Effectively Integrating Social Media and Web Based Technologies into the Classroom without Lawyers: #SixStepModel

Abstract

Social media and digital technologies have become an integral part of our society. Educators now have the capability of incorporating technology based platforms into the classroom. This paper will outline a six-step model designed to assist educators with easing into this digital transition. Additionally, legal considerations and privacy concerns of utilizing technology in the classroom will be detailed to assist instructors with compliance and student privacy protection. Finally, an example of technologically based, cross-culture project, which utilized the six-step model will be presented.

The methods in which we communicate have been significantly altered and enhanced by the explosion of social media and digital technologies. Our society has learned a new normal which encompasses interactive technology and the ability to constantly connect and obtain real time information with the world around us with a simple click. These technological advancements can be incorporated into the classroom to assist in achieve learning objectives or potentially enhance the learning experience. A six-step model designed to assist educators with easing into this digital transition will be outlined in this paper. Privacy and legal considerations of utilizing technology in the classroom will also be explained to assist instructors with compliance and student privacy protection.

Using social media technologies in the classroom is a new concept that has evolved over the last decade and educators are just beginning to tap into the potential benefits. The University of Phoenix (2015) discovered that only 13% of educators have integrated social media in the classroom. Today’s college students use social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+, etc.) most often to connect with friends and family (89%) and to a lesser degree for educational purposes such as planning study sessions (28%), completing assignments and projects (33%), and communicating with faculty or advisors (15%) (NSSE, 2012)

While additional research is needed on the effectiveness of social media marketing in the classroom, some scholars are noting potential benefits. West, Moore, & Barry, (2015) agreed that the growing popularity of social media technologies has inspired researchers to explore the ways in which these platforms can be effectively incorporated into the classroom. Giebelhausen (2015) attested that when teachers use socialmedia to its fullest potential in the classroom, it allows for many new possibilities for the classroom, including higher levels of engagement, increased relevancy, and improved differentiated instruction levels. Schroeder, A., Minocha, S., & Schneider, C. (2010) suggested that integrating social media software into learning and teaching practices has the potential to trigger significant educational innovations as they enable new forms of interactive and collaborative learning.

Al-Bahrani & Patel (2015) suggested that using social media in the classroom can result in potential benefits including but not limited to (1) facilitating communication in making announcements, providing students direct communication with instructors, allowing shy students to communicate, and enabling connections among students;(2)improving the learning experience through posts about relevant economic articles or videos; (3) promoting collaboration among students; (4) allowing students to actively learn through the composition of relevant posts; and (5) making learning an enjoyable experience.

How to Incorporate Social Media into the Classroom:

The six-step model detailed below can provide an educator with guidance integrating social media platforms into lessons. McCorkle & CcCorkle (2012), Berk (2009), & Elmore (2014) suggested best practices and strategies for utilizing digital technologies in education that will be outlined below. A six-step model for integrating social media and digital technology into a course lesson has been created to ease into the transition. See Figure 1.

Figure 1: 6 Step Social Media Integration: Based on literature review McCorkle & CcCorkle (2012), Berk (2009), & Elmore (2014)

First, the learning objectives of the lesson and course should be established. Once the goals have been identified, the educator must select which technology based tool is most appropriate. This step entails analyzing the various social media platforms that exist to determine which ones would provide synergy or enhance the objectives. Al-Bahrani & Patel (2015) suggested that choosing a platform depends on functionality and the instructor’s purposes. Step 2 is critical because if the technology tool doesn’t correlate well with the lesson, success will not be obtained. However, to select the appropriate social media or digital technology, the educator must possess a basic understanding of social media applications and their functions. Table 1 shows social media classifications and their functions.

Table 1:

Media Classifications and Functions

Classification	Examples Elmore (2014)	Function McMeans (2015) & Devalle institute (2014)
Social Networking	Facebook Myspace Google+ LinkedIn	-Communicate informally with others, find people, and share similar interests -Directly connect with one another through groups, networks, and location
Microblogging	Twitter Tumbler	-Posting of very short entries or updates on a social networking site -Subscribe to other users’ content, send direct messages, and reply publicly – Create and share hashtags to share content about related subjects
Video Sharing	YouTube Vine Vimeo	-Publishing digital videos, enabling the user to share videos publicly and privately
Photo Sharing	Instagram Snapchat Flickr Pinterest	-Publishing digital photos, enabling public and private photo sharing

Additionally, in step 2, the instructor may want to consider prior research on each tool’s effectiveness in the classroom. For example, West, Moore, & Barry, (2015) suggested that recent studies investigating the pedagogical effectiveness of incorporating Twitter into learning environments suggested that Twitter supports knowledge creation and retention (Kassens-Noor, 2012), enhance social presence (Dunlap & Lowenthal, 2009), and motivate students through the application of new technologies (Moody, 2010). Additionally, Neier & Zayer (2015) conducted a research study to determine how different social media tool have the potential to enhance learning. Responds rated the potential of various social media platforms using a 5-point Likert-type scale was used where 1 = no potential and 5 = strong potential. See Table 2.

Table 2:

Social Media’s Potential to Enhance Learning

	N	X	SD
Professional focused social networks	129	4.23	0.9
Video content and sharing	126	4.09	0.83
Question and answer sites	127	3.80	1.05
Blogs	127	3.74	0.96
Social networking	129	3.44	1.12
Microblogging	127	3.32	0.92
RSS feeds	124	3.30	0.90
Social bookmarking	126	3.20	0.90
Photo sharing sites	127	3.19	1.15
Geo-location services	124	2.98	1.00
Pinning sites	128	2.79	1.18
Other	94	2.72	1.16
Virtual worlds	126	2.27	1.26
Social gaming	125	2.18	1.18

Note. Based on a 5-point scale where 1 = no potential, 2 = weak potential, 3 = neutral, 4 = some potential, and 5 = strong potential

According to Neier & Zayer (2015) professional focused social networks (x = 4.23, SD = 0.897), and sites for video content and sharing (x = 4.09, SD = 0.830) had the highest potential to enhance learning. Blogs, social networking, and microblogging also had a high potential. Sites such as YouTube, Twitter, Linked In, and Tumbler all fall into the categories listed above. However, a weaker potential was reported for geo-location services ( x = 2.98, SD = 1.000), pinning sites (x = 2.79, SD = 1.182), virtual worlds (x = 2.27, SD = 1.261), and social gaming ( x = 2.18, SD = 1.178). Pinning and other photo sharing sites, such as Pinterest, Snapchat, and Instagram also reported lower potential scores.

Step 3 involves practicing to ensure proficiency. Crowley (2015) suggested that the educator should select a social platform in which they possess experience with and understand the proper usage. Crowley continued to infer that the tool should also appropriately match the course, target market, and school’s policies.

Step 4 entails examining your universities’ technology use policy and legal issues. Legal issues are varied and nuanced and include compliance with both the Family Educational Rights and Privacy act of 1974 (FERPA) and intellectual property rights.

Understanding the Legal and institutional policy implications of a social media teaching environment

Teaching in a traditional classroom setting, even one enhanced by an online learning management system, instructors rarely need to concern themselves overly with complex legal issues. The self-contained nature of both the institution, the classroom, and an online learning management system tend to mitigate most of the issues identified here. Two of the most important legal issues an instructor is likely to encounter when presenting a socially media enabled course are privacy issues and intellectual property rights issues.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy act of 1974 (FERPA)

Passed in 1974, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, restricts the educational records an institution may share, regarding students, to individuals outside the institution structure. Although there is no private right of action in the statute (Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, Zona v. Clark Univ.), there have been several illustrative cases brought before the courts which have helped define what constitutes an “educational record.” For example, in Simpson v. Uniondale Union Free School District (2010) the court determined “…a piece of art, sculpture or poetry” created by a student did not constitute an educational record. Conversely, in Krebs v. Rutgers (1992) the court indicated a student roster with social security numbers embedded did constitute an educational record and posting of student grades associated with names would likely be a violation of FERPA .

The lack of individual standing to bring an action under FERPA does not invalidate the extent to which this law could impact an institution. The Department of education “…shall take appropriate actions to enforce this section” (20 U.S.C. § 1232g (f)). This can range from simple sanctions to the outright denial of public funding to the institution.

The implication of FERPA on a social media course is largely due to the concept of “vagueness” as it relates to the definition of an “educational record.” Does the membership a social media group constitute an educational record under the law? It is possible under a broad reading of the opinion in Krebs v. Rutgers (1992) this membership could constitute a roster. If the group somehow becomes public, an educational record has been published, likely without the consent of the students involved. This individually might not be fatal because there are not associated personally identifiable information such as social security numbers, however, if grades are attached to assignments within the group, it is likely this would constitute a violation of the statute. In a self-contained environment the risk of a FERPA violation is minimized because the institution is largely in control of the access to information. The appropriate form, waving FERPA, must be signed and submitted by a student before the institution will grant access by a third party to the protected educational records. Online courses contained in a learning management system will have educational records protected by passwords. Even if a student shares the password allowing access to their own educational records, they are not able, generally speaking, to access the educational records of another.

Mitigating the accidental release of an educational record involves ensuring proper use of the tools available in the social media enabled course as well as limiting the information available to the extent possible without impacting the learning goals. Al-Bahrani & Patel (2015) suggested that incorporating Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook in the classroom has some drawbacks. Privacy concerns remain a major issue. Each social media platform has different privacy settings that the educator must understand prior to project implementation. Trend Micro (2014) suggested that failing to embark upon social media privacy settings could result in the release of personal and private information thus making it easier for a cybercriminal to exploit a student’s information and result in phishing, malware infection, spam and other social media scams. See Table 3 for Facebook and Instagram Privacy Settings.

Table 3

Facebook and Instagram Privacy Settings

Social Media Platform	Privacy Settings
Facebook	Allows users to: -Create a private profile -Accept or deny follower requests -Control which content or posts are seen by accepted users -Block apps that may share their personal information -Block search engines outside of Facebook to link to users profile -Block ads that leverage personal data -Block unwanted users Source: Luckerson (2016)
Instagram	-Create a private profile -Accept or deny follower requests -Create any desired screen name resulting in real name not being displayed -Share or block content from being posted to other social media sites, including Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr -Block unwanted users

Intellectual Property Rights

After teaching even a single course, it is likely an instructor has encountered the difficulty in making students understand intellectual property rights and how the words and ideas of others should be properly incorporated. The European Commission’s Information Society Technologies Program (Interparty, 2009) noted that prior to the internet, intellectual property rights were more controlled if only because the access to information was more limited. They further went on to note that the theft of intellectual property has become more mainstream.

If a student uses the work of another when they are in the contained environment of a classroom, these indiscretions can be handled by either the academic policy of the instructor or the policy of the institution. In a social media enabled environment these very same acts might instead result in a cease and desist notification, take-down notice, or in particularly egregious cases, legal action, which while potentially creating an interesting teachable moment, is unlikely to be one of the learning objectives of the course.

It is remarkably easy to run afoul of perceived intellectual property violations, even in cases where no such violation exists. Corporations have developed automated “bots” which roam the internet looking for potential violations. To say these bots are prone to error is an understatement. A recent study indicates nearly thirty percent of take-down requests are potentially faulty. (Urban, 2016) In September of 2016, an automated notice was sent to Google from Warner Brothers demanding they take-down search results to sites owned by Warner Brothers for copyright violations. (Consumerist, 2016) The bots flagged their own sites as being in violation.

The instructor of a social media enabled course needs to have a firm understanding of both copyright and trademark law, the two most probable areas where a student is likely to encounter issues, and must relate the implications of these laws to the student. Additionally, the instructor must be aware of the defenses they possess under the law to shield them and the institution from liability should such an event occur and any institutional policies which might apply.

The most common way internet copyright or trademark violations are addressed are through the aforementioned “take-down notice”. These notices were created under Title I of the DMCA of 1998. The take-down notices were created to provide a simple cost-effective method for rights holders of protected work to enforce their rights. By the same token, they were designed to limit the liability of providers whose only fault was the hosting of such protected work. In particular 17 U.S.C. § 512 (c) indicates a service provider shall not be liable, for monetary or equitable relief, as long as they were unaware of the offending violation and respond expeditiously to a take-down notice.

What does this mean for the instructor of a social media course? In large part, offending violations of intellectual property rights will actually be handled by the platform being used for the course. The service provider will receive a take-down notice, and will likely respond by removing the offending material and providing notice to the user who posted it. The DMCA defines a “service provider” as “an entity offering the transmission, routing, or providing of connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user’s choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received” and “a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities therefore.”

Another component to the free exchange of information is the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996. Although originally passed to combat online pornography, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), it is now “one of the most valuable tools for protecting freedom of expression and innovation on the Internet.”

Under section 230 of the CDA, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” Under this provision, one who hosts information is not responsible for the content so posted. Without this provision, the vast majority of social media sites wouldn’t exist in the first place. More importantly, this provision extends to virtually anyone who hosts information. Even in cases where the host exercises some sort of editorial control over the information, to the extent of providing minor editing of the information. (Nemet Chevrolet, LTD. v. Consumeraffairs.com, Inc.)

Step 5 is the implementation phase where the project is completed by students. This step requires continuous monitoring by the professor. It is critical to be aware of the content that students are posting and sharing. Hunzicker (2015) suggested that a professor must establish clear expectations for outside of class communication and model professionalism through your virtual interactions with students. This will also be further examined in the proper usage and legality section of this paper.

Finally, step 6 involves assessing the achievement of the learning objectives. The educator should attempt to determine if the technology based tool contributed to student learning. The selection of the assessment tool and whether it is formative or summative should be determined by the instructor based upon the course learning goals.

Examples of Technology Based Projects:

This section will outline examples of how social media or web based programs were incorporated into the classroom at Georgian Court University.

Skype: A web based technology component was integrated into Dr. Ashley Elmore’s BU241: Principles of Marketing course at Georgian Court University. The objective was to educate students on the 5P’s of marketing, while also enhancing their knowledge of culture and global business. A group project entitled Business Across Borders: A Comparative Marketing Study, utilized asynchronous and synchronous communication with students at UNICAES Universidad Católica in El Salvador. Working collaboratively, teams from the United States and El Salvador compared the pricing, promotional techniques, target market, and product offerings of companies that operate in both regions. Skype was the tool that facilitated student communication. Photographs, videos, and projects were then shared on YouTube. Table 4 shows how the 6 Step Social Media Integration Model was implemented.

Table 4

The implementation of the 6 Step Social Media Integration Model

Step	How it was implemented
Step 1: Analyze Lessons Objectives	Educate students on 5Ps of Marketing Understand Global Marketing Explore a foreign culture
Step 2: Select Social Media Platform	Skype: for student networking Youtube: for sharing of videos or presentations
Step 3: Practice to Ensure Proficiency	Practice session held prior to actual Skype with students in El Salvador to ensure students were prepared and technology worked as intended
Step 4: Examine University Policy and Legal Issues	1) Obtain photograph release forms and collect student signatures 2)Obtain permissions from Institutional Review Board to collect student data in assessment section 3) Set up privacy settings on all technology
Step 5: Implementation	1)Set up skype sessions with students in El Salvador and ensured that a specialist from IT and a translator were present
Step 6: Assessment	1)Pre & Post Survey : Using technology based data collection website Survey Monkey The post-survey asked students to report their knowledge of business practices and marketing in El Salvador after completion of the project using a 5 point scale: 5=very knowledgeable (n=3) 25%; 4=moderate knowledge (n=8) 66.67%; 3=neutral (n=0) 0% ; 2=low knowledge (n=1) 8.33%, and 1=no knowledge (n=0) 0%. The post survey indicted a significant increase in student learning on marketing and business in El Salvador. 2) VALUE rubrics: Global Learning rubric

Conclusion:

The use of social media applications can provide educators with potential benefits in the classroom and assist in achieving learning objectives. Microblogging, video sharing, and social networking sites are all examples of technology based platforms that can be utilized. Educators can use the 6-step model presented in this article to incorporate technology based tools or social media into their lessons. The 6-step model provides the educator with guidance on analyzing the lesson objectives, selecting the platform, practicing to ensure proficiency, examining the university policy and legal issues, implementation, and assessment. Educators must be aware of legality in this new technology based arena. Legal issues and privacy concerns should not discourage instructor implementation as risks can be mitigated by understanding the basics of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy act of 1974 (FERPA), intellectual property rights, and the unique security features of each social media platform.

Because there was no private right of action, the court declined to differentiate between a roster containing social security numbers and a roster without social security numbers.
This would not only likely be a violation of the terms of service, absolving the institution of responsibility for the release, but a strong argument could be made the sharing of a password is in fact granting of a waiver to the third party receiving it.
This is a vast oversimplification of the excellent work done by Urban and her fellow authors however expansive review of the work is beyond the scope of this paper.
While it is certainly possible a student could violate patent law, design law, or a myriad of other niche areas of intellectual property law, it is improbable, and unless one is actually teaching a social media enabled intellectual property law class, likely beyond the scope of the class being taught.

References:

Al-Bahrani, A., & Patel, D. (2015). Incorporating Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook in Economics Classrooms. Journal of Economic Education 46(1), p 56-67.
Berk, R. (2009). Teaching strategies for the net generation. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.ronberk.com/articles/2009 _strategies.pdf
Communications Decency Act of 1996. 47 U.S.C. § 230 (2016).
Consummerist. (2016). Warner Bros. Demands Copyright Takedown Of Its Own Websites.
Retrieved from: https://consumerist.com/2016/09/06/warner-bros-demands-copyright-takedown-of-its-own-websites/
Crowley, B. (2015). Connecting a classroom: Reflections on using social media with my students. Retrieved from: http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2015/09/09/connecting-a- classroom-reflections-on-using-social.html
Devalle Institute. (2014). Social Media Overview. Retrieved from: http://www.delvalle.bphc.org/mod/wiki/view.php?pageid=83
Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2009). Tweeting the night away: Using Twitter to enhance social presence. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20, 129-135.
Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2016). CDA 230 The most Important Law Protecting Internet Speech. Retrieved from: https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
Elmore, A (2014). Should Universities Develop Courses or Degree Programs in Social Media
Marketing: Academy of Business Research Presentation, September 2014
Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974. 20 U.S.C. § 1232g (2001).
Giebelhausen, R. (2015). What the Tech Is Going On? Social Media and Your Music Classroom. General Music Today, 28 (2).
Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002)
Interparty. (2009) Intellectual property rights on the internet. Retrieved from: http://www.interparty.org/intellectual-property-rights-on-the-internet.html
Jana Hunzicker. (2015) Building Professor-Student Relationships in an Age of Social Networking. Retrieved from: http://ctl.byu.edu/tip/building-professor-student-relationships-age-social-networking
Kassens-Noor, E. (2012). Twitter as a teaching practice to enhance active and informal learning in higher education: The case of sustainable tweets. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(1), 9-21
Krebs v. Rutgers, 797 F. Supp. 1246 (1992)
Lam, Y. (2010). Technophilia vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why Second-Language Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology in Their Classrooms. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(3), p.389-420.
Luckerson, V. (2016). Make your Facebook profile more private in 6 easy steps. Available
http://time.com/4166749/facebook-privacy-settings-guide/
McCorkle, D., & CcCorkle, L. (2012). Using Linkedin in the Marketing Classroom: Exploratory Insights and Recommendations for Teaching SocialMedia/Networking. Marketing Education Review, 22(2), p157-166
McMeans, A. (2015). Incorporating Social Media into the Classroom. Education Journal, 135 (3), p.289-290.
National Survey of Student Engagement. (2012). Promoting Student Learning and Institutional Improvement: Lessons from NSSE at 13. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537442.pdf
Neier, S., & Zayer, L. (2015). Students’ Perceptions and Experiences of Social Media in Higher Education. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3) p. 133 –143.
Nemet Chevrolet, LTD. v. Consumeraffairs.com, Inc., 591 F.3d 250 (4th Cir. 2009)
Schroeder, A., Minocha, S., & Schneider, C. (2010). The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats of using social software in higher and further education teaching and learning.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 159–174
Simpson v. Uniondale Union Free Sch. Dist. F. Supp. 2d 122 (2010)
Thomas, R. (2016). Understanding the legal issues of social networking sites and their uses. Retrieved from:
http://technology.findlaw.com/modern-law-practice/understanding-the-legal-issues-for-social-networking-sites-and.html
Trend Micro. (2014). How to protect your social media privacy.
http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/online-privacy/how-to-protect-your-social-media-privacy
University of Phoenix (2016). Teachers in America Remain Reluctant to Integrate Social Media in the Classroom, Finds University of Phoenix Teacher Survey. Retrieved from http://www.phoenix.edu/news/releases/2016/08/k-12-teachers-remain-reluctantsocial-media.html
Urban, Jennifer M. and Karaganis, Joe and Schofield, Brianna L., Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice (March 29, 2016). UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2755628. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2755628
US Department of Education. (2016). Legislative History of Major FERPA Provisions. Retrieved from: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/leg-history.html
West, B., Moore, H., & Barry, B. (2015). Beyond the Tweet: Using twitter to enhance engagement, learning, and success among first-year students. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), p160-170.
Zona v. Clark Univ., 436 F. Supp. 2d 287 (D. Mass 2006)