You are here:

“WhatsApp, Teacher?” - Student Perspectives on Teacher-Student WhatsApp Interactions in Secondary Schools
ARTICLE

,

JITE-Research Volume 17, Number 1, ISSN 1539-3585 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Abstract

Aim/Purpose: In this paper, we analyze the phenomenon of “classroom WhatsApp groups”, in which a teacher and students from a particular classroom interact with one another, while specifically focusing on the student perspective of these interactions. Background: The instant messaging application WhatsApp enables quick, interactive multimedia communication in closed groups, as well as one-on-one interactions between selected group members. Yet, very little is known about the extent, nature, and purposes of these practices, the limitations and affordances, the type of discourse and conflicts that develop in these spaces, and the extent to which it affects teacher-student interactions outside of WhatsApp (e.g., the social climate in class, the teacher’s status, teacher-student and student-student relations), especially from the students’ perspective. Methodology: Our methodology combines questionnaires, personal interviews, and focus groups with Israeli secondary school students (N = 88). Contribution: The present study adds to the expanding body of empirical research on social media use in educational settings by specifically focusing on a heretofore underexposed aspect, namely, secondary school student-teacher communication in the popular instant messaging application WhatsApp. We report on findings from the student perspective and discuss the advantages and limitations of this form of communication sphere, and on the social functions of the different classroom WhatsApp groups in secondary school students’ everyday life. Findings: The combined findings reveal that classroom WhatsApp groups have become a central channel of communication for school-related topics. It is used primarily for organizational purposes (sending and receiving updates and managing learning activities), as well as a means for teachers to enforce discipline. Students mentioned many advantages of WhatsApp communication, such as easy access, the ability to create communities, the ability to safeguard personal privacy, and the communication format (written, mediated, personal, or group). However, they also recognized limitations (i.e., communication overload) and challenged teacher ability to monitor and affect student interactions in social media, even when they are present in these WhatsApp classroom groups. Finally, we report on the role of parallel, sans-teacher WhatsApp groups, which are characterized as back stage discourse arenas that accompany the front stage offline classroom activities and the “official” classroom WhatsApp group. Recommendations for Practitioners: The combined findings of this study indicate how WhatsApp-based, joint teacher-student groups can serve a variety of educational purposes, namely, organizational, instructional, and educational-disciplinary. In addition, and in spite of teachers concerns, students are aware of the challenges inherent to the use of WhatsApp for communication with their teachers. Some of the main characteristics that prevent teachers from using other ubiquitous digital communication media, such as Facebook or Twitter, are not relevant when it comes to WhatsApp. Both teachers and students view WhatsApp as a favored channel of communication because of the low exposure to personal information and minimal invasion of privacy. Future Research: The qualitative methodology of this paper limits the ability to generalize the current findings to other contexts and population groups. Future research should preferably explore the generalizability of our findings to larger sections of teenage populations. It should also explore similarities and differences with other age groups. Finally, the present study was set in a particular country (Israel). Local norms of cellphone use and of appropriate teacher-student interaction, as well as locally developed media domestication patterns, may differ from country to country and/or from one cultural group to another. Future research should then include and compare the current findings with data from different countries and cultures in order to complete the picture.

Citation

Rosenberg, H. & Asterhan, C. (2018). “WhatsApp, Teacher?” - Student Perspectives on Teacher-Student WhatsApp Interactions in Secondary Schools. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17(1), 205-226. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved December 14, 2019 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aaen, J., & Dalsgaard, C. (2016). Student Facebook groups as a thirdspace: Between social life and schoolwork. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(1), 160-186. Https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1111241
  2. Ahad, A.D., & Lim, S.M.A. (2014). Convenience or nuisance? The ‘WhatsApp’ dilemma. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 155, 189-196.
  3. Allagui, B. (2014). Writing through WhatsApp: an evaluation of students writing performance. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organization, 8(3-4), 216-231.
  4. Amry, A.B. (2014). The impact of Whatsapp mobile social learning on the achievement and attitudes of female students compared with face to face learning in the classroom. European Scientific Journal, 10 (22). 1857-1881.
  5. Andersson, A., Hatakka, M., Grönlund, Å., & Wiklund, M. (2014). Reclaiming the students–coping with social media in 1:1 schools. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 37-52.
  6. Asterhan, C.S., & Rosenberg, H. (2015). The promise, reality and dilemmas of secondary school teacherstudent interactions in Facebook: The teacher perspective. Computers& Education, 85, 134-148.
  7. Beverly, P., Wood, C., & Bell, V. (2008). Txt msg n school literacy: Does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children’s literacy attainment? Literacy, 42(3), 137-144.
  8. Calvo, R., Arbiol, A., & Iglesias, A. (2014). Are all chats suitable for learning purposes? A study of the required characteristics. Procedia Computer Science, 27, 251-260.
  9. Chang-Kredl, S., & Kozak, S. (2017). Children using Facebook: Teachers’ discursive constructions of childhood. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(2), 211-215. Https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2017.1305967
  10. Davis, C.H., III, Deil-Amen, R., Rios-Aguilar, C., & Gonzalez Canche, M.S. (2012). Social media in higher education: A literature review and research directions. Report printed by the University of Arizona and Claremont Graduate University. Retrieved 10.08.17 from http://www.pewinternet.org/Commentary/2012/April/Pew-Internet-Teens.aspx
  11. DeGroot, J.M., Young, V.J., & VanSlette, S.H. (2015). Twitter use and its effects on student perception of instructor credibility. Communication Education, 64(4), 419-437.
  12. Fewkes, A.M., & McCabe, M. (2012). Facebook: Learning tool or distraction? Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(3), 92-98.
  13. Friedman, L.W., & Friedman, H.H. (2013). Using social media technologies to enhance online learning. Journal of Educators Online, 10(1). Https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2013.1.5
  14. Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (2000). The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 645-670). London: Sage.
  15. Forkosh-Baruch, A., Hershkovitz, A., & Ang, R.P. (2015). Teacher-student relationship and SNS-mediated communication: Perceptions of both role-players. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning, 11, 273–289. Https://doi.org/10.28945/2329
  16. Gaskell, G. (2000). Individual and group interviewing. In M.W. Bauer& G. Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound (pp. 38-56). Sage.
  17. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
  18. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J.H. (2009). Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38, 246-259.
  19. Heng, C.H., & Ling, T.L. (2014). Interactive Character Learning Model (ICLM)—Chinese character learning using WhatsApp for Malay L3 Learners. US-China Education Review, 4(11), 772-786
  20. Hershkovitz, A., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2013). Student-teacher relationship in the Facebook era: The student perspective. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 23, 33-52.
  21. Jones, N., Blackey, H., Fitzgibbon, K., & Chew, E. (2010). Get out of MySpace! Computers& Education, 54(3), 776-782. Https://doi.org/10.1016/J.compedu.2009.07.008
  22. Teacher-Student WhatsApp InteractionJunco, R., & Cotton, S.R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers& Education, 59, 505-514. Https://doi.org/10.1016/J.compedu.2011.12.023
  23. Karapanos, E., Teixeira, P., & Gouveia, R. (2016). Need fulfillment and experiences on social media: A case on Facebook and WhatsApp. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 888-897.
  24. Labus, A., Despotović-Zrakić, M., Radenković, B., Bogdanović, Z., & Radenković, M. (2015). Enhancing formal e-learning with edutainment on social networks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 592-605.
  25. Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016). Is Facebook still a suitable technology-enhanced learning environment? An updated critical review of the literature from 2012 to 2015. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 503528. Https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12154
  26. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  27. Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simonds, C.J. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook”: The effects of computermediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56(1), 1-17. Https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520601009710
  28. Meyrowitz, J. (1996). Taking McLuhan and “medium theory” seriously: Technological change and the evolution of education. In S.T. Kerr (Ed.), Technology and the future of schooling, 95th Yearbook National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 73-110). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  29. O’Connell, M. (2010). “To Text or Not to Text”: Reticence and the utilization of short message services. Human Communication, 13(2), 87-102.
  30. O’Hara, K.P., Massimi, M., Harper, R., Rubens, S., & Morris, J. (2014, February). Everyday dwelling with WhatsApp. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work& Social Computing (pp. 1131-1143). ACM.
  31. Ophir, Y. (2017). SOS on SNS: Adolescent distress on social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 5155.
  32. Ophir, Y., Rosenberg, H., Asterhan, C., & Schwarz, B. (2016). In times of war, adolescents do not fall silent: Teacher-student social network communication in wartime. Journal of Adolescents, 46, 98-106.
  33. Puhl, T., Tsovaltzi, D., & Weinberger, A. (2015). Blending Facebook discussions into seminars for practicing argumentation. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 605-616.
  34. Reid, D., & Reid, F. (2004). Insights into the social and psychological effects of SMS text messaging. Retrieved from http://www.160characters.org/documents/SocialEffectsOfTextMessaging.pdf
  35. Robert, L., & Dennis, A. (2005). Paradox of richness: A cognitive model of media choice. IEEE Transactions of Professional Communication, 48(1), 10-21.
  36. Rosenberg, H. (2016). Media, Teens& Children: Consumption, habits and social practices. In: R. Mann& A. Lev-On (Eds.), Annual Report: The Israeli Media in 2015 Agendas, Uses and Trends (pp. 70-91). Ariel: New Media Research Institute, Ariel University. (in Hebrew)
  37. Rosenberg, H., Ophir, Y., & Asterhan, C.S. (2018). A virtual safe zone: Teachers supporting teenage student resilience through social media in times of war. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 35-42.
  38. Schwartz, J. (2016, May). The most popular messaging app in every country. Digital Vision. Https://www.similarweb.com/blog/worldwide-messaging-apps
  39. Silverstone, R. (2006). Domesticating domestication. Reflection on the life of a concept. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie, & K.J. Ward (Eds.), Domestication of media and technology (pp. 229-248). Maidenhead:
  40. Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J.M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  41. Tawiah, Y.S., Nondzor, H.E., & Alhaji, A. (2014). Usage of WhatsApp and voice calls (phone call): Preference of polytechnic students in Ghana. Science Journal of Business and Management, 2(4), 103-108.
  42. Traeger, S. (2017). Teacher-parents interaction in WhatsApp groups (Unpublished M.A dissertation). The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
  43. Wang, Q., Woo, H.L., Quek, C.L., Yang, Y., & Liu, M. (2012). Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 428-438.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections