Research gaps

The above discussions have evidenced that mobile learning using Facebook has increasingly become an important area in student learning engagement. Though many scholars and practitioners explored mobile learning (Huang, Lin & Chuang, 2007; Wang, Wu & Wang, 2009; Liu, Han, & Li, 2010; Cheon et al., 2012; Yang, 2013; Cheung, 2013; Hao, Dennen & Mei, 2017), Facebook (Chiu & Lee, 2011; Suki, Ramayah & Ly, 2012; Yang & Lin, 2011; Salim, 2012; Escobar-Rodríguez, Carvajal- Trujillo & Monge-Lozano, 2014), there are few empirical studies investigating the factors influencing Facebook for mobile learning in the higher education in Hong Kong.

Though some researchers used different technology acceptance models to conduct empirical studies on mobile learning in different contexts, there is insufficient evidence that the technology acceptance models could be applied perfectly to all different contexts. Some major predictors, including facilitating conditions and social influences, fail to influence the adoption of mobile learning in empirical studies (Yang, 2013; Cheon et al., 2012; Wong, Teo & Russo, 2013; Schaper & Pervan, 2007; Park, Yang & Lehto, 2007; Carlsson et al., 2006). Similar issues have arisen in the empirical study of the adoption in Facebook for learning (Salim, 2012; Cheung, Chiu & Lee, 2011; Suki, Ramayah & Ly, 2012). Besides, mobile learning is highly

facilitated by the power of the mobile device or smartphone, the features of the mobile device may affect the success of mobile learning (Koole, 2009). However, there is limited research exploring the factors of Interactive Learning and Device Usability (Koole, 2009; Cheung, 2013).

Figure 2.1 shows the research gap. There are three major research areas of mobile learning, i.e. (1) authentic & situated learning, (2) collaboration, (3) teaching & learning support and (4) behavior. Past literature focused on authentic & situated mobile learning includes (a) Authentic learning (Herrington & Herrington, 2007), (b) Web 2.0 mobile framework (Cochrane, 2012), (c) Transfer the mobile framework (Cochrane & Withell, 2013), (d) Web 2.0 & mobile learning (Waycott and Kennedy, 2009), (e) Student attitude to mobile learning (Heflin, Shewmaker & Nguyen, 2017), (f) Student motivation in mobile learning (Ciampa, 2014), (g) Factors: Socio-cultural and situated learning (Botzer & Yerushalmy, 2007). Examples of collaborative mobile learning are (a) Collaborative learning model (Cruz-Flores & Lopez-Morteo, 2008), (b) Model for mobile learning in distance education (Park, 2011), (c) Mobile web 2.0 framework (Cochrane & Bateman, 2013) and (d) Student motivation in mobile learning (Ciampa, 2014). There are five studies belonging to teaching and learning support in mobile learning, i.e. (a) Student-centered learning (Low & O’Connell, 2006), (b) Blended mobile learning (Chilcott & Hadfield, 2009), (c) Peer-to-peer mobile learning model (Yao, 2010), (d) A success model for mobile learning (Elmorshidy, 2013) and (e) Individual & peer learning support (Cheng et al., 2011). In terms of behavioral study, there are studies including (a) Age & gender difference in mobile learning adoption (Wang et al., 2009), (b) M-learning acceptance (Liaw et al., 2010), (c) M-learning adoption model (Liu et al., 2010) and (d) Mobile learning acceptance (Hao, Dennen & Mei, 2017). Regarding social media, there are two major research areas, i.e. (1) learning and (2) benefit, concern and other issues. Example of research studies in social media learning are (a) Personal learning environment (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012), (b) Health communication (Moorhead et al., 2013), (c) Teaching crowds (Dron & Anderson, 2014), (d) Governance challenge (Obar & Wildman, 2015) and (e) Student learning styles (Balakrishnan & Gan, 2016). In terms of the benefit, concern and issues about social media, there are research studies like (a) Challenges and opportunities (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010) and (b) Social fake news (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017).

There are extensive literatures studying either mobile learning or social media. However, in view of the popularity of social media and smartphone as well as students’ engagement on social media and mobile devices, scholars have started to investigate mobile learning using social media. There are two major research areas, namely, (1) benefit and concern and (2) technology adoption. Examples of research study about the benefit and concern of mobile learning using social media are (a) issues (Sobaih et al., 2016), (b) student perspectives (Gikas & Grant, 2013), (c) influencers and trends (Shen, Kuo & Ly, 2017) and (d) Learning attention (Drigas et al., 2014). In terms of technology adoption using social media for mobile learning, there are some studies, for instance, (a) Mobile learning acceptance (Sharma, Sarrab & Al-Shihi, 2017) and (b) User behavior (Ray & Saeed, 2015). However, there are few studies focused on the technology adoption of Facebook for mobile learning. Therefore, it is necessary to address this research gap in order to investigating the factors influencing the student adoption of mobile learning using social media. The research findings are very important because these can help teachers understand how to implement mobile learning via social network successfully.

Teaching & Learning support

 Student-centered learning (Low & O’Connell, 2006)

 Blended mobile learning (Chilcott & Hadfield, 2009)

 Peer-to-peer mobile learning model (Yao, 2010)

 A success model for mobile learning (Elmorshidy, 2013)

 Individual & peer learning support (Cheng et al.,

2011)

Authentic and situated learning

 Authentic learning (Herrington & Herrington, 2007)

 Web 2.0 & mobile learning (Waycott and Kennedy,

2009)

 Factors: Socio-cultural and situated learning

(Botzer & Yerushalmy, 2007)

 Web 2.0 mobile framework (Cochrane, 2012)

 Transfer the mobile framework (Cochrane &

Withell, 2013)

 Student motivation in mobile learning (Ciampa,

2014)

 Student attitude to mobile learning (Heflin,

Shewmaker & Nguyen, 2017)

 Age & gender difference in mobile learning adoption (Wang et al., 2009)

 M-learning acceptance (Liaw et al., 2010)

 M-learning adoption model (Liu et al., 2010)

 Mobile learning acceptance (Hao, Dennen & Mei,

2017)

Behavior

Collaboration

 Collaborative learning model (Cruz-Flores

& Lopez-Morteo, 2008)

 Model for mobile learning in distance education (Park, 2011)

 Mobile web 2.0 framework (Cochrane &

Bateman, 2013)

 Student motivation in mobile learning

(Ciampa, 2014)

 Personal learning environment (Dabbagh &

Kitsantas, 2012)

 Health communication (Moorhead et al., 2013)

 Teaching crowds (Dron & Anderson, 2014)

 Governance challenge (Obar & Wildman, 2015)

 Student learning styles (Balakrishnan & Gan, 2016)

Learning Benefit, concern and other issues

 Challenges and opportunities (Kaplan & Haenlein,

2010)

 Social fake news (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017) Benefits and concerns

 issues (Sobaih et al., 2016)

 Student perspectives (Gikas & Grant, 2013)

 Influencers and trends (Shen, Kuo & Ly, 2017)

 Learning attention (Drigas et al., 2014)

Technology adoption

 Mobile learning acceptance (Sharma, Sarrab &

Al-Shihi, 2017)

 User behavior (Ray & Saeed, 2015)

Mobile learning

Social media

Research gap: Facebook for Mobile learning

For the purpose of discussion in this study, the researcher has adopted seven common but important determinants to investigate their relationships with behavioral intention. These seven determinants have been widely tested in technology adoption research and confirmed by practitioners and scholars, namely, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, hedonic motivation, habit, social presence, interactive learning and device usability. Performance expectancy is chosen because of its strong behavioral intention predicting power in the prior literature (Chiu & Wang, 2008; Lee et al., 2011; Paola et al., 2011, Bakar et al., 2013; Oshlyansky et al., 2007; Tan, 2013; Shin & Kim, 2008; Cheung & Vogel, 2013; Wang et al., 2009). Similarly, effort expectancy is chosen because prior literature has evidenced its strong behavioral intention predicting power (Chiu & Wang, 2008; Lee et al., 2011; Paola et al., 2011, Bakar et al., 2013; Oshlyansky et al., 2007; Tan, 2013; Shin & Kim, 2008; Cheung & Vogel, 2013). Hedonic motivation is chosen because scholars have evidenced its increasingly important role in mobile learning (Huang, Lin & Chuang, 2007; Wang, Wu & Wang, 2009; Liu, Han, & Li, 2010; Cheon et al., 2012; Yang, 2013; Cheung, 2013) and Facebook (Chiu & Lee, 2011; Suki, Ramayah & Ly, 2012; Yang & Lin, 2011; Salim, 2012; Escobar-Rodríguez, Carvajal-Trujillo & Monge-Lozano, 2014). In view of the growing popularity of smartphones and social media (Pew Research Center, 2015a-e), the use of Facebook and smartphones has become a habitual action in students’ daily lives (Giannakos et al., 2013; Perlow, 2012). Besides, prior studies have evidenced the significant relationship between habit and the actual usage behavior in areas including Facebook (Giannakos et al., 2013) and smartphones (Perlow, 2012), taobao.com (Pahnila et al., 2011), sporadic-use IT (Wilson et al., 2010), mobile payments (Dahlberg & Ö örni, 2007), airline e-commerce (Rodríguez & Trujill, 2013) and learning management software (Raman & Don, 2013). Therefore, it is reasonable to include habit as one of the determinants in this study. Social presence is chosen because scholars like Cheung et al., (2011) evidenced that social presence exhibited the strongest predicting power on students’ intention to use Facebook for learning. Interactive learning and device usability are chosen because the mobile device or smartphone plays an important role in mobile learning (Koole, 2009, Cheung, 2013). Therefore, this study (1) addresses the absence of research into the adoption of Facebook for mobile learning in the context of Hong Kong by examining the critical determinants which are identified in past literature, including: habit, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, hedonic motivation, device usability, interactive

learning and social presence; (2) contributes to the body of literature about the blend of teaching and learning using Facebook and smartphones in order to facilitate student learning; (3) clarifies the concerns of some researchers about the appropriateness of using social network sites for learning purposes; and (4) discusses business opportunities for mobile learning in higher education in Hong Kong.