Presented in GloCALL 2015, Daejeon, Korea, 12-14 November 2015 Abstract The benefits of Social Networking Sites (SNSs) for academic purposes have been extensively researched. In the studies of social capital and how through SNSs social capital can be formed and maintained, some studies have suggested that SNSs may build strong network and such network could benefit students in terms of educational attainment, achievement, and psychosocial factors (Ye, 2006; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Phua & Jin, 2011; Lin, Peng, Kim, Yeun Kim, & LaRose, 2012; Tamam, 2013) . However, the studies also found some barriers and implications of SNSs in the process of learning. Most of the studies in social capital in SNSs were conducted in the context of formal education settings, in which SNSs were treated either as a part of certain courses, or relevant to students' formal education status. This study is going to be conducted in the context of informal discussion in English learning Facebook groups, with various types of members, both formal students and those who are interested in learning English. In particular, the study is going to employ the framework of social capital and actor-network theory in analyzing the discourse among the learners in order to find out the influencing factors and types of social capital that may be beneficial in learning English. Keywords Social Networking Sites, Social Capital, Actor-Network Theory, Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis, Learning English Bio Neny Isharyanti is currently a lecturer at the English Education program of Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga, Indonesia. Her research interests include Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis and sociolinguistics.

1. The benefits&
implicationsof
learninglanguage
usingfacebook
group
Neny Isharyanti
Satya Wacana Christian University
Salatiga, Indonesia

2. overview
• Curiosity
• Experts Said
• The Study
• The Results
• In Retrospect
• Q & A
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

3. CURIOSITY
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

4. Social media usage worldwide
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2542749/Facebook-favourite-
social-network-teens-beating-YouTube-Twitter.html
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

5. Indonesia?
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

6. 21st centurylearners
• https://edtechdigest.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/trends-infographic-learn-now-lecture-later/GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

7. EXPERTS
SAID
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

8. Languagelearning process
• Faerch & Kasper (1983)
 Communicative Competence: linguistics,
pragmatics, sociolinguistics competence
• Schieffelin & Ochs (1986)
 language learning process is not only a
transformative linguistic mental process, but it
also situated in social and cultural contexts
which help transforming/ creating human
understanding.
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

9. Language learningprocessin 21st
century
• Contexts  F2F & online
• The potentials and promising offers of
online contexts in assisting language
learning (Lamy & Zourou, 2013; Meskill,
2012; Thomas, 2011)
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

10. Actor-network theory
• Law (2007), Fenwick & Edwards (2010),
Sismondo (2010)
 Network – language learning
 Actor – objects, subjects, human beings,
machines, animals, ‘nature’, ideas,
organizations, inequalities, scale and sizes,
and geographical arrangements”
• Sustained language learning
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

11. Social capital
• Bordieu (1986); Putnam (1993); Bordieu & Wacquant (1992)
 “one’s accumulated social relationships with others, and is
defined as the sum of the resources, actual or virtual, that
accrue to an individual or a group by virtue of possessing a
durable network of more or less institutionalized
relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition” (p.
119) .
• Social capital in learning (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;
Phua & Jin, 2011; Greenhow & Burton, 2011)
• Social capital in Facebook (Wang et al., 2013)
 achieving better grades, higher engagement, and greater
satisfaction with the university learning experience.
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

12. Types of social capital
• Bonding – close, personal relationship for
emotional support & personal benefits
• Bridging – casual acquaintances and
connections for information & analytic
diversity benefits
• Maintained – online & offline relationship
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

13. THE STUDY
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

14. Research questions
• Who are the important bridging actors?
• What are the influences of social capital of
the actors in the process of language
learning?
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

15. context
• English for Specific Purposes
 Business English for International Classes for
Management and Accounting Program, Satya Wacana
Christian University, Salatiga, Indonesia)
• Blended Learning
 F2F
 Online
• Aims/Assessments:
 Job search: writing a letter of application & curriculum
vitae, job interview
 Cross-Cultural Understanding: online discussion on
business cases
 Business Project – writing a proposal, presenting the
proposal
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

16. methodology
• Focus on the online context
• Social Network Analysis
 Interaction on Facebook group
 NodeXL
• Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis
 Transcript
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

17. THE
RESULTS
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

18. Who’s important?
• Eigenvector + Closeness Centrality
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

19. Who’s important?
• On a closer look..
Participants TOEFL
score
Course
Scores
Class
Rank
(Pre)
Class
Rank
(Post)
In-
Degree
Out-
Degree
Betweenness
Centrality
Eigenvector
Centrality
Comments
Received
Comments
Created
Total
Comments
TMK 437 72.19 Low Low 9 13 10.18 0.07 17 38 55
KR 503 73.50 Mid Low 14 6 13.52 0.07 28 8 36
SD 443 82.28 Low High 10 9 6.86 0.07 24 22 46
SS 417 72.52 Low Low 12 6 9.05 0.06 25 18 43
ES 440 73.61 Low Low 9 8 12.74 0.06 15 11 26
DH 537 79.59 High High 10 6 6.09 0.06 12 6 18
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

20. Effects onlearning
• Inconclusive
• But…
 What abilities/skills are emphasized?
 Assessment methods?
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

21. PARTICIPATION
• F2F class discussions
 Tangible
 Extrovert students
 Listening and Speaking abilities
 Short processing information – unequal footing
• Online class discussions
 Intangible (numbers don’t always count)
 Extrovert AND introvert students
 Reading and Writing abilities
 Give more time to process information, at students’
paces – equal footing
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

22. IN
RETROSPEC
T
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

23. Abilities/Skills focus
• Linguistic abilities?
• Other abilities?
• Linguistics
 Syntactic abilities
 Semantic abilities
 Pragmatics abilities
 Sociolinguistic abilities
• Linguistically weak students not
communicative students
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

24. benefits
• More equal opportunities
 Diversity in students’ learning background
• Learning styles
• Cognitive processes
• Communication style /skills
• Linguistics abilities
• Varied contexts exposure
 F2F vs. online
• Variety in Assessments
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

25. Implications
• Course design
 Objectives of learning
 Skills emphasized
 Fair opportunities
 Recognition of other skills than linguistics
abilities/skills
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

26. limitations
• Limited data
 Number of students
 Number of interactions
 Length of data collection
• CMDA has not been employed yet
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015

27. ANY
QUESTIONS
?
neny@staff.uksw.edu
@nenyish
about.me/neny
GloCALL 2015 | Daejeon, South Korea | 13112015