You are here:

Enriching Higher Education with Social Media: Development and Evaluation of a Social Media Toolkit

; , Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland ; ,

IRRODL Volume 18, Number 1, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press


While ubiquitous in everyday use, in reality, social media usage within higher education teaching has expanded quite slowly. Analysis of social media usage of students and instructors for teaching, learning, and research purposes across four countries (Russia, Turkey, Germany, and Switzerland) showed that many higher education instructors actively use social media for private purposes. However, although they understand that their students also use it for learning purposes, and instructors sense the potential of social media in teaching, they mostly refrain from doing so due to various barriers. In response, an openly accessible trilingual Social Media Toolkit was developed which analyzes the teaching scenario with several questions, before suggesting, based on an algorithm, the best matching class of social media, complete with advice on how to use it for teaching purposes. This paper explains the rationale behind the toolkit, its development process, and examines instructors\u2019 perceptions towards it.


Glbahar, Y., Rapp, C., Kilis, S. & Sitnikova, A. (2017). Enriching Higher Education with Social Media: Development and Evaluation of a Social Media Toolkit. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(1),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved February 22, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80.
  2. Bennett, R.E. (1993). On the meaning of constructed response. In R.E. Bennett& W.C. Ward (Eds.), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  3. Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K.K. (1987). Open-ended versus multiple choice response formats––it does make a difference for diagnostic purposes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11(4), 385-395.
  4. Birenbaum, M., Tatsuoka, K.K., & Gutvirtz, Y. (1992). Effects of response format on diagnostic assessment of scholastic achievement. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(30), 353-363.
  5. Blazer, C. (2012). Social networking in schools: Benefits and risks; review of the research; policy considerations; and current practices. Information Capsule, 1109. Retrieved from
  6. Borich, G.D. (2013). Effective teaching methods: Research-based practice (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
  7. Bosman, L., & Zagenczyk, T. (2011). Revitalize your teaching: Creative approaches to applying social media in the classroom. In B. White, I. King, & P. Tsang (Eds.), Social media tools and platforms in learning environments (pp. 3-15). Springer Science& Business Media.
  8. Bower, M., Hedberg, J.G., & Kuswara, A. (2010). A framework for Web 2.0 learning design. Educational Media International, 47(3), 177-198.
  9. Callens, M.V. (2014). Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to teach course content and improve social media literacy. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 3(1), 17-26.
  10. Cao, Y., Ajjan, H., & Hong, P. (2013). Using social media applications for educational outcomes in
  11. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Education and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
  12. Dabbagh, N., & Reo, R. (2010). Impact of Web 2.0 on higher education. In D.W. Surry, R.M. Gray Jr,
  13. Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology (Research report). Louisville, CO: ECAR. Retrieved from
  14. English, R.M., & Duncan-Howell, J.A. (2008). Facebook© goes to college: Using social networking
  15. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers& Education, 59(2), 423-435.
  16. Fleiss, J.L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 378-382.
  17. Gammon, M.A., & White, J. (2011). (Social) media literacy: Challenges and opportunities for higher education. In C. Wankel (Series Ed.), Educating educators with social media (pp. 329-345)
  18. Johnson, L., Adams-Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC
  19. Lim, J., & Richardson, J.C. (2016). Exploring the effects of students' social networking experience on
  20. Matzat, U., & Vrieling, E.M. (2016). Self-regulated learning and social media–a ‘natural alliance’?
  21. Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simonds, C.J. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook: The effects of
  22. Mazman, S.G., & Usluel, Y.K. (2010). Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers& Education, 55(2), 444-453. Doi:10.1016/J.compedu.2010.02.008
  23. Presley, M., & McCormick, C. (2007). Cognition, teaching, and assessment. New York: Harper Collins College.
  24. Rogers-Estable, M. (2014). Web 2.0 use in higher education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 17(2), 130-142.
  25. Safko, L. (2010). The social media bible: Tactics, tools, and strategies for business success. New Jersey: John Wiley& Sons.
  26. Schroeder, A., Minocha, S., & Schneider, C. (2010). The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
  27. Shohamy, E. (1984). Does the testing method make a difference? The case of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 1(2), 147-170.
  28. Taylor, R., King, D.F., & Nelson, D.G. (2012). Student learning through social media. Journal of Sociological Research, 3(2). Retrieved from
  29. Traub, R.E. (1993). On the equivalence of the traits assessed by multiple choice and constructed-response tests. In R.E. Bennett& W.C. Ward (Eds.), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement (pp. 29-44). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  30. Vickery, G., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2007). Participative web and user-created content: Web 2.0

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. TWIT 1000: Tweeting in Teacher Education

    Joanna Zimmerle, Austin Peay State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2018 (Mar 26, 2018) pp. 2339–2344

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact