because of what schools have done, but rather what they haven't done to address the incredible changes of technology all around us. In a short span of one generation, today's students are more connected to technology than any other before it. The use of cell phones and the internet have given rise to the "hyperconnected" generation (Waters 2007 ). The ease with which they use the vast array of technologies is often baffling and frightening to the older generation. Prensky (2001) coined the term "Digital Natives" to describe the current generation of students who are at ease with any new technology while us "Digital Immigrants" look on trying to comprehend. We often look on in awe and horror as kids today lay bare their lives on the pages of Facebook, wondering what good can come of such exposure. Cell phones are a constant annoyance for schools and often ban their use.
But with any new technologies there is always good use and bad use. Within a single newspaper just pages apart were stories titled "Digital terror and hate" (Zeileg 2007 ) describing heinous and vile websites and one titled "'Beautiful, powerful' woman mourned" (Winnipeg Free Press 2007 ) in which friends had created a memorial page in Facebook to commemorate a friend who had died in a tragic automobile accident.
Why use Facebook and cellphones as educational tools? Lets ask some more questions. Do you want to connect to your students? Do you want to seem relevant to them? Do you want to keep their minds working all day instead of "powering down" to go to school. (Putnum 2007)
Facebook has received a lot of bad publicity because of privacy fears (Barton 2005 ) (Geist 2007 ) (Foster 2007 ). Because you can invite friends to your facebook pages and messages can be sent from one "friend" to another, instances of cyberbullying have also been associated with Facebook. (Franek 2006 ). But their have been instances where victims fight back with Facebook (Shuaghnessy 2007 ), and where Facebook can be used as an educational tool (Lavallee 2007 ) (McGraw 2006 ) and as a way to gain social capital (Ellison, et al. 2007 ).
Similarly cell phones have a bad reputation in schools as being time waster and a distraction (D.L.W 2007 ) (Land 2004 ). Often the response to cell phones is to ban them (Malcolm 2006 ). But a little creative thinking on the use of cell phones can turn these devices from pariahs to princesses (Carvin 2006 ) in an educational environment (Prensky 2004 ).
Solutions to the use of cell phones and Facebook lie in their appropriate usage. Is there internet citizenship that can be taught to bridge the generation gap? (Pajnik 2005) (Sperling, et al. 2003) Is there enough common ground so there can be a democratic consensus on the use of these tools? (Bjerke 2005). As teachers we need shift the paradigm to make their tools educational tools.
Rationales for the inclusion of controversial technologies
The hallowed halls of academia for most kids seem hollow and stark with very little to stimulate their generation. Just within the span of one generation, students have changed radically. Whereas the exposure of their teachers to technology was slow and few, today's students are constantly exposed to technology and using it on a daily basis to organize, entertain, and enrich their lives.
Prensky (2001) describes today's students as "Digital Natives", students born into this digital age where they have instant access to information and technology, exposed to computers, video games, digital music players, cell phones from a very young age. More importantly to teachers, these "digital" students operate much differently than most of us "analog" teachers.
Most teachers were born into an era of analog devices: tapes and records, broadcast television with few channels, and a single phone in the home. Just like a tape we tend to think linearly, that is, moving from A to B to C, rarely jumping around, because in an analog world, you could only watch a TV show at a certain time and rewinding tapes was a chore. Because of our upbringing and the fact that we were also taught this way, leads most teachers to be analog teachers, teaching from A to B to C.
In moves the digital age, seemingly right under our feet, and bringing along with it the "Digital Natives". The last commercial remnant of the analog world, the VHS tape, was discontinued just last year - all mass market products today are digital. In the digital world, things are not linear, they are random access - simply pick what you want to do or what you want to see and it is there - no rewinding or fast-forwarding. The internet is a perfect example of this vast random access world where they can see and do just about anything almost instantly.
Waters (2007) describes this generation of students as "hyperconnected". Modern applications on the internet are blurring the lines between internet web pages and cellphones, allowing students to be "always on" and always connected to their social network. Their devices and internet content are becoming interconnected, allowing them to maintain their presence wherever and whenever, 24/7/365. Students could use their cellphone to shoot video from a party and immediately upload it to their Facebook, blog or send it to another cell phone in real time.
Most parents and teachers look at such connectedness in frightened awe mostly because as "Digital Immigrants," this is a world almost completely unfamiliar to us. And yet as schools and teachers we are their guide to provide them with a future? Teachers need to bridge this technological gap by learning how the "Digital Native" learns to provide an inclusive environment where their tools and the way they live are relevant, because unless we learn the ways of our digital students, we will not be relevant to them.
Facebook: For Worse or For Better?
Facebook is a social networking service that has gained wide acceptance among young adults. It is estimated that at least 1 in 10 of all internet users in Canada have a page on Facebook (Geist 2007). Established in 2004, Facebook allows users to chat, post photos and comments as well as invite other to view their pages and communicate. Its ease of use and connectivity to other users has made it the defacto social networking site. It has also given rise to many concerns about Facebook.
Because users can easily post comments that can be read by other users, instances of Cyberbullying have occurred (Franek 2006). Harassment and derogatory comments can easily be made between members because of the anonymity that can be afforded in Facebook but also because little monitoring of activity takes place. Just recently, I had to intercede in a Facebook “bullying” incident in which someone was posting lies about the relationships of another. Upon examination it was simply a matter of gossip and did not involve fraud or defamation that needed further school involvement.
The ability to connect and post pictures and other information so easily has had many parents and agencies concerned that Facebook may expose teenagers to risk from their “friends” (Geist 2007). This openness has also exposed some to disciplinary action by posting pictures or information implicating them in an offence (Foster 2007). Students have been held accountable by their schools for inappropriate postings in Facebook. (Barton 2005, p3) This type of punishment also raises concerns that schools and other institutions are censoring or punishing free speech.
Concerns aside, it is hard to not try and utilize Facebook’s strength in connecting and communicating for education purposes. McGraw (2006) describes a Penn State Professor using the strengths of Facebook to stay connected to his students by creating a group in Facebook that included him, his teaching assistant and students enrolled in the class, allowing only the group members to see discussions. Students list the instructor as a friend so he can communicate with students in other ways beside the class page and get to know his students. This Facebook class provides immediacy and connectedness between students and their instructor in which they can share anything about the course almost anytime.
The University of Michigan has embraced Facebook and offers a graduate program in social computing (Lavallee 2007). Instead of worrying about how much time students waste on social networking sites, universities and colleges are tapping into their students’ lives to make technology education relevant. The social computing aspect of technology is here to stay with major companies like Yahoo and Microsoft supporting these programs.
Research on the use of Facebook at the high school level is sparse. Because of this I conducted my own research on the topic. 39 students enrolled in ICT courses were surveyed on their use of Facebook. Some key results of the survey indicated that almost 60% had Facebook sites with approximately the same viewing others' sites. Those with sites indicated that all had more than 100 "friends" and some had more than 300. In comparing the use of Facebook at the university or college level, I asked if schools could use Facebook to communicate to students. Most students said that would be good. However, when asked if teachers could be added as "friends" to their pages, about half said no due to privacy concerns while others thought it would be a good use of Facebook or had other responses. When asked whether they let their parents to see their page, many said no due to privacy and some said no because parents don't know how. About a third had no problem with parents seeing their pages.
In interpreting the results I was not surprised at the usage percentage of Facebook, but was pleasently surprised at how many students do recognize that Facebook can be a good communication tool, even between students and teachers. It was not suprising that some students use Facebook as a private communication tool, and were almost indignant to suggest that their parents see their pages. Which is incredibly ironic, since their parents should be their greatest support, meanwhile they expose their private lives to the world wide web and 300 plus "friends" who are unlikely to know them nearly as well.
Should we use Facebook as a learning tool? Colleges and universities are adopting its use. Even High School students are able to recognize its value. With any new technology, there are always positives to go along with its negatives but that is no reason to ban it entirely. It needs to be included in the teachers toolbox to reach kids and make their world relevant to us, and ours to them.
Cell Phones: A Rich Device Poorly Thought of By Schools
Another example of a digital disconnect between schools and students is in the use of cell phones. Teachers and schools have concentrated on the negatives of cell phone use with legitimacy to back up their claims. Cell phones are used inappropriately to "waste time" and students are easily distracted by their use. Cell phones so equipped can be used for more nefarious purposes like photographing or videotaping people without their knowledge. There have been famous instances involving Micheal Richards or a not so famous one at my school (right in my own hallway) where a fight was staged and recorded on cell phone and posted on YouTube. Because of the repercussions of such usage, the common response is to ban cell phone usage (D.L.W Feb 2007) (Malcolm 2006) (Land 2004 ), which is also our school policy.
Doesn't the fact that cell phones are so widely used prove how powerful they are? Prensky (2004) has many suggestions for using cell phones in the classroom: using cell phones in helping public speaking, recording and reciting poetry (via voicemail), collaborating with science partners in a field study, using text messaging as a reporting medium, using the camera feature to record events for playback to the class, and many more. The possibilities for use are limited to the imagination of the teacher.
To explore this topic further, I also conducted a brief survey on the use of cell phones. I asked our principal, a parent, and a student questions on cell phone use. I asked three questions:
The student of course did not understand the problem with cell phones. For question 1, she thought kids wasted time with phones and are a hassle for teachers. She did absolutely agree with questions 2 and 3 and felt she could use her cell phone for learning. The parent mainly thought cell phones were a distraction and did agree with questions 2 and 3, however felt that teenagers were not mature enough to follow the rules consistently enough. The principal brought up mainly privacy concerns with cell phones, but agreed they could be used for instructional purposes if supervised by staff. The principal also thought that teenage students could not be ethically responsible enough in their cell phone use to lift a ban on their usage.
Once again, some colleges and universities have led the way in the adoption of cell phone use (Carvin 2006). Some have offered free mobile phones to freshman while some have removed dormitory phones and established campus wide cellular service. Although such drastic infrastructure development is highly unlikely at the public school level, the idea of using cell phones to communicate between school stakeholders should be investigated.
Inroads for high schools to allow cell phone usage seem unlikely as teachers and parents feel kids are not mature enough to handle their proper use. This is unfortunate since most parents give their kids cell phones knowing they are powerful communication tools. This perceived and real lack of appropriate use of technology by few has led to an outright ban on usage for all. We know that its not the technology that is the problem, it is the appropriate usage. If that is the case, is there a way to teach appropriate usage to all, so that these tools could be used for the benefit if all?
Is Internet/Technology Citizenship the Solution?
The inappropriate use of technology in schools is rarely a criminal matter. It rarely results in physical harm to someone, monetary loss or loss of property. Cell phones, for example, are usually just used in the wrong context, which usually results in a breach of school rules. For example, students use their cell phones during breaks which results in them being late for their next class or their cell phone rings in class. Just like belching loudly during a memorial service, appropriate behaviour is a matter of etiquette and citizenship.
It’s true that classes on etiquette are no more, however, perhaps such lessons should be taught for cell phones. The citizenship aspect of cell phone usage involves not just the individual but also society. Unfortunately as a society we have not established clear cut rules and consequences for cell phone usage. In many European countries, cell phone usage while driving is an offence; not so in Canada. Unfortunately, it's hard to get students to obey cell phone etiquette, when many adults still have a lack of cell phone control Krotz (2007).
With the internet, it may not simply be a matter of etiquette, but of citizenship. The internet as an entity might not be capable of promoting citizenship. Internet citizenship almost exclusively involves safety on the internet; how to protect yourself on the net (Jones 2007 ). The responsibility seems exclusively with the individual. The internet itself, provides no infrastructure to help support and promote the citizen in the society. Real societies have governments and laws in place to maintain order and protect all citizens.
Panjnik (2005, p 463) offers that the internet is less than a society for all but merely marketplace started by the .com revolution. Tsaliki (2003, “Conclusions”) in a sweeping look at electronic citizenship and the use of the internet for democratic discourse among global environmental groups concluded that the groups main use of the internet was for self-promotion rather than for the “nexus of global action.” Shelly (et al, 2004) discusses infrastructural and social barriers to access that can make digital citizenship difficult. Hoff (et al, 2005) contend that instead of creating united and coherent public spheres of discourse, the internet has promoted multiple specialized public spheres. This exclusivity of the internet is contrary to the necessary inclusive nature of democratic societies.
Conclusion
It is without question that new technology is developing at a rate unprecedented in human history. Children today for the most part have access to vast resource of information and tools to help enhance their lives. Schools and teachers need to be able to at least recognize that these changing students are here and their minds are trained to work at "twitch speed." It is therefore our responsibility to utilize some of their tools to keep their minds active is school.
Facebook is a wildly popular social networking service embraced by teens and utilized across all demographics. Its ease of use makes it a great communication tool. Of course ease of use can bring perils as people find inappropriate ways to use it. As my students have suggested, used properly, Facebook could be used to connect them to their school and courses.
Cell phones have been the target of many schools. Its wide acceptance by teens and their need to use it has resulted it being banned from use in many schools. Utilizing this tool for good also takes some careful consideration, but the benefits could once again prove another bridge into your students' lives.
Any new technologies can be used inappropriately, and just like schools, governments need to recognize and deal with the realities of new technologies to help set boundaries on their use. Without government set standards, appropriate usage is left entirely up to the individual.
Whether the internet is the true “global village” that we all assume may yet to be decided. In terms of education however we should use technology to help include and enhance the teaching and learning process to make us relevant to our students, who will be living in the global village, both physically and virtually. As technology and the internet make our world smaller and our reach greater, teachers have a responsibility to reach out as well.
References
Adams, J. Michael, Sperling, Michael B. (2003), Ubiquitous Distributed Learning and Global Citizenship, The Presidency, Winter 2003.
Barton, Zoe (2005), Facebook’s Greek Drama, C|Net news webpage, November 22, 2005, http://www.news.com/Facebooks-Greek-drama/2100-1046_3-5895963.html
Carvin, Andy (2006), Making Mobile Phones Mandatory: A New Educational Trend?, PBS Teachers Online, July 10th 2006, http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now/2006/07/making_mobile_phones_mandatory.html
D.L.W. (Feb 2007), School Cell Phones: Lock 'em Up, School Library Journal, February 2007, Vol. 53, Issue 2, p17, http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6410492.html
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 1. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo112/issue4/ellison.html
Foster, Patrick (2007), Caught on Camera – and found on Facebook, The Times Online, July 17, 2007, http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article2087306.ece
Franek, Mark (2006), Foiling Cyberbullies in the New Wild West, Educational Leadership, December 2005/January 2006, http://markfranek.wordpress.com/2005/12/15/foiling-cyberbullies-in-the-new-wild-west-educational-leadership-journal/
Geist, Micheal (2007), Facing Up to Facebook Fears, Toronto Star Website, May 7th, 2007, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1925/135/
Hoff, Jens, and Bjerke, Flemming (2005), Fences and gates in cyberspace: Is the Internet becoming a threat to democracy?, Information Polity 10, p141-151.
Jones, Patrick James (2006), Resources for Promoting Online Citizenship, Educational Leadership, December 2005/January 2006, http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/01/17/
Land, Christopher (July 2004), Its Not Just the Bell Ringing in the Classroom, From Parenting Matters, July 2004, Partners in Parenting, Colorado State University, http://cfert.colostate.edu/pdf/parenting_matters_newsletter/english/2004/jul04.pdf
Lavallee, Andrew (2007), At Some Schools, Facebook Evolves From Time Waster to Academic Study, The Wall Street Journal Online, May 29th, 2007, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117917799574302391.html
Malcolm. Noreen (2006). Ban on cell phones in public schools fires up debate, The New York Amsterdam News. July 20-July 26, 2006, http://www.nysun.com/article/62380/
McGraw, Katlyn (2006), Penn State Professor will use Facebook.com to Teach Class, Penn State Web Page, NewsàConnectionsàE-Bridges, September 2006 http://www.ed.psu.edu/news/smithfacebook.asp
Pajnik, Mojca (2005), Citizenship and Mediated Society, Citizenship Studies, Vol. 9, No. 4, p349-367.
Prensky, Marc (October 2001), Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, From On the Horizon, NCB University Press, Vol. 9, No. 5
Prensky, Marc (December 2001), Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, From On the Horizon, NCB University Press, Vol. 9, No. 6 http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part2.pdf
Prensky, Marc (2004), What Can You Learn From a Cell Phone – Almost Anything!, From Innovate!, NCB University Press http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-What_Can_You_Learn_From_a_Cell_Phone-FINAL.pdf
Putnum, David (2007), 'In class, I have to power down', From The Guardian, May 8, 2007. http://education.guardian.co.uk/elearning/story/0,,2074232,00.html
Shaughnessy, Larry (2007), Victim uses Facebook to finger suspect, September 29th, 2007 http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/09/28/facebook.finds.attacker/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
Shelly, Mack, Thrane, Lisa, Shulman, Stuart, Lang, Evette, Beisser, Sally, Larson, Teresa, and Mutiti, James, Digital Citizenship: Parameters of the Digital Divide, Social Science Computer Review 2004: 22; 256, http://ssc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/22/2/256
Tsaliki, Liza (2003), Electronic citizenship and global social movements, First Monday: Peer reviewed Journal on the Internet, Volume 8, Number 2 (February 2003), http://firstmonday.org/issues/issues8_2/tsaliki/index.html
Waters, Darren (2007), Hyper-connected generation rises, BBC-news website, September 5th, 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/6637865.stm
The Evening Standard London Lite (2007), “Drivers risk two years in jail for using their mobile phones” http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23411328-details/Drivers+risk+two+years+in+jail+for+using+their+mobile+phones/article.do
Winnipeg Free Press (2007), ’Beautiful, powerful’ woman mourned, Winnipeg Free Press, November 13th, 2007, pA6
Zeilig, Martin (2007), Digital terror and hate, Winnipeg Free Press, November 13th, 2007, pA13