A dramaturgical perspective of online university student behaviours in a second year psychology class
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i1.1988Keywords:
Online learning, online teaching, student experience, Facebook, GoffmanAbstract
This study applies dramaturgical sociology, specifically Goffman’s approach to region behaviour, to explore where students spend their time doing class related tasks in spaces other than the LMS. The context for this research is a case study of a second year psychology class at an Australian university. Data was collected about students’ front stage setting (the LMS) and backstage setting (students’ experiences on Facebook). Over a 12-week semester 126 students were observed in the LMS. During the semester, 21 students completed fortnightly questionnaires about where they spent their time and with whom. At the end of the semester, 14 students participated in online interviews. The findings that emerged from the data illustrated how the characteristics of the audience in each setting, as well as the timing of communication and duration of each setting, may have impacted a student’s social learning experience. This knowledge can help online teachers to understand the characteristics of a setting that might determine where students prefer to situate their learning experience. While this paper uses a dramaturgical perspective of online university students in a second year psychology class, the students’ experiences can generally be used to understand how LMS’s, social networking tools, and collaborative technologies support and impede social learning experiences in higher education.
References
Arouri, Y. (2015). How Jordanian University Students Perceive the Opportunities and Challenges of Using Facebook as a Supplementary Learning Resource? International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 10(1), 46. http://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4265
Bicen, H., & Cavus, N. (2011). Social network sites usage habits of undergraduate students: case study of Facebook. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 943–947. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.174
Bosch, T. E. (2009). Using online social networking for teaching and learning: Facebook use at the University of Cape Town. Communication, 35(2), 185–200. http://doi.org/10.1080/02500160903250648
Bowman, N. D., & Akcaoglu, M. (2014). “I see smart people!”: Using Facebook to supplement cognitive and affective learning in the university mass lecture. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 1–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.05.003
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Bullingham, L., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2013). “The presentation of self in the online world”: Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of Information Science, 39(1), 101–112. http://doi.org/10.1177/0165551512470051
Catalano, A. (2015). The Effect of a Situated Learning Environment in a Distance Education Information Literacy Course. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(5), 653–659. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.06.008
Chaiklin, S., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1993). Understanding practice: perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge ; New York, N.Y: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cuesta, M., Eklund, M., Rydin, I., & Witt, A.-K. (2016). Using Facebook as a co-learning community in higher education. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(1), 55–72. http://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1064952
Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
DiVall, M. V., & Kirwin, J. L. (2012). Using Facebook to facilitate course-related discussion between students and faculty members. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(2). Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA325092029&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=fulltext&issn=00029459&p=AONE&sw=w
Donlan, L. (2014). Exploring the views of students on the use of Facebook in university teaching and learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(4), 572–588. http://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2012.726973
English, R. M., & Duncan-Howell, J. A. (2008). Facebook goes to college: Using social networking tools to support students undertaking teaching practicum. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 596–601.
Gilmore, D. (2014). Goffman's front stage and backstage behaviors in online education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(3), 187-190.
Gilmore, D. (2017). Where and with whom do students learn in an online university subject? A multiple case study analysis. Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City. New York: Double Day Anchor Books.
Hogan, B. (2010). The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 377–386. http://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893
Hyde-Clarke, N. (2013). Facebook and public debate: An informal learning tool for the youth. Journal of African Media Studies, 5(2), 131–148.
Junco, R. (2014). iSpy : seeing what students really do online. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 75–89. http://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.771782
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge [England] ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Livingstone, S. M., & Sefton-Green, J. (2016). The class: living and learning in the digital age. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Lin, P.-C., Hou, H.-T., Wang, S.-M., & Chang, K.-E. (2013). Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Computers & Education, 60(1), 110–121. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.017
Livingstone, S. M., & Sefton-Green, J. (2016). The class: living and learning in the digital age. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Markham, A. N., & Baym, N. K. (Eds.). (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Masood, K., Ahmed, B., Choi, J., & Gutierrez-Osuna, R. (2012). Consistency and validity of self-reporting scores in stress measurement surveys. In Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE (pp. 4895–4898). IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6347091
Meskill, M, Sadykova G. (2017). The presentation of self in everyday ether: A corpus analysis of student self-tellings in online graduate courses. Online Learning, 11(3), 123-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v11i3.1723
Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks. First Monday, 14(3). http://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v14i3.2162
Phillips, S. (2007). A brief history of Facebook. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/jul/25/media.newmedia
Prescott, J., Wilson, S., & Becket, G. (2013). Facebook use in the learning environment: do students want this? Learning, Media and Technology, 38(3), 345–350.
Rambe, P. (2012). Critical discourse analysis of collaborative engagement in Facebook postings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 295–314.
Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002
Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1984). Everyday cognition: its development in social context. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Ross, D. A. R. (2007). Backstage with the Knowledge Boys and Girls: Goffman and Distributed Agency in an Organic Online Community. Organization Studies, 28(3), 307–325. http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076000
Ru-Chu, S. (2013). Effect of using Facebook to assist English for Business Communication course instruction. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(1). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/openview/2aaaee3dd3699858772168e5f8bed77a/1?pq-origsite=gscholar
Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: exploring students’ education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157–174.
Staines, Z., & Lauchs, M. (2013). Students’ engagement with Facebook in a university undergraduate policing unit. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(6), 792–805.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Trammell, K. D., & Keshelashvili, A. (2005). Examining the new influencers: A self-presentation study of A-list blogs. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(4), 968–982.
Vygotsky, L. S. (Lev S., 1896-1934. (1978). Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Waller, V., Farquharson, K., & Dempsey, D. (2016). Qualitative social research: Contemporary methods for the digital age. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods (4th ed). Los Angeles, Calif: Sage Publications.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
