1. Professor-student friendship on facebook CUHK undergraduates’ attitudes WU, Ka Chun Eymon (1009632403) CHIU, Ho Pak Irwin (1009614763) CHIANG, Ka Chon (1009618033) AU-YEUNG, Wai Kai (1009632073)

2.  Facebook  Widely used in modern society  A former Missouri public school student was molested by a teacher decades ago  Debate - whether it is suitable for teachers and students to have private friendships or online communications in the US  In August of 2011, the debate reached legal territory Background

3.  State of Missouri initiated a law  take effect on August 28th  ban private or exclusive online teacher-student relationships (including facebook friendship)  Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website to communicate with students, unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian  Hot debate in the United States and elsewhere "Amy Hestir Student Protection Act"

4.  Should there be absolute boundaries for teachers in their online relationships?  Is teacher-student relationship online an evil?

5.  Currently, there are 3 818 120 facebook (fb) users in the Hong Kong  #38 in the ranking of all fb statistics by country Hong Kong Facebook Statistics

6.  Facebook penetration in Hong Kong is 53.85% (in the whole population)  Among Internet users, 78.26% are fb users  Total number of facebook users in Hong Kong is reaching 3818120 as at Oct 21, 2011  Growing by >160 100 in the last 6 months Users & Demography of Hong Kong

8.  There are a large number of facebook users in Hong Kong, including students in universities and secondary schools  Can interact with large group of people easy via facebook  More research on the social interaction via facebook between teachers and students should be carried out to investigate its effect on students and hence as a guide to education policy

9.  However, currently there is not much research on teacher-student friendship on facebook in HK

10.  To investigate CUHK undergraduate students’ attitudes towards professor-student friendship on facebook (Aim: to describe the current situation)  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and student engagement at university (Hypothesis: positive relationship)  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship) Research Objectives

11.  To investigate the relationship between having professors as facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship)  To investigate whether communication between students and professors via facebook will affect communication in the real world  To investigate whether students’ friendship establishment with professors on facebook will affect professor-student relationship in the real world

12.  In a research concerning “Using Twitter to Support Engagement in the College Classroom” in 2009, it had been found that there is a positive relationship between student engagement in social media and their success in school Current findings

13.  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and student engagement at university (Hypothesis: positive relationship)  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship)  To investigate the relationship between having professors as facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship)  To investigate whether facebook friendship establishment between students and professors will affect real-life relationship (Hypothesis: positive relationship) Hypothesis

14.  Questionnaire (online and paper)  Try to distribute questionnaires to undergraduate students from different faculty and in different year of study to minimize any bias from convenience sampling  Data collection lasted for about 2 weeks  Questionnaires collected: 531 Methodology

15. Data demography

18. Results

25. People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

45.  Need to have sense of humor  Need to be willing to help students  Need to know each other beforehand  Need to have at least some real-life verbal communication beforehand  Common beliefs or cooperation in a task may not be necessary Conclusion – to be fb friends

55.  Tools  Paired t-test  determines whether responses from the same group differ from each other in a significant way (i.e. not by chance)  Unpaired t-test  determines whether responses from the 2 independent groups differ from each other in a significant way (i.e. not by chance) Data analysis

56. Can facebook friendship affect real- life professor-student relationship?

58. Group Not friend on facebook yet If profs not accept friend req Mean5.324.63 SD2.332.51 SEM0.10.11 N531

59. Paired t test results P value and statistical significance: The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001 By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval: The mean of “Not friend on facebook yet” minus “If profs not accept friend req” equals 0.68 95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.56 to 0.81 Intermediate values used in calculations: t = 10.7089 df = 530 standard error of difference = 0.064

60.  Therefore, professors not accepting facebook friend request from students may significantly undermine students’ intention to greet professors in normal circumstances

63. Group Not friend on facebook yet After being fb friend with pro Mean5.325.87 SD2.332.07 SEM0.10.09 N531

64. Paired t test results P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval:  The mean of “Not friend on facebook yet” minus “After being fb friend with profs” equals -0.55  95% confidence interval of this difference: From -0.68 to -0.43 Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 8.5031  df = 530  standard error of difference = 0.065

65.  Therefore, after being friend on facebook, students tend to have significantly higher intention to greet with professors

66.  Taking the two statistical analysis into account, it seems online social relationship tends to be positively related to real-life social relationship

67.  Like to be fb friends with professors (score: 5-8)  Don’t like to be fb friend with professors (score: 0-3) Student engagement at university and their intention to friend professors on facebook

70. Group Like friending profs don't like friending profs Mean6.184.98 SD1.392.01 SEM0.090.16 N216 151 Intention to attend lessons

71. P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval:  The mean ofLike friending profs minus don't like friending profs equals 1.20  95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.85 to 1.55 Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 6.7600  df = 365  standard error of difference = 0.178

72.  Therefore, students who like to be facebook (fb) friends with professors tend to be significantly more willing to attend lessons

74. Group Like friending profs don't like friending profs Mean6.184.98 SD1.392.01 SEM0.090.16 N216 151 Intention to submit homework

75. Unpaired t test results P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval:  The mean of “Like friending profs” minus “don't like friending profs” equals 1.33  95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.89 to 1.77 Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 5.9042  df = 367  standard error of difference = 0.225 Intention to submit homework

76.  Therefore, students who like being fb friends with professors tend to has significantly higher intention to submit homework

78. Group Like friending profs don't like friending profs Mean5.825.12 SD1.351.91 SEM0.090.15 N216 153 Intention to pay attention in classes

79. Unpaired t test results P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval:  The mean ofLike friending profs minus don't like friending profs equals 0.70  95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.37 to 1.04 Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 4.1327  df = 367  standard error of difference = 0.170

80.  Therefore, students who like being fb friends with professors tend to has significantly higher intention to pay attention in classes

82. Group Like friending profs don't like friending profs Mean4.573.71 SD1.812.18 SEM0.120.18 N216 153

83. Unpaired t test results P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant. Confidence interval:  The mean ofLike friending profs minus don't like friending profs equals 0.86  95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.45 to 1.27 Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 4.1507  df = 367  standard error of difference = 0.208

84.  Therefore, students who like being fb friends with professors tend to has significantly higher willingness to answer professors’ questions (a measure of active participation in classes)

86. Group Like friending profs don't like friending profs Mean5.534.82 SD1.732.02 SEM0.120.16 N216 153

87.  Unpaired t test results  P value and statistical significance:  The two-tailed P value equals 0.0004  By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant.  Confidence interval:  The mean ofLike friending profs minus don't like friending profs equals 0.70  95% confidence interval of this difference: From 0.32 to 1.09  Intermediate values used in calculations:  t = 3.5911  df = 367  standard error of difference = 0.196

88.  Therefore, students who like being fb friends with professors tend to has significantly higher willingness to participate in extra-curricular activities

89. Friendship and academic status

91. Desire to friend professors and academic status

92.  Any explanation?  Friended but not active or don’t like?  Like but not friended yet? Thinking

93.  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and student engagement at university (Hypothesis: positive relationship  yes!!!)  To investigate the relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship-  yes!!!)  To investigate the relationship between having professors as facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship-  No… need further investigation)  To investigate whether facebook friendship establishment between students and professors will affect real-life relationship (Hypothesis: positive relationship-  yes!!!) Hypothesis proved true?

94.  Time and human resources  Questionnaire coverage and representativeness of the result  Can only identify association but not the casual relationship Limitations

95.  Our research may give some clues on education mode that may enhance students’ engagement in school as well as learning  Recognize students’ desire and make good use of it to boost student engagement at universities, which may further help with students’ academic status Suggestions

96.  +ve relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and student engagement at university  +ve relationship between the desire of being professors’ facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship  -ve relationship between having professors as facebook friends and academic status (Hypothesis: positive relationship  +ve Relationship facebook friendship establishment between students and professors will affect real-life relationship Conclusion