Risks or Issues for teachers

The teacher group were asked what were their biggest concerns about using Facebook as part of their teaching and they raised some important points. The issues which emerged related to: (i) Institutional support (Section 4.3.5.1): (ii) academic integrity (Section 4.3.5.2); (iii) teacher responsibility in managing personal privacy and safety (Section 4.3.5.3); and (iv) resistance to change (Section 4.3.5.4).

4.3.5.1 Institutional support

Teacher 3 said that his biggest concern is that there seems to be many technology initiatives within the vocational Institute and said that the “question is where does it stop? You can use this, you can use that … hundreds of platforms that you could use for the same thing. What do we use?” He seemed to be overwhelmed with the ever-changing technology introduced by the institute. Teacher 4 responded that “we use what the students want.” The teachers agreed that Facebook was what the students seemed to want to use.

Teacher 1 instead said his biggest concerns come from “a completely different area. [My concern is] about the lack of institute management support.” Teacher 1 referred to the code of conduct and how the institute has identified “all of the reasons why we can’t use it [Facebook] but no one has actually designed a risk management strategy.” His thoughts were that any risks or issues that arose from using Facebook as part of the teaching and learning process could be identified and minimised through a proper risk management process. There appeared to be a sense of frustration that the institute tended to avoid using new systems and processes if there were any associated risks rather than identifying potential risks and implementing mitigation strategies.

Teacher 5 agreed saying that “the issue here is enablement support. I would use it [Facebook] but I don’t know all of the ramifications. I don’t know what I can do, what the facilities are. I also need to know, what’s the support?” He felt that he would need to know what training and support he would have access to before committing to using Facebook. Teacher 5 also agreed with Teacher 3 that there was already a considerable amount of technology being introduced at the institute and that “the social network universe is a complex one. [We should] choose one and learn it and once you’ve mastered that, then deal with that.” Teacher 2 agreed saying “yes, they’re all going to have the same sort of features anyway, instant messaging and other functions but just different buttons.” The teacher group indicated that while they were not opposed to learning and using new technology, such as Facebook, as part of their teaching, they had concerns about the amount of support they would receive from the institute.

4.3.5.2 Academic integrity

Teacher 3 asked a question about using Facebook as a potential Learning Management System (LMS) and was concerned about how it would work and if there was the potential for students to copy each other’s work. He asked “If we are using it to upload assignments does that assignment just go to the teacher or does everyone get to see it in the group? So that when someone does it everyone copies it?” From this question there was considerable discussion about using Facebook more to share information and links and to post reminders to students rather than as an LMS. The teachers who had little knowledge of Facebook and its uses tried to understand how it would work through comparisons with existing systems within the institute. Teacher 1 explained that Facebook was for “a different audience and different information. It does not have to compete. ” It was explained that it was more of an addition to existing resources rather than a replacement.

4.3.5.3. Teacher responsibility in managing personal privacy and safety

Teacher 2 conceded that Facebook provided a space where the students could ask questions and was probably “more fun than the classroom or teaching environment but privacy, bullying and those students who don’t know how to use it might be a little bit scared to use it.” Privacy and bullying were “big” issues for her. She conceded that “with more adult students it is probably less likely to happen” but

76 Chapter 4: Results

Teacher 1 countered by saying that “it can still happen” but could also occur within the classroom.

Teacher 5 agreed saying that there is potential for bullying to even occur

“outside of the classroom where you have no control as a teacher.” Both Teacher 2 and Teacher 5 posed similar questions about duty of care and Teacher 5 asked

“where does our duty of care stop?” They discussed that some responsibility must lie with the students themselves and Teacher 2 said “we can’t be responsible for everything, every time, everywhere. There has to be some degree of responsibility with the students.” So it appears that while privacy and bullying were real concerns for the teachers they understood that this issue already exists, it’s nothing new because of Facebook. They agreed that there would have to be clear rules, expectations and consequences set for the groups if they were to use Facebook.

4.3.5.4 Resistance to change

Teacher 5 raised the issue of teacher resistance should the Institution ask teachers to adopt Facebook in their teaching. He said “the biggest concern for me would be for teachers forced into using this … we still have the controlling concept of the teacher.

Because you are giving away control – that is what you are doing - and you are now becoming more of a guide.” This feeling of giving away their control was an issue influencing his use of Facebook as it was a place that students could go to get answers, an alternative to the teacher alone.

Teacher 4 agreed saying “there’s always going to be those teachers that don’t want to change. Having the time to learn it, having the time to put good stuff up there … you’re always going to have those issues.” There seemed to be this concern around how much extra time would be required to use Facebook as part of their teaching when they believed that their time was already stretched. Teacher 5 suggested that to reduce the time factor, perhaps a Facebook page could be used to mentor others. He suggested the site could be used to teach others how to use it and explain the features of Facebook. Teacher 1 replied to the teachers’ concerns about time and said “you mentioned workload … can I just say I am getting more engagement for less work because it’s driven by students.” This comment seemed to impress the other teachers and they appeared to ponder this thought.