Scientific Journal Of King Faisal University: Basic and Applied Sciences
Scientific Journal of King Faisal University: Humanities and Management
Facebook and EFL Academic Writing: Students’ Perspectives in a Saudi College
(Ahmed Saad Al Shlowiy and Khaled Ahmed Layali)Abstract
A research problem was identified that warranted the initiation of this study. A mixed pattern for results regarding Facebook usage in EFL writing outside the classroom exists in the literature. As the researchers believed in student-centered and autonomous learning, they intended to delineate students’ perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of using Facebook in EFL academic writing. The researchers conducted this study with their students at a Saudi college. Ten students participated in this study while they were studying the English Writing course. The researchers collected data through a questionnaire, interviews and participant observations. The findings showed six benefits of Facebook usage in academic writing: (1) greater motivation to write, (2) increased collaboration among students, (3) improvements in writing, (4) having a good medium to practise writing outside the classroom, (5) providing an environment with less pressure on writing and (6) greater ease of use and being able to write anytime, anywhere. Two drawbacks were identified: (1) distractions regarding chat invitations and (2) use of impolite language. The researchers provided suggestions for maximising the benefits and minimising the drawbacks in EFL teaching and learning. They also linked the use of Facebook to some learning theories.
KEYWORDS
Composition skills, foreign language learning, out-of-class activities, social media, writing issues
PDF
References
Abdul Majid, A. H., Stapa, S. H. and Keong, Y. C. (2012). Scaffolding through the blended approach: Improving the writing process and performance using Facebook. American Journal of Social Issues and Humanities, 2(5), 336–42.
Abrams, Z. I. (2003). Flaming in CMC: Prometheus’ fire or inferno’s?. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 245–60.
Bani-Hani, N. A., Al-Sobh, M. A. and Abu-Melhim, A. H. (2014). Utilizing Facebook groups in teaching writing: Jordanian EFL students’ perceptions and attitudes. International Journal of English Linguistics, 4(5), 27–34.
Baran, B. (2010). Facebook as a formal instructional environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), E146–9.
DeWalt, K. M. and DeWalt, B. R. (2011). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. 2nd edition. Plymouth, UK: Rowman AltaMira Press.
Espinosa, L. F. (2015). The use of Facebook for educational purposes in EFL classrooms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(11), 2206–11.
Hartshorne, R. and Ajjan, H. (2009). Examining student decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(3), 183–98.
Jung, I., Kudo, M. and Choi, S-K. (2012). Stress in Japanese learners engaged in online collaborative learning in English. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 1016–29.
Khan, R. K. and Ivy, T. I. (2014). Using Facebook for large writing classrooms: A possibility for Bangladesh. International Journal of Multifaceted and Multilingual Studies, 1(1), 1–19.
Koc, D. K. and Koc, S. E. (2016). Students’ perceptions of blog use in an undergraduate linguistics course. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(1), 9–19.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press Inc.
Lemeul, J. (2006, September 1). Why I registered on Facebook. Chronicle of Higher Education. Available at: https://www.chronicle.com/article/why-i-registered-on-facebook/ (Accessed on: 10/12/2019)
Maloney, E. (2007, January 5). What web 2.0 can teach us about learning. Chronicle of Higher Education. Available at: https://www.chronicle.com/article/what-web-2-0-can-teach-us-about-learning/ (Accessed on: 10/12/2020)
Maranto, G. and Barton, M. (2010). Paradox and promise: MySpace, Facebook, and the sociopolitics of social networking in the writing classroom. Computers and Composition, 27(1), 36–47.
Maykut, P. and Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and Practical Guide. London, UK: Routledge.
Mazman, S. G. and Usluel, Y. K. (2010). Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers & Education, 55(2), 444–53.
McLoughlin, C. and Lee, M. J. (2008). Mapping the digital terrain: New media and social software as catalysts for pedagogical change. In: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) Annual Conference, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia, 30/11/2008- 03/12/2008.
Nepomuceno, M. M. (2011). Writing online: Using blogs as an alternative writing activity in tertiary ESL classes. TESOL Journal, 5(n/a), 92–105.
Oinam, S. (2017). Student-centered approach to teaching and learning in higher education for quality enhancement. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(6), 27–30.
Perry, F. L. (2011). Research in applied linguistics: Becoming a discerning consumer. 2nd edition. NY, NY: Routledge.
Shih, R. C. (2011). Can web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5), 829–45.
Shukor, S. and Noordin, N. (2014). Effects of Facebook collaborative writing groups on ESL undergraduates’ writing performance. International Journal of English Language Education, 2(2), 89–99.
Suthiwartnarueput, T. and Wasanasomsithi, P. (2012). Effects of using Facebook as a medium for discussions of English grammar and writing of low-intermediate EFL students. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(2), 194–214.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole , V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Yunus, M. M., Salehi, H., Sun, C. H., Yen, J. Y. P. and Li, L. K. S. (2012). Using Facebook groups in teaching ESL writing. Recent Researches in Chemistry, Biology, Environment and Culture, 1(n/a), 75–80.