THE POTENTIAL OF FACEBOOK GROUPS AS A LEARNING TOOL: THE CASE OF AN ENGLISH-LANGUAGE COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE. DANIELA NOVIA - DIVA ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The potential of Facebook Groups as a learning tool: The case of an English-language community of practice. Daniela Novia Department of English Individual Research Project (EN04GY) English Linguistics Spring 2022 Supervisor: Andrew Cooper
The potential of Facebook Groups as a learning tool: The case of an English-language community of practice. Daniela Novia Abstract In recent years, Facebook has become a tool for practicing English. Language educators have been trying to integrate the social context of a community of practice into formal teaching, as a complement to classroom-based learning. However, social media platforms are used independently outside of the school context. For example, many English-language learners use the application Facebook Groups to choose a community of practice that shares the same purpose of language learning. With the aim of contributing to the understanding of English-language learners’ independent use of Facebook, this paper seeks to explore their online practices through non-participant observation and a qualitative analysis of the content shared and commented on the group wall. 858 posts (and related comments) shared by the members of an English language-learning group, open to the public, were analysed with the purpose of finding out which aspects of foreign language learning seem to be particularly relevant for the group and which of the four basic language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) are they trying to develop. Another important aspect is whether the interactions in the group are conducted in English as expected. The results show that reading skills tend to be promoted to a greater extent than the other skills. It was then observed that the group members use the English language consistently, with very few exceptions. In general, therefore, this study shows that the Facebook Groups contribution to learning English through participation in an English-language learning community such as the one observed here is rather limited and unbalanced. Keywords Facebook Groups, second and foreign language teaching and learning, informal language learning, collaborative learning.
Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................. 1
2. Theoretical background .................................................................. 2
2.1 Key concepts................................................................................... 2
2.2 Formal pedagogical applications of Facebook ....................................... 3
2.3 Facebook for informal language learning: students’ perspectives and
usage .................................................................................................. 5
3. Method ...................................................................................... 10
3.1 Choice of method ........................................................................... 10
3.2 Criteria for the selection of the group ................................................ 11
3.3 The process ................................................................................... 12
4.4 Ethical considerations ...................................................................... 14
4. Results ...................................................................................... 14
4.1 Relevant themes and their functions ................................................. 14
4.1.1 Vocabulary ................................................................................. 15
4.1.2 Grammar ................................................................................... 19
4.1.3 Reading ..................................................................................... 21
4.1.4 Pronunciation .............................................................................. 22
4.1.5 Greetings, wishes, and thanks ....................................................... 23
4.1.6 Off-topic discussions and self-promotions ........................................ 23
4.1.7 Learning strategy ........................................................................ 24
4.1.8 Speaking.................................................................................... 24
4.2 The English-only rule ...................................................................... 25
5. Discussion .................................................................................. 26
6. Conclusion ................................................................................. 28
References ..................................................................................... 29
1. Introduction
Social media platforms can play a fundamental role in bringing people together through
common interests. During the second quarter of 2021, Facebook was the biggest social
network worldwide, with roughly 3 billion active users each month (Facebook, 2021).
The role of Social Networking Sites (SNSs) in second and foreign language teaching
and learning (L2TL) is also a topical subject, as research suggests that, during the
COVID-19 pandemic, Facebook has proved to be particularly useful to English-
language learners in the absence of face-to-face contacts (Ghounane, 2020). Thus, it
could be argued that Facebook is becoming an increasingly valuable tool for practicing
English, both in and out of the classroom. For this reason, language educators have been
trying to integrate the social context of a community of practice into formal teaching, as
a complement to classroom-based learning (e.g., Harting, 2017; Mills, 2011). As
Reinhardt (2019) suggests, this might also consist of teacher-led projects or activities
outside the classroom which seek to foster autonomous learning. On the other hand,
social media platforms can be experienced independently outside of the confines of the
school context. For example, many English-language learners use Facebook to receive
support from a community that shares the same purpose of language learning and is
willing to provide support. Indeed, it has been noted that SNSs could make a useful
contribution in several areas, such as learners’ motivation, participation in second
language (L2) usage, development of socio-pragmatic competence, and self-directed
learning (Harting, 2017; Reinhardt, 2019).
More empirical research seems to be needed when it comes to learners’ informal,
personal usage of Facebook for language learning. As Harting (2017) notes, referring to
the Facebook Groups application, a tool that allows to create or be part of a Facebook
community on a chosen topic, questions should be raised about what students would
actually do if they were on their own, without teacher guidance. Thus, despite the
relevance that this topic might have for L2TL, “very little research goes beyond the
classroom-level controlled application of SNSs” (Hamat & Abu Hassan, 2019, p. 68).
Current studies on the topic have focused on students’ attitudes and perceptions of
social media usage in learning English beyond the classroom (e.g., Aydin, 2017;
Trinder, 2017). Through survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews,
researchers have also tried to provide an overview of the students’ informal use of
Facebook as a foreign language learning environment, in the attempt of eliciting
information about what skills might actually be practiced online (e.g., Aydin, 2017;
Hamat & Abu Hassan, 2019).
This paper aims to explore English-language learners’ independent use of Facebook
through direct observation of their online practices. For the limited scope of this work, a
community on Facebook Groups, open to the public, was observed for four weeks. The
group, whose members have different ethnic backgrounds and first languages (L1),
provides a virtual meeting place for those who are interested in learning English.
Qualitative content analysis was performed on a corpus consisting of 858 posts (and
related messages) on the group wall, to determine what aspects of the language the
group is more interested to practice, and whether this is done consistently in English.
1
Specifically, the study was guided by the following research questions:
Which aspects of L2 learning seem to be particularly relevant for the group, i.e., which
of the four basic language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) are the
members trying to practice actively in the group?
Are the interactions in the group conducted in English as expected, even without teacher
supervision? Moreover, if the members use languages other than English, what seems to
be the purpose of language alternation in a context that focuses on English specifically?
In the next section, key concepts related to the theoretical framework of this study are
discussed in more detail.
2. Theoretical background
The section below (2.1) provides an overview of some key concepts that are relevant to
the study. The sections that follow (2.2 and 2.3) briefly summarize the relevant
literature relating to both formal and informal pedagogical applications of Facebook for
language learning.
2.1 Key concepts
In linguistics, a growing body of literature has investigated L2TL beyond the classroom.
Scholars, however, have attempted to define the learning that takes place outside of a
conventional formal environment by using various terms, or the same term in different
ways. This shows a need to clarify exactly what is meant here by the words ‘formal’,
‘informal’ and ‘non-formal’ language learning.
In this paper, the term formal learning refers to “learning activities organized by a
teacher that are systematic and regularly scheduled” (Dressman, 2020, p. 4). Instead,
according to Alm (2015), the term non-formal learning is often used to describe
organized activities “which take place in alternative learning environments, such as
online or evening language classes” (p. 4). However, as Dressman (2020) notes, formal
learning encompasses “language classes within a public or private school program” as
well as “classes in a language center or even private tutoring lessons, if those lessons are
organized and taught regularly by an instructor [emphasis added]” (p. 4).
The broad use of the term informal learning is “learner-controlled, not linked to any
course or institution” (Trinder, 2017, p. 402). Previous studies on the topic have defined
informal learning as ‘unintentional’ or ‘incidental’, as opposed to ‘intentional’ or
‘deliberate’ classroom learning. Trinder (2017), however, observes that with the
“frequent exposure of non-native English speakers to English language media and
communities, the question arises of whether informal learning is still mainly random
and non-intentional” (p. 402). She then argues that experienced language learners are
able to reflect on their own learning processes and, at the same time, are more aware of
the benefits of online resources. She, therefore, concludes that learning in informal
2
contexts can be intentional, at least to a certain extent. Supporting this view, Hubbard
(2020) writes a definition that seems appropriate for the purpose of this study, namely
informal learning defined as:
(i) being relatively unstructured, with what structure there is provided by the learner for the
learner, (ii) taking place outside the classroom, the ‘classroom’ being a place defined as where
teachers and learners convene for the purpose of learning, whether in a physical or a virtual
space, and (iii) accommodating a broad range of intentionality but minimally assuming that
students are deliberately placing themselves in a context where language learning can occur.
(Hubbard, 2020, p. 406)
English learners’ out-of-class contact with English has been also defined as extramural
English, which literally means ‘English outside the walls’, and refers to spare time
activities such as playing digital games, using the Internet, watching TV and movies,
listening to music, and reading books and magazines (Sundqvist, 2009; Sylvén &
Sundqvist, 2012). Sundqvist (2009) does not exclude deliberate intention from the
concept, so that “extramural English, or involvement in extramural English activities, is
generally voluntary on the part of the learner” (p. 26).
From this point on, this paper will use the definition suggested by Hubbard (2020) when
referring to informal learning. By contrast, the term formal learning will be used in its
broadest sense to refer to all learning activities that are systematically planned and
regularly taught by instructors, regardless of the learning environment.
2.2 Formal pedagogical applications of Facebook
In recent years, the role of SNSs in L2TL has been the subject of much systematic
investigation (Reinhardt, 2019). Education scholars and practitioners have suggested
that SNSs “can facilitate the development of collaborative and participatory learning
communities as well as opportunities for informal and unstructured learning”
(Reinhardt, 2019, p. 18). At the same time, they have explored some of the different
ways in which teachers might use sites like Facebook to complement classroom-based
learning.
The application Facebook Groups has been recognized as having pedagogical potential.
A key study in this respect is that of Blattner and Fiori (2009), in which they reported
how often textbooks tend to omit an essential aspect of language acquisition, i.e., how
to raise students’ socio-pragmatic awareness. The authors suggested that this issue can
be tackled by participating regularly in a group discussion with native speakers from
different regions of the world who share similar interests. To do so, learners can use the
feature ‘Groups’ on Facebook, “a tool that can enhance the sense of belonging” (p. 25).
Moreover, Blattner and Fiori (2009) identified various meaningful activities and
effective tasks to help teachers integrate this tool successfully in their classrooms.
A well-known experimental study involving the creation of a Facebook group page is
that of Blattner and Lomicka (2012). While Blattner and Fiori (2009) focused on
helping educators, who might be unfamiliar with SNSs, to overcome their suspicion
toward Facebook, Blattner and Lomicka (2012) were also concerned with students’
3attitudes regarding the integration of Facebook in the language classroom. In particular,
they investigated how the attitudes of higher education foreign language learners
evolved before and after having used Facebook in a class for a year. The students in this
study responded positively to the use of Facebook in formal education and the
comparison of their attitudes at the beginning and at the end of the year showed “a shift
towards awareness of the L2 learning potential of the medium” (Reinhardt, 2019, p. 23).
In general, the students enjoyed the opportunities for interactions with native speakers
of the target language and the fact that the atmosphere on Facebook, “referred to by one
student as ‘casual’ and another as ‘pressure-free’” (Blattner & Lomicka, 2012, p. 16),
seemed to make students feel at ease while they were practicing their written skills in a
group page created specifically for their course.
Mills (2011) examined engagement within the context of a Facebook community. In her
study, higher education foreign language learners were asked to create Facebook
accounts and profiles for their fictional characters and interact with each other regularly
though their simulated identities over the course of a semester in order to create a
“collective narrative” (Mills, 2011, p. 351). Additionally, a survey was administered at
the end of the semester to assess the students’ perceived value of the project. This
interactive community served as a complement to the classroom environment in a self-
directed learning context, where “collective reflection, immediacy, and interaction were
encouraged” (Mills, 2011, p. 363–364). The findings showed evidence that the
exchanges within the context of this virtual community “served to enhance a strong
sense of ownership in the collective story” (Mills, 2011, p. 352). However, the author
noted that one limitation of the project was that it did not focus on form. Interestingly
enough, most students in the postproject survey claimed that they focused on
grammatical accuracy and vocabulary choice to make themselves understood, and also
because the online interactions were public. Similarly, linguistic feedback to students
was not included in the project of Blattner and Lomicka (2012), since the focus was
rather directed towards “spontaneous language practice” (p. 14). Together these early
studies provide important insights into the pedagogical usage of Facebook, especially as
regards the importance of social interactions for language learning and the developing
of socio-pragmatic competence. Later studies in the area have also focused on specific
ways of using Facebook as a tool to improve the pragmatic competence of foreign
language students through collaborative learning (e.g., Harting, 2017).
Some studies have focused specifically on English as a foreign language (EFL). For
example, Espinosa (2015) analyzed practical uses of Facebook for educational purposes
in EFL classrooms, by describing both benefits and potential challenges that might arise
when blending conventional classroom teaching with online instruction. Interestingly,
both Harting (2017) and Espinosa (2015) mention that learners might not necessarily be
able to exploit by themselves the many opportunities for language learning that
Facebook offers. In other words, the informal nature of Facebook might require the
mediation of a teacher, since the platform “can captive students easily, but this visual
engagement does not necessarily represent intellectual engagement” (Espinosa, 2015, p.
2209). In this regard, Espinosa (2015) expresses concerns about the preferred language
used by many students in their Facebook interactions, as they might alternate languages,
i.e., use languages other than English in the same interaction. Moreover, even if
4students stick to English, they might be tempted to use, without teacher supervision,
non-standard varieties or even broken English.
In their recent study, Mykytiuk, Lysytska, and Melnikova (2020) also highlighted some
advantages and disadvantages of using Facebook in an EFL context. For example, they
mention that some of its features, such as “messaging and chatting” (Mykytiuk et al.,
2020, p. 153) might be distracting for the students. Nevertheless, in their research on the
impact of a Facebook group on vocabulary, listening and writing skills development,
Mykytiuk et al. (2020) found out that the experimental groups (who were added to a
Facebook group) outperformed the participants of the control groups (who were taught
in a traditional education environment instead) as regards the three aspects investigated:
vocabulary, listening skills, and writing skills (which included grammatical accuracy). It
should be noted, however, that the abovementioned Facebook group was specifically
“created and moderated” (Mykytiuk et al., 2020, p. 132) by the instructors while the
teaching materials were “previously selected and properly designed” (p. 135).
Other studies have focused on one skill specifically. For example, a number of EFL
studies have begun to examine the impact of a Facebook group, expressly designed to
complement classroom activities, on the development of speaking skills (e.g., Barbosa,
2017), whereas others have developed Facebook group projects that focused almost
exclusively on written production (e.g., Peeters, 2015; Razak, Saeed & Ahmad, 2013;
Wichadee, 2013). Taken together, these studies support the notion that Facebook might
be successfully integrated in the language classroom to promote interaction in the target
language. Overall, these studies highlight that, within the context of Facebook Groups,
more attention seemed to be given to content, rather than to form, although one aspect
did not necessarily exclude the other, and formal improvements were observed.
In this connection, a basic understanding of both language students’ perceptions and
usage of Facebook as an out-of-class, informal learning platform is essential to shed
light on the online practices that are the focus of this study. A literature review of these
two aspects is therefore presented in the following section.
2.3 Facebook for informal language learning: students’ perspectives
and usage
Facebook as an informal language-learning environment has been investigated by most
researchers with the help of quantitative methods. Approximately a decade ago,
Kabilan, Ahmad, and Abidin (2010) carried out a survey with 300 undergraduate
students in Malaysia, where English is officially the second language. Their quantitative
survey study found that the students had a positive attitude towards Facebook as an
online environment that facilitates the learning of English. A rather high percentage of
students (more than 70%) agreed that Facebook could be used to practice writing,
without worrying too much about making mistakes, while a similar percentage of
students agreed that they were also able to practice their reading skills in English.
Additionally, the study reported that the students did not join specific groups on
Facebook related to English language learning. Instead, they used to casually chat with
their Facebook friends in English, which made them learn new vocabulary and also
5contributed to making them feel more confident and motivated. However, although the
findings were encouraging from the perspective of incidental learning, Kabilan et al.
(2010) concluded that language educators needed to integrate Facebook “as an
educational project with predetermined learning objectives and outcomes for the
learning experience to be meaningful” (p. 179). To my knowledge, this was the first
study that investigated students’ usage of Facebook as an informal environment for
learning English. The chosen methods and procedures have made an impact on a great
deal of the subsequent research on the topic.
A later study on the use of Facebook for out-of-class, informal language learning was
that of Alm (2015). In this paper, the author provided important insights on how
students used different Facebook features (status updates, comments, private messages,
and chats) to expose themselves to the target language. Although the informants in this
study, 190 university language students in New Zealand, were learners of languages
other than English, it seems relevant to include this research here, since the subsequent
studies in the present review have considered it particularly relevant. In her quantitative
analysis, Alm (2015) used an anonymous online questionnaire to investigate both
students’ perceptions of Facebook as a multilingual environment and their online
writing practices. Alm (2015) stressed the positive role played by Facebook in exposing
the students to the target language and in making them “active L2 users, even in a place
as remote as New Zealand” (p. 16). Moreover, about half of the informants indicated
that they belonged to L2 Facebook groups, which were set up by students themselves,
especially when the language level was more advanced, as opposed to groups initiated
by teachers, that were the less represented. According to Alm (2015), language
instructors should start “acknowledging and encouraging the out-of-class language
engagements of [their] students” (p.17) and plan learning activities that might help
building a bridge between in-class and out-of-class experiences.
AbuSa’aleek (2015) reached the same conclusion in his study. By employing the
questionnaire made by Kabilan et al. (2010), he investigated students’ perceptions
towards learning English on Facebook. The quantitative survey reported that the
informants, 65 university students in Saudi Arabia, believed that Facebook as an online
learning environment was able to facilitate and support their English language learning,
while at the same time improving their motivation and confidence as foreign language
users. Moreover, the students believed that Facebook generally improved their L2 skills,
especially in order to “overcome language mistake” and “learn new words in English”
(AbuSa’aleek, 2015, p. 68). Both Alm (2015) and AbuSa’aleek (2015) reported the
presence of language-learning groups. In AbuSa’aleek (2015), a brief mention is made
of groups specifically dedicated to learning English, which are seen as a useful
complement to classroom activities.
Also Alnujaidi (2016) focused on university students in Saudi Arabia. However, the
scope of this research was broader, since it was concerned on SNSs in general, being
Facebook only one among many others. In his descriptive-correlational research,
Alnujaidi (2016) employed a survey questionnaire to investigate 103 EFL students’
attitudes, perceptions, and expectations toward the effectiveness of SNSs as learning
environments. The findings indicated that informants had “overall positive attitudes,
6perceptions, and expectations” (Alnujaidi, 2016, p. 47) toward SNSs “for their language
skills improvement” (p. 44), especially YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
However, the survey did not explore in further detail which language skills the students
believed they were practicing online.
As in Alnujaidi (2016), also the students in Aydin (2017) believed that Facebook could
improve their language skills in general. However, his paper focused in greater detail on
the students’ perceptions of “Facebook contributions to basic language skills and
knowledge areas” (Aydin, 2017, p. 393). By employing a background questionnaire and
a survey, Aydin (2017) described the perceptions of 174 EFL university students in
Turkey towards Facebook as a language learning environment. According to the
findings, the platform was perceived as appropriate “to share language resources and
materials […] and constituted a good discussion forum for language learning” (Aydin,
2017, p. 390). Additionally, the students were asked to consider how Facebook might
contribute to the improvement of a range of different skills and knowledge areas, such
as communicational and interactional skills, language skills in general, listening skills,
pronunciation skills, speaking skills, reading skills, writing skills, grammar knowledge,
and vocabulary knowledge. Although some of these categories were also present in the
abovementioned previous research, they appeared in Aydin (2017) as more clearly
separated from other dimensions and investigated in greater detail. In particular, two
elements of language development seemed to be perceived as highly relevant when the
students were using Facebook for practicing English. These are the communicational
and interactional skills, and the vocabulary knowledge area. Also perceived as relevant
to the students was the Facebook contribution to their speaking skills, reading skills,
writing skills, and grammatical knowledge. The author concluded that EFL teachers
should also use Facebook actively and integrate it in their teaching. However, “a special
attention” (Aydin, 2017, p. 396) should be given to listening and pronunciation skills, as
these were perceived by EFL learners as neglected on Facebook.
A broader perspective and a different methodology were adopted by Trinder (2017).
Unlike Aydin (2017), Trinder (2017) focused on how students used or perceived the
usefulness of a variety of digital applications (online dictionaries, movies and TV series,
video clips, SNSs, online websites, emails, and e-learning modules) for the acquisition
of foreign language skills. However, the study seems to be relevant enough to be cited
in the present review, as the findings showed that Facebook, being compared to the
other digital resources, was among those used more frequently by the students for their
L2 learning purposes. With a mixed-method approach, Trinder (2017) described the
perceptions and online practices in independent settings of 175 Austrian university
students who attended English for Specific Purposes language classes on campus and
some Business English modules online. In short, the study investigated how frequently
the new media technologies were used for learning English, how useful they seemed to
be for “language learning in general, and […] for the development of a range of
language competencies (reading, writing, speaking, listening, communicative
competence, vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and Business English)” (Trinder,
2017, p. 403). When it comes to Facebook, a high percentage (more than 70%) of
informants “confirmed that they deliberately engage in online activities with the explicit
aim of improving certain aspects of their English” (Trinder, 2017, p. 407). As argued in
7other studies, Trinder (2017) also concluded that teachers should ask their students to
find and share online resources that are connected to the course content, e.g., by posting
them and leaving comments in closed Facebook groups, in order to “bridge informal
and formal environments” (p. 410). As noted above, also qualitative data were collected
in this study. They were then interpreted through a thematic analysis of the open
questions in the questionnaire.
Kabilan, Ganapathy, Bray, Gustine, and Qasim (2019) did not focus solely on one
country. A comparative study involving 456 university students was conducted in four
different countries (Malaysia, Japan, Indonesia, and Maldives). By using a quantitative
survey, the international project investigated higher education students’ perceptions and
general practices or uses of Facebook as an environment for learning English. The
research was based on the study carried out by Kabilan et al. (2010). The research
findings in the 2019 project consistently pointed towards the fact that Facebook was
experienced as a useful platform for learning English, considering that more than half of
the informants agreed on that. From the students’ perspective, Facebook could be used
to improve reading, writing, vocabulary, and communication skills. In this regard, it was
also found that learners from different countries focused on different skills when using
Facebook. Japanese students, for example, tended to be less active on Facebook,
compared to the students in the other three countries, and focused primarily on
vocabulary learning, just like Indonesians, while the Malaysians and Maldivians
preferred to focus on writing. However, the majority of the students from the different
countries “agreed that they had gained confidence in learning new English words”
(Kabilan et al., 2019, p. 44) and were “well aware of them learning certain elements of
language, specifically communication and learning new words” (p. 45). The authors
concluded that scholars and instructors should identify their students’ interests, usage
patterns, and learning needs “before they plan, organize and implement their teaching-
learning activities, ideas or projects […] because […] different learning contexts mean
that there are different learning needs and interests” (Kabilan et al., 2019, p. 46).
Interestingly, the authors also concluded that future research should explore how
teachers might use Facebook to promote foreign language learning among students in
different countries.
There has been substantial research undertaken on the pedagogical role of SNSs for
learning English within the Malaysian context. In particular, two further studies need to
be mentioned here. The first one is that of Shafie, Yaacob, and Singh (2016), who
observed the online practices of 4 Malaysian university students for 14 weeks to find
out how they used Facebook to learn English. At the end of the observation period, the
students were also interviewed. The findings of this qualitative multiple case study
revealed that there were five Facebook activities that were preferred by L2 learners in
order to improve their English. The most popular activities consisted in reading and/or
writing posts and comments on their personal Facebook pages, while participating in
interest-based Facebook groups was the second popular Facebook activity, followed by
watching movies, and communicating with foreign Facebook friends. This study is the
only one that combines interviews with online observations of the informants’ activities.
As in Trinder (2017), the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Always within the
Malaysian context, an investigation on 6,085 university students, performed by using an
8online survey, was conducted by Hamat and Abu Hassan (2019), with the purpose of
finding out whether the students did “actually use their SNSs for any informal language
learning activities” (p. 68) and whether they perceived these as helpful for learning
English. One particular point of interest in this research was to observe in detail what
skills of English language the students seemed to learn from the SNSs (which also
included Facebook). The study covered the four basic language skills (reading, writing,
listening, and speaking) together with the vocabulary and grammar knowledge areas.
The findings showed that more than 99% of the students owned at least one account on
a social media platform. Moreover, Malaysian students confirmed that they made use of
SNSs to improve their English. In addition to that, the findings also reported that SNSs
were perceived as particularly helpful in developing writing skills and in expanding
vocabulary, closely followed by communication skills, and reading skills. The authors
then suggested that SNSs might be used by teachers in the English classroom to
facilitate and support development in at least four areas of proficiency, namely “writing,
reading, communication skills and vocabulary development” (Hamat & Abu Hassan,
2019, p. 79), which confirmed the conclusions founded in previous research.
The interest toward Facebook as an informal English-language learning environment is
not expected to disappear any time soon. Many recent studies (e.g., Anwas et al., 2020;
Desta, Workie, Yemer, Denku & Berhanu, 2021; Ghounane, 2020) have investigated
social media usage (including Facebook) for improving English language proficiency.
The evidence presented in these papers seems to confirm that learners perceive the
usefulness of SNSs as regards to the improvement of their English language skills in
general, although Anwas et al. (2020) more specifically reported that the students in
Indonesia perceived the online environment as particularly useful when practicing their
reading and writing skills, whereas listening and speaking skills were perceived as less
practiced. Finally, it might be interesting to mention that Desta et al. (2021) also
investigated the role of gender in influencing the attitude of medical students in Ethiopia
regarding social media usage for enhancing their English proficiency. According to their
findings, “no significant differences were observed between students' viewpoints on the
basis of gender” (Desta et al., 2021, p. 522).
As indicated above, the topic of informal learning of English on social media has been
explored from different angles and with different methods. However, it seems
reasonable to think that there might still be much to explore, even considering that data
collected through direct observation is scarce. Quantitative studies of attitudes have
given a general idea as to whether students use SNSs for language learning purposes
and perceive it as useful. However, these studies do not directly investigate the content
of learners’ interactions and their language uses. This study aims to contribute to the
body of knowledge on the subject by focusing on these aspects, also with the purpose of
finding out whether there is a correspondence between learners’ perceptions and their
actual practices online.
93. Method
This section will explain the chosen approach (3.1), the criteria for the selection of the
group (3.2), and the process of analysis (3.3). In addition, ethical considerations are also
included (3.4).
3.1 Choice of method
As shown in the previous section, most researchers have adopted quantitative methods.
This allowed them to draw general conclusions on both students’ expectations towards
social media platforms as learning environments and their online practices as well as
perceived improvements in English. The present study, however, focuses exclusively on
the online practices of a group of English learners on Facebook Groups through direct
observation. The informal learning context is the same, but the perspective is different.
Instead of interviewing the learners to find out how they use Facebook for language
learning, it is the content that they choose to share in a dedicated group and their
comments on it that constitute the center of the investigation. Through a qualitative
analysis of this content, the study’s aim is to determine what aspects of the language the
group is more interested to practice, and whether this is done consistently in English.
In short, the questions guiding the design of the method were: What are the learners in
this group doing? In other words, what do they choose to post and comment without
instructors to guide them? What basic skills are they trying to develop? Why do they
choose this kind of content? In other words, what basic skills are they trying to develop?
Do they consistently communicate in English? To answer these questions, a qualitative
approach seems to be particularly useful. As Groom and Littlemore (2011) observe,
“qualitative research tends to answer questions about how and why, rather than what
[emphasis in original]” (p. 61), that is to say that qualitative analysis is more
interpretive in nature. Moreover, “the qualitative researcher is interested in detailed,
thick descriptions of smaller datasets” (Groom & Littlemore, 2011, p. 62). Indeed, it
was considered that qualitative methods would usefully supplement and expand the
knowledge about English-language learners’ use of the feature Groups on Facebook.
For greater clarity, it should be noted here that this research does not have the purpose
of determining whether and to what extent learning takes place. Instead, the focus is on
the potential of the tool, i.e., on what seems possible to learn and practiced as an active
member of the Facebook group. In addition, a qualitative approach was used in this
study also because it has been, traditionally, the less common choice, as it has been
showed in the literature review section.
The choice of a qualitative approach also presented some disadvantages. On the one
hand, as Franz, Marsh, Chen, and Teo (2019) observed, it is difficult to find practical
guidelines to help researchers interested in conducting a qualitative content analysis of
text using data obtained from Facebook. Moreover, even though Franz et al. (2019)
make a contribution in this direction, their strategies and criteria to collect, organize,
and analyze Facebook data are referred in particular to health-related studies.
Nevertheless, the current study utilizes the basic guidelines suggested by Franz et al.
10(2019) for the thematic analysis of social media content, which comprises text, videos,
images, shares, reactions, and emoticons. Thus, the said guidelines are seen as a
necessary complement to the “thematic content analysis” (Kuckartz, 2014, p. 65) used
for more traditional sources of qualitative data.
3.2 Criteria for the selection of the group
For the limited scope of this study, one community of English-language learners on
Facebook Groups had to be selected. To better answer the research questions, the
following ten criteria needed to be met:
The group has to be public (see section 3.4).
The purpose of the group should be that of creating an international community of
learners of English (general English), without focusing on a particular skill and/or
knowledge area, for which dedicated groups exist.
To gain a better understanding of the group and its purpose, it is necessary to read all
the information in the sections ‘About’ and ‘History’.
Among the group rules from the administrator, there should be also the one that states
that all posts and comments must be in English.
The group needs to be reliable, i.e., it must do what it promises. This means that there
should be no mismatch between the group’s purpose and the shared content.
The group needs to be big enough, and active enough, to expose its members to the
shared content several times a day.
Not only the group administrators, but also the members themselves should post content
or leave comments on the posts, thus demonstrating their active participation.
The group should be open to people of different nationalities and first languages.
Ideally, the group should allow all proficiency levels.
Preferably, the group should not be connected to a specific location, institution, or
school.
These criteria proved to be useful for discarding inappropriate groups. At the time of
selecting the group, there were nearly a hundred groups revolved around English-
language learning. However, after applying these criteria, only three groups were
deemed adequate and only one group, the one that was chosen in the end, met all the
requirements fully.
The chosen group, whose name is omitted here for privacy reasons (see section 3.4)
provides a virtual meeting place for those who are interested in learning and practicing
(general) English, and it is open to all proficiency levels. The community, whose
members have different ethnic backgrounds and first languages, is therefore
international. The community posts and messages on the group wall (recently renamed
‘timeline’) are open to the public. The number of members may vary, but the
community is rather large by Facebook standards (approximately tens of thousands of
members). The group is quite active, with approximately 30 posts a day. The
observation time frame was 4 weeks.
11It seems appropriate to make a couple of considerations here. Firstly, the Facebook
population cannot represent the perfect picture of the world’s population, as “its users
tend to be younger, better educated, and some groups might be entirely excluded (e.g.,
Amish, people without Internet access, or living in countries that block Facebook)”
(Kosinski, Matz, Gosling, Popov & Stillwell, 2015, p. 6). Secondly, a group’s activity is
made of posts, comments, and messages. While the first two can be public, if the group
is open, the messages between the group members are private. Therefore, qualitative
content analysis has been performed on a corpus consisting of public posts and
comments on the group wall.
The following section briefly describes the process of data collection and qualitative
analysis of the small corpus obtained from the Facebook data, conducted with the
purpose of answering the research questions.
3.3 The process
As indicated previously, this study employs a qualitative research approach (see section
3.4 for the ethical concerns). The first step of the process after choosing the group was
the “non-participant observation” (Groom & Littlemore, 2011, p. 73), meaning that the
group activity was observed for the chosen timeframe (four weeks) without any
involvement from the observer. This resembles an approach to studying digital
communications known as “digital ethnography” (Varis, 2014, p. 2). With digital
ethnography, “researchers can now lurk – ‘participate’ invisibly and unbeknownst to the
people whose activities are being observed […]; it is as if the ethnographic ‘fly on the
wall’ was now wearing an invisibility cloak” (p. 12). The observation of Facebook
users’ interactions with other users can be also described as “passive analysis”, which
“involves the study of information patterns […] or the interactions between users in
existing Facebook groups” (Franz et al., 2019, Overview section). Passive analysis
studies usually process observational data manually (Franz et al., 2019). Since the size
of the datasets, consisting in 858 posts (and related comments), allowed it, the same
procedure was employed in this study. Thus, the data were extracted manually, with the
help of a spreadsheet. Then, it is advisable to familiarize oneself with the data.
According to Franz et al. (2019), researchers should immerse themselves with the data
before conducting thematic analysis by actively reading, at least once, the entire datasets
before coding (in other words, the process of investigation, comparison,
conceptualization, and categorization of the data). Similarly, Kuckartz (2014) is of the
opinion that this step should be “hermeneutical or interpretive in nature and involves
reading the text carefully and trying to understand it” (p. 50). The following step was
that of developing a category system and defining categories that were connected to the
topics or themes that are relevant to the research (Kuckartz, 2014). During this phase,
“categories will be created, refined, merged, split, and sometimes discarded altogether”
until a point is reached where there is “no need to generate any new categories at all, or
where the model […] is stable enough” (Groom & Littlemore, 2011, p. 86–87) for the
purpose of the research. Thus, as regards the first research question, the analysis focused
on the central theme of each post on the group timeline and its comments on it. Thus, a
12post and its comments form a thematic ‘unit’. A summary of the resulting analytical
scheme is provided in Table 1:
Table 1: Thematic categories and their main function(s)
Type of unit Main function(s) Example
Vocabulary (content words, Practicing reading skills An image showing a single
collocations, short phrases, word (in bold) within the
and idioms) context of a sentence
Practicing writing skills A multiple-choice quiz
Grammar Practicing reading skills A picture showing a grammar
point of interest
Practicing writing skills Preposition gap-fills
Practicing reading and/or Someone sharing a YouTube
listening skills video lesson on the future
tense
Reading (a quotation or a Practicing reading skills A famous line from a book
small piece of writing)
Pronunciation (single words Practicing listening skills A video showing how a
and tong twisters) native speaker pronounces a
difficult word
(Practicing speaking skills) (when speech-shadowing the
video or audio of someone
speaking)
Greetings, wishes and Building rapport A good morning message
thanks
Off-topic discussions and Someone promoting their
self-promotions own company
Learning strategy Improving study skills Someone sharing study
techniques
Speaking Practicing listening and A ‘listen and repeat’ exercise
speaking skills on how to talk on the phone
As shown in Table 1, eight principal themes were identified. In order to do that, also the
comments under the posts were considered. Furthermore, the analysis sought to
determine how this content is used in the group and what seems to be the purpose.
The order in which these eight thematic categories are listed in Table 1 is not random.
The order emerged from quantification of the posts belonging to different themes, as
outlined in the results section.
As far as the second research question is concerned, the presence or absence of
languages other than English was noted in parallel with the thematic analysis. As the
language used by the group is almost always English, there are only a few observations
to make on the rare occasions when this does not happen (see section 4.2).
133.4 Ethical considerations
As indicated previously, the chosen group is public. According to Kosinski et al. (2015),
publicly available data on Facebook do not require informants’ consent, provided that
the following conditions are met:
1. It is reasonable to assume that the data were knowingly made public by the individuals;
2. Data are anonymized after collection and no attempts are made to deanonymize them;
3. There is no interaction or communication with the individuals in the sample; and
4. No information that can be attributed to a single individual, including demographic profiles
and samples of text or other content, is to be published or used to illustrate the results of the
study. (Kosinski et al., 2015, p. 32)
This paper follows all of the abovementioned requirements. This study also conforms to
Stockholm University’s research integrity and ethics policy (2021). Furthermore, as
regards the selection of a group, all open groups stating the rule ‘what’s shared in the
group should stay in the group’ were discarded, as an additional precaution.
4. Results
The results of the analysis will be presented in two different sections. The section below
(4.1) seeks to answer the first research question. The section that follows (4.2) briefly
summarizes the relevant results relating to the second research question.
4.1 Relevant themes and their functions
As was mentioned in the previous section, eight principal themes were identified (see
Table 1). For the sake of simplicity, the main thematic categories will be referred to as
follows:
Theme 1: Vocabulary
Theme 2: Grammar
Theme 3: Reading
Theme 4: Pronunciation
Theme 5: Greetings, wishes and thanks
Theme 6: Off-topic discussions and self-promotions
Theme 7: Learning strategy
Theme 8: Speaking
As shown in Figure 1 below, there were 858 posts in total.
14Thematic categories
29 7
38
41
T1
46 T2
T3
T4
108 440
T5
T6
T7
T8
149
Figure 1: Posts’ distribution by thematic category (N=858)
The pie chart shows the number of posts assigned to each thematic category, where T1
corresponds to the first theme, and so on. Here it can clearly be seen how the core
categories ‘vocabulary’ and ‘grammar’ are the most relevant in terms of frequency.
The following sections will provide a more detailed account of the abovementioned
categories and related functions. The examples provided were selected because they can
be considered as typical post types in their own category.
4.1.1 Vocabulary
The first category ‘vocabulary’ covers posts showing content words, collocations, short
phrases, and idioms. As far as content words are concerned, the shared images often
contain a definition of the word, its phonemic notation, an explanatory picture, and one
or more sentences that provide context. Comments related to this type of content are
usually thanks and/or emoticons. Figure 2 shows one common way to present a content
word:
15Figure 2: Word of the day (www.facebook.com/groups/)
The purpose of this kind of posts seems clear enough. By reading the information
contained in this image, learners should be able to understand and memorize the (new)
vocabulary item.
Semantic relationships are also very popular, especially at word level. The most
common ones shared by the group members concern synonyms, antonyms, and
homonyms.
Collocations, short phrases, and idioms are also presented in a similar fashion. See
Figure 3 (a list of phrases) and 4 (an idiom) below:
16Figure 3: 'I Think' synonyms list (www.facebook.com/groups/)
In Figure 3, different ways of expressing ‘I think’ are presented in a bulleted list.
Figure 4: Idiom of the week (www.facebook.com/groups/)
17Figure 4 shows the presentation of an idiom, ‘I slept like a log’. It can be noticed that
both the image and the example sentence try to facilitate comprehension. Usually, as is
the case here, a simpler version of the expression in focus is also provided (in this case,
‘I slept like a baby’ and ‘I slept very well’).
As regards to collocations, short phrases and idioms, phonemic notation is rarely
provided. These types of posts usually receive some comments and, especially when it
comes to idioms, longer and more elaborate discussions may arise. Indeed, it can
happen that the figurative language of the idiom is perceived as difficult to understand,
and therefore the group members discuss its meaning together. Or it may happen that
some members provide a translation in their native language (this aspect will be
discussed in section 4.2). Basically, this kind of material is posted to be read and
hopefully commented on.
In addition to these ‘explanatory posts’, it is also common to find a variety of exercises.
The most common ones are gap-fill exercises, matching exercises, and closed-ended
questions, such as yes/no questions or multiple-choice questions with a single-word
answer:
Figure 5: A multiple choice exercise (www.facebook.com/groups/)
As Figure 5 shows, learners are asked to do something more than just reading. In this
regard, it might be interesting to mention that members who are able to spark group
discussions with their posts are awarded with a badge. In other words, they become ‘top
contributors’, which implies that their posts become more visible on the page. This
contributes to the impression that the purpose of the exercises is that of receiving a
written answer. Indeed, it is common to find at least a few written comments under
these kinds of posts. These can range from single words to longer comments. The
18conclusion that can be drawn here is that shared content concerning vocabulary appears
to have the main function of helping to develop reading skills and, secondarily, writing
skills.
As already mentioned, this category is the most relevant one in terms of frequency (see
Figure 1). This means that about half of the daily posts are related to vocabulary, with
an alternation of posts containing vocabulary explanations and exercises that does not
seem to indicate a clear preference for either one or the other.
4.1.2 Grammar
The second category ‘grammar’ comprises both posts that exemplify English grammar
rules and posts with grammar exercises. Figures 6 and 7 show these two types of
content:
Figure 6: Verb and preposition (www.facebook.com/groups/)
Figure 6 shows an image that covers a grammar point of interest, consisting in some
common verbs followed by the preposition ‘to’ within the context of an example
sentence. This is a very common post type in this community. However, another kind of
post type in this category can consist of a YouTube video. In this case, a grammar topic
is explored in a video lesson. Thus, the learner has the opportunity to watch the video
lesson, which usually consists of written slides or written explanations on a whiteboard,
and a voice or a person commenting them. These kinds of posts offer the opportunity to
practice listening, which happens rarely in this community.
19Figure 7: A gap filling exercise to test knowledge of grammar (www.facebook.com/groups/)
In Figure 7, learners are asked to identify the grammatically correct adjunct in the
sentence. The exercise type is a gap-fill with multiple choice options, and no answers
are provided. Grammar exercises are commonly shared in the community through an
image post. A user-generated written text as a post is also possible, but less common.
Thus, there are both similarities and differences between the first two main thematic
categories. In both of them, posts containing explanations and exercises alternate
without showing a specific preference for either one or the other. Instead, a couple of
differences can be noticed. First of all, content related to grammar is present every day
with at least a few posts on the group timeline. The number of posts may vary on a daily
basis, but it is never as high as the number of those relating to vocabulary. In addition,
grammar posts can give the opportunity to practice not only reading and writing, but
also listening, although it must be noted that embedded videos with grammar video
lessons are rather rare on the group timeline.
204.1.3 Reading
The third category ‘reading’ is almost as popular as the second one in terms of
frequency (see Figure 1). It includes all posts sharing a quote or a piece of writing, e.g.,
a poem. These reading passages are never long. The following example shows the most
common type of post in this category:
Figure 8: An Albert Einstein quote (www.facebook.com/groups/)
Figure 8 shows an image quoting a famous saying by Albert Einstein. Inspirational
quotes by famous personalities like this one are very popular in the community,
although not always reported accurately. The presence of likes and shares and the
absence of comments point out to the fact that this content is essentially a quick read. In
Table 1, it is therefore reported that the main function of this category may consist in
practicing reading. More engaging tasks, such as reading comprehension exercises (see
Figure 9 below) are extremely rare on the group wall:
21You can also read
