Using social networking sites as a language teaching and learning environment

1. Introduction

The growing adoption of emerging technologies for language pedagogy, literacy development, and language assessment has accelerated computer-assisted language learning (CALL) as a major field of education and led to the establishment of major specialized journals, such as Language Learning and Technology, Computer Assisted Language Learning, and ReCALL. As technologies further advanced, we began to see individuals and schools increasingly adopt CALL technologies and use their interactive features to facilitate language learning. Consequently, CALL research began to gain momentum and expand its research foci during the mid-1990s (Levy, 2000; Uzunboylu & Ozcinar, 2009). This expansion gave birth to some independent and stand-alone subfields, such as computer-assisted language testing (CALT) (Parmaxi et al., 2013).

Three decades ago, language pedagogy was criticized for its overwhelmingly cognitive orientation and its failure to consider the social aspects of language teaching and learning (Firth & Wagner, 1997; Matsuoka & Evans, 2004). As such, the sociocultural theory emerged as an alternative perspective and has since been applied to a wide array of approaches and areas, such as second language acquisition and language pedagogy (Lantolf & Beckett, 2009; Lantolf et al., 2015; Swain et al., 2015). With the advent of internet-based tools and services that facilitate content creation and sharing (i.e., Web 2.0 technologies), this theoretical perspective directs second language (L2) scholars’ attention to the socially engaged, relational, and participatory practices in CALL. This social turn gave rise to social media as a viable pedagogical tool for language learning (Reinhardt, 2020). As a type of Web 2.0 technology, social media allow individuals to generate and share content, organize information, and interact with one another within an online community (Hew & Cheung, 2013; Manca, 2020*). It includes wikis, blogs, discussion forums, social bookmarking, video-sharing sites, photo-sharing sites, and social networking sites (SNS) (Chugh & Ruhi, 2019; Reinhardt, 2019*). Although the distinction between social media and SNS may be blurred by the constantly evolving Web 2.0 technologies, Reinhardt (2019*, p. 17) distinguishes SNS as a form of social media technology that integrates photo hosting, multimedia sharing, chatting, and messaging and allows users to post status updates in reverse chronological order with threaded discussions. They may be commercial and non-educational, which are not originally designed for learning (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, Twitter), or non-educational, which are originally designed for learning (e.g., Busuu). Unlike other social media platforms, SNS allow users with similar interests to form connections and construct social relationships. It is this definition that this research timeline adopts. Some of the most popular SNS in terms of active users are Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, Instagram, Tumblr, Snapchat, Twitter, Pinterest, MySpace, WeChat, Tik Tok, QQ, and Weibo (Statista, 2022). The majority of them were developed in the United States (US), except the last four, which were developed in China.

The growing interest of L2 scholars and educators in SNS is driven by its massive popularity, flexible features that allow learners to choose how the learning process should be organized based on the demands of the learning context, and reported efficacy in improving learners’ language skills, autonomy, digital literacy, and intercultural awareness (Barrot, 2021a; Chugh & Ruhi, 2018; Manca, 2020*). To date, almost half of the world's population use SNS for both personal and professional reasons (Statista, 2022); the majority of them are teenagers and young adults (OECD, 2019). SNS also offers various features that allow teachers to share resources, facilitate collaboration and interaction, address students’ different learning styles, deliver instruction interactively, and create a socially engaging learning environment (Chugh & Ruhi, 2018; Manca, 2020*; Manca & Ranieri, 2016a; Menzies et al., 2017). With reference to its efficacy, many researchers made a strong case in favor of SNS as a language learning and teaching environment (see Barrot, 2018*, 2021a; Hattem & Lomicka, 2016; Manca, 2020*; Reinhardt, 2019*; Solmaz, 2018). As a way to move forward, it is critical to obtain a historical and global view of the research landscape in this area and monitor its development. Thus, this research timeline aims to chart the emerging tendencies and historical trajectory of SNS as a language teaching and learning environment. In particular, I place emphasis on the evolution of methodological approaches and the expansion of research in terms of SNS platforms, topical foci, use, and context. This paper complements Reinhardt's (2019)* state-of-the-art review of research on social media in second and foreign language teaching and learning as it covers the latest studies since Reinhardt's review and provides readers with an up-to-date overview and key developments in SNS research in a time-oriented way. Unlike the topically arranged review of Reinhardt, this research timeline presents the developmental curve in this line of research chronologically.

2. Key research developments in SNS as language teaching and learning environment

With the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies, it is not surprising that research in this area is increasing, internationalizing, and diversifying. The sheer volume of studies on this topic provided us with a glimpse of how SNS has evolved to adapt to the dynamic landscape of language pedagogy. Anchored on the developmental curve reported by Boulton (2017), this research timeline identified three periods: emergence, early expansion and sophistication, and consolidation. These key developments are not dichotomous and rigidly linear because this field can move from one period to another recursively in a given time. They are also not mutually exclusive as a collection of studies may be simultaneously categorized in two adjacent periods.

The first collection of studies corresponds to the period of emergence (approximately between 2009 and 2013) in which a small number of scholars had undertaken descriptive studies, which are mostly concentrated on technology use and evaluation. These studies tended to focus on high-profile SNS, such as Facebook (e.g., Kabilan et al., 2010*). Others investigated teachers’ preferences (Eröz-Tuğa & Sadler, 2009*) and whether SNS was effective in promoting L2 writing development (e.g., Shih, 2011*) and language practices outside of class time (e.g., Lomicka & Lord, 2012*). Except for Lantz-Andersson et al. (2013*), nearly all were conducted in a higher education context. These studies began to produce evidence that points to students’ preference for using SNS as a language learning platform. In particular, students perceived SNS to have useful impacts on their language skills, motivation, and confidence. The first collection of studies also provided empirical support for its usability in facilitating interaction, collaborative learning, and writing development. As forerunners, some of these pieces (i.e., Kabilan et al., 2010*; Shih, 2011*) remain to be influential in the field of CALL and SNS research as manifested by the citations they received.

The second period corresponds to the early expansion and sophistication (approximately beginning 2014), where a spike in productivity and a more focused and theoretically and empirically grounded collection of studies were seen. Alongside this expansion is the adoption of increasingly sophisticated and rigorous methodologies using multiple data sources. Experimental research designs began to be an instrument of choice in validating the effectiveness of SNS features in promoting meaningful interaction (e.g., Ozdemir, 2017*), vocabulary development (e.g., Çetinkaya & Sütçü, 2018*), writing skills development (e.g., Andujar, 2016*; Dizon, 2016*), and oral skills development (e.g., Fouz-González, 2017*; Lin & Hwang, 2018*; Sun et al., 2017*). Meanwhile, qualitative research designs went beyond descriptive designs and started to diversify into a case study (e.g., Benson, 2015*; Chen, 2013*; Hattem, 2014*; Schreiber, 2015*; Yen et al., 2015*), ethnography (e.g., Álvarez Valencia, 2016*; Jin, 2015*; Kulavuz-Onal & Vásquez, 2018*; Vanek et al., 2018*), and grounded theory (e.g., Mitchell, 2018*; Wang, 2017*) with a balance between emic and etic perspectives.

Diversification in learning contexts was also observed. For instance, several studies extended the context to a non-academic setting (e.g., Álvarez Valencia, 2016*; Oliver & Nguyen, 2017*; Razak & Saeed, 2014*), secondary education (e.g., Çetinkaya & Sütçü, 2018*; Vanek et al., 2018*), and primary education (e.g., Austin et al., 2017*; Sun et al., 2017*). Less popular SNS platforms were also explored during this period, such as Toetenel (2014*), who explored Ning as a tool for establishing an asynchronous online environment. Similar studies were undertaken by Álvarez Valencia (2016)*, Sun et al. (2017)*, Mitchell (2018)*, Xu et al. (2017)*, and Wang (2017)* using Busuu, Papa, Pinterest, and WeChat, respectively. Although most topics fell into oral communication and listening, writing, technology adoption and evaluation, and socialization and pragmatics, other researchers expanded the area of investigation by focusing on more fine-grained topics, namely electronic portfolio assessment (e.g., Barrot, 2016*), pronunciation (e.g., Mompean & Fouz-González, 2016*; Fouz-González, 2017*), intercultural communication (Benson, 2015*; Jin, 2015*), service learning (Sun & Yang, 2015*), and community of practice (Razak & Saeed, 2014*). Overall, qualitative and mixed methods design, Facebook, and formal learning in the higher education context remained the primary focus of investigation during this period.

The late 2010s witnessed a period of consolidation where enough studies were available for various types of research synthesis; hence, several systematic reviews started to emerge. One such review was by Barrot (2018)*, who defined the contour of scholarly work on Facebook as a technology-enhanced language learning environment. He found that most studies relied heavily on self-report data and pre-experimental designs and were conducted in a higher education context focusing on oral and writing development. Another review along this line was that of Reinhardt (2019)*, who critically analyzed the findings of 87 studies on the formal and informal use of blogs, wikis, and SNS for language teaching and learning. His study indicated that SNS could be leveraged to expose learners to socio-pragmatically genuine discourse practices, develop L2 identity, promote interaction and language awareness, and develop learner community. To move the field forward, he highlighted the need for better site design grounded in established language teaching and learning practices and second language acquisition theories before any SNS can be effective. More recently, Manca (2020)* synthesized studies on less explored SNS (i.e., Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, and WhatsApp) published between 2013 and 2018. Among the four platforms investigated, WhatsApp emerged as the only well-explored SNS. She also noted the need to undertake more sophisticated research designs. The emerging interest of L2 scholars in systematic reviews highlights their recognition of the key role that systematic reviews play in advancing technology-enhanced language learning. However, the above research syntheses exclusively dealt with critical synthesis (i.e., qualitative approach to evaluating the research landscape) and bibliometric review (i.e., quantitative descriptive approach in mapping scientific literature). None so far have explored the research landscape using a meta-analytic approach (i.e., a systematic review of quantitative data to integrate research findings across related studies). Thus, future systematic reviews may embark on meta-analysis to obtain a clearer picture of the efficacy of SNS for language teaching and learning.

Two conditions may occur after the period of consolidation. It may either lead to a period of maturity or a period of decline. A period of decline may follow when sustained growth fails and when the effort to adopt SNS begins to weaken. In this case, the focus might shift to topics and features that transcend or span different emerging technologies (e.g., virtual reality and augmented reality), thereby weakening research on many SNS-related topics, especially when they are already saturated. Additionally, the decline might strengthen research on the older versions of Web 2.0 technologies (e.g., blogs and wikis). This shift is particularly likely when blogs and wikis incorporate newer features amenable to language learning. During the period of maturity, the field will experience sustained growth in which a progressive interplay between expansion, sophistication, and consolidation occurs. Similar to CALL as a field, many areas of SNS research will emerge as stand-alone subfields during this period. Looking at the current trajectory of SNS research, this field appears to emerge as a major research area under CALL. For instance, recent studies have been theoretically grounded and have used multiple data sources and more sophisticated research designs, such as experimental design and structural equation modelling, (e.g., Barrot, 2021b*; Alamer & Al Khateeb, 2021*; Andujar & Salaberri-Ramiro, 2021*; Chen, 2020*; Lai & Tai, 2021*; Lai et al., 2020*; Luo & Gui, 2021*; Paul & Friginal, 2019*). Some studies explored other under-researched platforms (e.g., Isbell, 2018*; Jia & Hew, 2019*; Jin, 2018*; Luo & Gui, 2021; Wu & Miller, 2021*; Zhao & Flewitt, 2020*) and topics, such as pragmatic development (e.g., García-Gómez, 2020*), translanguaging and cross-cultural awareness (e.g., Wu & Miller, 2021*; Zhao & Flewitt, 2020*), intracultural development (e.g., Yang & Yeh, 2021*), mediating effects of language learners’ personality (e.g., Kao, 2020*), multimodal negotiation (e.g., Mackay et al., 2021*), and digital literacies (e.g., Chen, 2020*). These studies attempted to address the gaps and respond to the call highlighted in the recent systematic reviews.

As illustrated above, research on SNS as a tool for language teaching and learning has recently been intensifying and diversifying in terms of platforms, research design, learning context, SNS use, and topical foci. In particular, the data suggest that the field is moving towards making the distinction between formal and informal uses more important because of the recent emergence of studies of learning ‘in the digital wilds’ or learning beyond the classroom. In the same vein, the language of study in SNS research has continued to expand from two in 2009 to at least 18 in 2021, the majority of which targeted English. With reference to shifts in topics, the focus was initially limited to high-profile SNS (i.e., Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter) and slowly expanded to other emerging SNS, such as Instagram, WeChat, WhatsApp, and Pinterest. Moreover, the topics during the emergence phase were mainly about writing and technology adoption/evaluation. Although these two topics remain to be popular during the early expansion and sophistication phase, other important topics emerged, such as interaction and discourse analysis, oral communication, teacher education, and language, culture and socialization. All these six topics have continued to dominate the field even until the consolidation phase.

This timeline provided overwhelming evidence of the positive impact of SNS on the different aspects of language learning, such as language production (writing and speaking), language reception (reading and listening), language micro-skills (vocabulary and grammar), affective domain (motivation, attitude, and belongingness), and sociocultural domain (identity, social presence, and intercultural competence). However, its fate on whether it will flourish or perish in the next few years depends on the concerted efforts of L2 scholars and practitioners in pushing the field forward. As a way to move towards its maturation, CALL scholars may embark on examining the viability of underexplored and unexplored SNS to obtain a clearer picture of their role in language teaching and learning. Future studies may also look into the dependent variables that exhibit diverging findings for a more nuanced understanding of the impact of SNS on the different aspects of language pedagogy.

The analysis covers nearly 100 articles published in mainstream education and language and linguistics journals (i.e., Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) from 2009 to 2021. These papers were considered key players based on their impact (e.g., readership and citations), novel findings, theoretical contributions, pedagogical significance, and how they drive this line of research forward. To retrieve these articles, I adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (Moher et al., 2009), which involves four key stages: identification, screening, eligibility, and included. First, I identified all the eligible source titles. Then, I excluded journals that are written in the non-English language as part of the screening stage. To further locate the eligible articles, I limited the document type to empirical studies and systematic reviews. I also set the year range between 1999 (i.e., the year that the first SNS [i.e., QQ] was launched) and 2021 during search and retrieval to ensure that all eligible articles were included. However, no papers were generated from the SSCI database for years earlier than 2009. As part of the final stage, I examined the title, abstract, and full content of the paper to determine if they, indeed, dealt with language teaching and learning. This procedure is inevitably biased towards articles published in SSCI/AHCI journals and written in English. Thus, this timeline might have inadvertently excluded some widely cited papers, doctoral dissertations, repository works, and studies that are non-empirical, published in non-SSCI/AHCI journals, and contextualized in non-English-speaking regions. Nonetheless, significant and critical topics in SNS found in this grey literature were sufficiently represented and addressed by those published in SSCI journals.

It is not possible and also not intended to provide the full collection of all individual studies in this area because of the limited space for this section. Thus, only samples from a large body of scholarly work were included in the timeline to illustrate the key developments and general themes on this topic. The selections were categorized based on the four broad themes as outlined below:

• A. Research design

  • 1. Descriptive

  • 2. Case study

  • 3. Ethnography

  • 4. Grounded theory

  • 5. Correlational

  • 6. Experimental

• B. SNS use

  • 1. Formal use in formal learning settings (FUF)

  • 2. Informal use in formal learning settings (IUF)

  • 3. Use in informal learning settings (UI)

• C. Learning context

  • 1. Primary/Elementary (LEL)

  • 2. High school (LHS)

  • 3. Higher education (LHE)

  • 4. General academic across levels (LGA)

  • 5. Professional/Non-academic (LPN)

• D. Topical foci

  • 1. Affective factors

  • 2. Analysis of discourse and interaction

  • 3. Assessment and evaluation

  • 4. Language, culture, socialization and pragmatics

  • 5. Phonology/phonetics and oral communication, including listening

  • 6. Reading, writing, and literacy

  • 7. Research methodology

  • 8. Technology adoption and evaluation

  • 9. Vocabulary and lexical studies

The categories under SNS use — FUF, IUF, and UI — were derived from Manca & Ranieri's (2016b) critical review of Facebook as a technology-enhanced learning environment. Formal setting refers to a school context, while informal setting relates to non-academic or out-of-school contexts. Meanwhile, formal use refers to adopting SNS as a primary platform in language classrooms, whereas informal use involves the integration of SNS as a supplementary platform for out-of-class activities. The last category (i.e., topical foci) was largely based on the themes specified by the American Association for Applied Linguistics (2021). Two themes (Affective factors and Technology adoption and evaluation) were added to accommodate the topical focus of some selected studies.

Note. Authors’ names are shown in small capitals when the study referred to appears in this timeline.