21st Century higher education institutions encounter remarkable social, economic, and technological transformations guaranteed to transform students’ educational experience substantially. Analysts ought to proceed with monitoring contemporary and emerging technologies as a way of seeing what equipment have considerable abilities in the classroom, and how open-minded students are to utilizing the identified tools. This assessment takes out a single component of the crucial technological switch within universities by examining how social media is being used in higher education. The current study has reviewed the opportunities linked to the usage of social media tools within classrooms without considering the opinions students have concerning its importance in promoting their educational experience. The article aims at offering an understanding of how educators can decisively include social media tools in the classroom, and how social media usage has the potential of affecting student’s opinion of the instructor and the learning institution. In contrast, this article produced essential outcomes revealing that acceptance to utilizing social media in education, disclose interactive and information purpose for its use, besides offering logical and pedagogical meaning, there are limitations associated with the replication, sample, and generalization of results.
Introduction
The researchers analysed a necessary topic, focusing on student’s perspectives on social media as essential pedagogical equipment. Undergraduate students in sizeable, independent universities pursuing marketing courses were studied concerning their social media usage, choice, and individual opinions concerning the use of social media in higher education. Further qualitative information gathering with students probed into influence for social media use in education, including instructors’ and university’ perspectives (Darvishi, 2020). The paper has a standard and captivating introduction because of its ‘funnel method’ nature. The approach of social media might be significant for every student as it can enable quick access and information retaining, despite being in school or not. However, Stacy Neier1 and Linda Tuncay Zayer (2015) failed to identify and describe their school of thought they considered in their assessment. Such an absence of details can make it hard to replicate their study as a way of further expanding the survey on this type of issue.
Methods
Exceptional methods were used in this survey even though there are limitations to the results. Foremost, the study examined various areas relevant to marketing education.
“Undergraduate students in a midsized, private university taking a marketing course were surveyed about their social media usage and preferences as well as their perceptions regarding the use of social media in higher education” (Stacy and Linda, p. 1, 2015). Further qualitative and quantitative data collections were considered; however, with the small sampled subjects to that were studied. It is challenging to write in generalities about the results to the greater student demographic. In addition, the participants in this survey were from a mid-sized university, which makes it difficult to generalize the outcomes to the greater student demographic. While Stacy and Linda (2015) contend that the study emphasizes on providing empirical awareness for any educator or university seeking to utilize social media, and that the assessment needs to be replicated with a greater population including various learning institutions, the authors failed to discuss how such factors of their survey could be limited.
Quantitative along with qualitative methods should both provide a comprehensive image of the way study subjects perceive social media usage in education (Sadowski, et al, 2017). Limiting research in one region is not worth providing the results that can be used to make a final and generalized conclusion. For instance, the authors were restricted their study in private university and considering a single course, “marketing course were surveyed about their social media usage as well as their perceptions on the use of social media tools in the education.” It consisted of rounds of data collections, former involving “138 surveys completed during Spring 2012,” and the latter involving “135 surveys was collected during Spring 2013” (p. 135). But these are significant counts that can be done from both public and private higher learning institutions before coming into a generalized conclusion.
Results
While applying a qualitative approach, Stacy and Linda consider using in-depth interviews to obtain a detailed view from the students and the influence that compels them to prefer social media in education. They looked for answers to their “grand-tour” questions concerning the topic, as they interviewed not more than thirteen undergraduate students, based on an interview structure championed by who they referring to as “by McCracken (1988).” Such a good strategy ought to be used to examine participant’s experiences and sincerity to the “use of social media in education,” further outline the motive behind social media use as far as education is concerned. More indicatively, it should give a depth evaluation; add onto the quantitative data with quantitative information, worth presenting fine distinction on participants’ (students) stories related to their influences on the topic concerned. Lastly, the research needs to portray student’s perspectives on the way “social media use affects perceptions of instructors and universities.” (Lowe & Laffey, 2011). Each of the mentioned elements is significant to have a whole detained examination of the issue at hand.
Results do not prove any specific school of thought. First, there are possible limitations of the survey. For instance, each student in study attended the same institution, and this was the case with the instructors picked as sample. Participants’ opinions of using social media in education had the possibility of being impacted by the social media attempt their respective institutions are utilizing, and what the current brand perspectives are about the institutions (Kim, 2017). That is, for instance, rather than referring to the institution collectively, they would have referenced their personal universities when expressing their opinions concerning brand perspective along with social media.
Discussion
The outcomes suggested that even though students may not persistently show complete awareness of social media tools, the information from the study suggests that there exists the desire to utilize different classifications of social media. To make an extension of the study implications for the entire high education fraternity, a more investigative qualitative evaluation concerned with the opinions of the instructors and universities using social media, needed to be done. The authors did not target using direct quantification to evaluate the productiveness of the utilizing social media in education. However, participant’s opinions are one of the various considerations for instructors to think of when making the decision to include or exclude these tools in classrooms (Abrahim,et al.,2018). A more extensive survey is required using direct quantification of success and fit for various forms of courses, including teaching strategies, as a way of helping educators in their decisions in utilizing social media for educational roles.
Forthcoming assessment is required to establish and expand the investigative evaluation on the connection between social media usage and the way students see universities. The entire information gathering failed to look after grouping students based on personal character or learning abilities. Instead, the role of the survey involved provision of a wide awareness of students’ perspectives on the use of social media in education (Thurnell-Read, Brown and Long, 572, 2018). The authors admit that the “Past research details how different learning styles are linked to web-enabled teaching methods and the future research should extend their works besides exploring in more depth how specific learning styles match up to preferences for the use of social media tools in education.” Lastly, the research did not directly address engagement.
Engagement, as a term refers to the “the time and effort students devote to activities that are linked to desired outcomes of college and what institutions do to induce students to participate in these activities” (Kuh, 2009, p. 693). Garcias, et al (pp. 2865-2874) outline that less studies in higher learning institutions trie to link social media use with participation but that participation is essential element as far as learning is concerned. In fact, various researcher have proved that positive association between social media usage and participation; even though such is explained in the context if certain equipment (Sweet-Cushman, 763-770, 2019). Some researchers do not find necessary association between “Twitter and engagement,” for instance (Welch & Bonnan-White, 2012). In as much as this study is worthwhile, the forthcoming one ought to go past weighing engagement as it is associated to a particular branded social media tools and exploring a more comprehensive image of the connection between social media usage and students participation in it. Notably, this evaluation offers a ground on which further exploration of the concerned issue as detailed in the article “students’ general perceptions regarding social media in education.”
Conclusion
This article was grounded on a necessary topic in higher education, and researchers should find solution to improve the concern. One of the challenges students encounter, as far as online or use of social media tools are concerned is the social influence, and they need to be guided on how to maximize such for their own academic advantage. This study failed to sufficiently demonstrate how these students can benefit academically after being guided on how to use the various social media tools. Instead the focus was on perceptions, which is not bad, but more could be done about this. In addition, the small sample size and inadequate diversity among participants restricts generalization of the findings. The coming researches should consider diversity as a necessary element to have a more grounded proof for the entire research being conduct.