Social media and students When should
universities step-in?
Peta Lee27 June 2014 Issue No:326
An Australian study of whether or not universities
should censor students social media activity has
thrown up some interesting findings. There was a
resounding no from students on whether
universities should monitor student-run sites, and
the main message for universities was not to take
too seriously what students say on personal sites.
The Journal of Higher Education Policy and
Management, published by Taylor & Francis, has
just published an article on 2011 research by John
Rowe, academic registrar at Australias Curtin
University in Perth, entitled Student Use of Social
Media: When should the university intervene?"
In it, Rowe summarises ethical problems faced by
institutions trying to protect their staff, students and
reputations.
On whether or not universities should actively
monitor non-university student-run sites, students
were sensitive: 72% saw student-run sites as no-go
zones compared with 54% of teaching staff and 42%
of non-teaching staff.
Many were uncomfortable with the notion of an
institution more actively entering the private social
spaces of students and monitoring student-run sites
for comments.
Complex ethical issues
Difficult and complex ethical questions have arisen
for universities since the escalation of social media
use.
Comments posted on sites like Facebook, for
example, are often stream of consciousness
thoughts, expressed with scant regard to their
potential impact. Occasionally they constitute
serious transgressions, including racism,
homophobia, violent threats and admission of
plagiarism.
But do universities have a duty to intervene for staff
and student well-being? And should freedom of
speech be upheld?
Rowes study involved students as well as teachers,
all of whom were shown various social media posts,
with varying degrees of offensiveness, and who
were asked to rank them from trivial to serious, as
well as decide whether or not institutions should
intervene.
Given that many students would regard their
Facebook pages and Facebook groups as their own
private space, a prime goal of the project was to
establish appropriate limits for university
interference in these matters.
Another was to develop a categorisation model for
dealing with inappropriate or irresponsible
comments that had been detected or reported.
Unexpected results
A few results surprised me, Rowe told University
World News. Based on some actual student
behaviour issues with which I had dealt at Curtin
(student comments on teaching staff), I thought it
was possible academics might be particularly
sensitive to criticism (more so than other staff).
However, I found that in general, teaching staff
were really no more sensitive than non-teaching
staff. The only issue on which teaching staff
displayed a noticeably higher level of sensitivity than
non-teaching staff was in relation to racist comments
about other students or staff.
I also found it interesting and a bit surprising that
non-teaching staff (that is, administrative staff) were
more inclined to think it was appropriate to intrude
into student personal spaces private Facebook
sites, student-run Facebook groups etc via active
monitoring and so on than teaching staff.
Many of the teaching staff who responded seemed
very pragmatic about the issues.
Rowe said for earlier generations, criticising
teachers and ridiculing their mannerisms or
appearance was commonplace. But the comments
were spoken, not written, or passed between
students via handwritten notes in class or scratched
into wooden desktops or the back of toilet doors.

The likelihood of the subject of the comment actually
seeing it was small and even if it were seen or
brought to that persons attention, the chances of
linking the comment to a particular student were
slim. Also, schools or universities would often
immediately remove the offending comments, so
they had limited distribution and life.
The internet had changed this, he said.
Many younger people seemed quite prepared to
post potentially questionable comments under their
own names, perhaps not realising these posts would
not be confined to just their friends. Even where the
original posting might be able to be deleted, it might
already have been copied or further distributed.
Foul language no problem
Added Rowe: There was a high degree of
commonality between students and staff on what
constitutes the no-go zone of unacceptable
comment on social media. Students are not
particularly concerned about use of foul language,
but they seem very clear in their views on what is
OK and what is unacceptable. very uncomfortable if they knew universities were
Racist, sexist or homophobic comments are in this
latter category. Students also see threats of violence
and admissions of cheating as unacceptable. Their
views are very similar to those of staff on these
matters.
In students opinion, while they recognised that
certain types of comments posted on student-run
forums might warrant intervention and action by a
university particularly threats of violence, racist
and sexist comments, admissions of cheating or
offers to cheat on academic work they also
believed these sites were private spaces and not the
domain of universities.
They felt uncomfortable about universities entering
these spaces and actively monitoring them for what
institutions might perceive as inappropriate
comments: this was regarded as an invasion of
privacy.
Yet with particularly offensive or inappropriate posts,
both staff and students were in agreement: the
answer was clearly yes.
However, while both groups felt it was warranted for
universities to take action with these types of posts,
there was also a view that responsibility for taking
action could equally be left with the police or with
service providers.
Take-home message
Rowe said the main message for universities was
that they shouldnt take too seriously what students
say on personal sites private Facebook or student-
run Facebook sites.
A lot of what is said on personal sites (non-
university sites) is deliberately and knowingly
provocative and aimed at an audience. My key
finding is that it would be inadvisable for universities
to actively monitor these sorts of sites for negative
comments.
Institutions can react if a complaint is made (and in
some cases, should react), but they should not
actively seek out these types of comments to
suppress or react to them. Many students would feel
actively monitoring such sites. Of course, comments
on official university sites are another matter.
When asked if he thought there were likely to be any
obvious changes to these issues over the next few
years, he said: I dont think so. I think the key
findings will still apply although of course it will be
very interesting to test this!
In three years time, social media will be even more
pervasive and, in my opinion, being used a lot more
by universities in a mainstream way to communicate
with students and even deliver learning experiences.
However, I still think students will want to have a
clear separation between their spaces and
university spaces, and will use each set of social
media accordingly.
On that basis, I think my findings regarding staying
out of their space etc will still be valid and I think a
lot of the other findings will probably still remain
applicable as well.
Traditional Education vs Online Education
Should You Switch?
According to the National Center for Education
Statistics, about 4.3 million undergraduate students,
or 20 percent of all undergraduates, took at least
one distance education course in the 2007-08
school year. And about 0.8 million, or 4 percent of all
undergraduates, took their entire program through
distance education.
These numbers are impressive, but even more so
when you factor in the rate of growth. A recent study
found that the popularity of online colleges is
growing exponentially in relation to standard brick-
and-mortar institutions in fact, its a ratio of more
than 10 to 1.
But if youre currently enrolled in classes offered
through a standard brick-and-mortar university, you
should make sure you understand exactly what
youre jumping into before transitioning to online
education and, more importantly, what your degree
will be worth in the real world after completing your
coursework.
Types of online education
One of the main things to be aware of is that there
are four very different styles of distance learning,
often used in combination with one another but each
with its own unique requirements.
Open Schedule
These classes can be completed anywhere and
provide the student with the highest level of freedom
possible, enabling them to incorporate the
coursework into their personal schedule. Within this
system, students are given the course material and
a set of deadlines. Free to meet the deadlines
anytime and anyway they choose, this style of online
education is designed for self-motivated people who
dont succumb to procrastination.
Blended Learning
This is a common version of distance learning that
offers an open schedule, but requires students to
communicate in an established location, whether its
in a physical classroom or online via message
boards or chat rooms. Similar to an open schedule,
blended learning allows students to complete
assignments on their own time as long as they meet
the deadline required for communication.
Computer-Based Learning
This is the strictest version of distance learning, so
much so that it almost mirrors the behavior of the
standard classroom. Within computer-based
learning, students are required to participate at
designated times and places, often ranging from a
computer or science lab to an actual classroom. As
such, this option is typically ideal only for those who
live close to campus and are looking to take on extra
coursework through a system of independent study.
Fixed-Time E-Learning
The most common type of online education, fixed-
time e-learning sets a pre-determined schedule that
can be kept from any location. Unlike computer-
based learning, students are not required to attend a
physical location. Instead, theyre permitted to
complete the coursework from home, school or the
office and then log onto the online learning site at
the pre-determined time. This type of distance
learning is also popular as it provides a live online
forum that tends to supplement the social
component that can often be lacking for online
students.
Public perception
When considering switching to an online university,
the other major consideration you should be aware
of is the perception it will give you in the
marketplace. Some employers may worry about the
legitimacy of a degree obtained from a school
theyve never heard of. And its hard to blame them.
Degree mills abound on the web, with
organizations that have legitimate-sounding names
conferring degrees on people for little more than a
fee.
If transitioning to an online college, make sure the
college youre going to has a credible reputation (if
not a widely-recognizable name). The surest way of
doing so is pursuing a degree from the distance
learning arm of a well-respected traditional
university or, at the very least, an accredited
distance learning institute.