PERCEPTION AND USE OF SOCIAL NETWORKS (SN) BY EDUCATION STUDENTS - Leonor Prieto Navarro Isabel Muñoz San Roque Juan Carlos Torre Puente

PERCEPTION AND USE
OF SOCIAL NETWORKS
(SN) BY EDUCATION
STUDENTS
                     Leonor Prieto Navarro
                  Isabel Muñoz San Roque
                  Juan Carlos Torre Puente

             Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid

• COMMON SCENARIOS FOR PERSONAL
  CONSTRUCTION:
  FAMILY, SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY, LEISURE, WORK, COMMUNITY…

• FOR 15 YEARS, A NEW CONTEXT: SOCIAL
  NETWORKS (SN)

  Huge volume of communications:
„ 3.8billion used SN in January 2020
„ Two and a half hours / day connected
„ More than 3.5 billion play video games per month
„ 800 million tweets a day…

Millions of followers, viewers, subscribers who pay to
view Do
      theiryou   remember
            content  ...           these people?
Something very important is brewing in this reality of
social Einstein
       networks  Montessori         Freud            Curie

                      Do you recognize these
                      people?

     Pestalozzi     Ibai Llanos   Chiara Ferragni   TheGrefg

                                     Teachers? Parents?
                                  Or Instagrammers,
                                  YouTubers,
                                  TikTokers, Streamers
  María Pombo        El Rubius    Videoplayers…

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:
 Analysis of the perception, use, assessment
 and affectation of SN in Education students

 MEASURING INSTRUMENTS:
 -Open-ended written reflection on SN (n = 72)
 -Three focus groups (n = 21)
 -Online questionnaire of 39 items (n = 245)

   Sex         Average age        Studies       Average
83% Women         20 years        33% Early     response
                                 Childhood        time
17% Men
                                 48% Primary    18 minutes
                                                45 seconds
                                 19% Sports

In each of the 6 open-ended responses to the questionnaire,
an average of 198 responses were obtained

SOME RESULTS: Time in SN
   Overall impression: "No one escapes this reality"

    Not participating in SN implies social isolation

Time in internet        4 hours    46% more than 4 h.
Time in SN              2 h. 1/2   11% more than 4 h.

Average number of          580     26% more tan 900
general contacts
Average number of          15      8% follow none
influencers followed

    Studying Sports, and not sex, is significantly
  associated with being in less SN, following fewer
 people, feeling less affected and dependent on NS

SOME RESULTS: Opinion on SN
In the questionnaire, the majority (44%) see positive and
negative aspects of SN

Positive                       Negative
Entertainment: fun,            It is a parallel world, of
distraction, escape,           falsehood, of
relaxation ...                 appearance of perfection
Communication: contact         Generated addiction and
people, socialize, interact    dependency
with others                    Substitute power of
Cognition: information,        relationships in person
culture, knowing other         Cyberbullying and other
points of view                 criminal behavior

In the open answers, the balance is not symmetrical: the
weight of the negative in a 4: 1 ratio is overwhelming

SOME RESULTS: Impact and influence of SN

1. IMPACT:
          45% little or nothing, 38% quite influencing
          60% believe that it benefits sometimes and harms others

2. WHY DO THEY INFLUENCE ?
     •    They are there, overabundance of information received
     •    You can learn with them, inform yourself, know more things
     •    For the comments received and the resulting comparisons,
          especially the disadvantageous

3. INFLUENCERS
Positive aspects                            Negative aspects
In some there is a lot of work and talent   They show superficial aspects of the
behind                                      human being
Ready to receive permanent feedback,        They generate false positive
not always easy                             expectations
                                            There are no influencers with great
                                            ethical and emotional significance

SOME RESULTS: Dependence of SN
48% claim to be quite dependent. The greater the
dependence,
the longer the time in networks
the more people followed
the greater the impact received from networks and influencers
the greater number of networks used and the greater probability of their
use in future teaching

WHO IS MOST NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY SN?
A. Personality characteristics: People with a negative view of themselves,
insecure, emotionally unstable

B. Evolutionary characteristics: Especially children and adolescents

C. Cognitive characteristics: Lack of own criteria, critical capacity,
education, information on networks and clarity of ideas

SOME RESULTS: Use of SN in Education

CURRENT USE OF NS IN EDUCATIONAL CENTERS:
-Little or very little use in Early Childhood: 85%
                           in Primary Schools: 45%
- And they believe that in Early Childhood its use should be very limited

PREPARATION TO INCORPORATE SN INTO THEIR TEACHING :
-47% feel good or excellently prepared to introduce SN into their
future teaching
-15% feel they need training

HOW TO EDUCATE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE PROPER
USE OF SN ?:
A. Enhance the value of "real" life
B. Report how they work and promote critical thinking
C. Carry out various training activities in schools
D. Work in a coordinated way with families

CONCLUSIONS
1. Rethinking the dichotomization of reality
   -There is no two realities, online and offline
   -True reality includes everything we do and
    everything we are into
   - Education must intervene in ALL reality

But how to achieve audience and notoriety in these
new educational spaces without betraying the
essential purposes?

2. Rethinking the reciprocal influence of human interaction
   -SN allows a greater profusion, speed and immediacy of
    exchanges, but therefore reduces the ability to analyze
    them
   -What kinds of models are repeatedly exposed to those
    who frequent the SN?

Can the teacher become an influencer also in the NS?

CONCLUSIONS
3. Minimize educational risks, maximize educational benefits
    -Can the benefits of the SN be defined as soft and the
     losses as hard?
   -A good cognitive structure: development of abstract and
    critical thinking, cognitive antidote to superficiality
   -A good personality structure: educate in a strong and
    adjusted positive vision of oneself

But the development of thought and personality takes time and
begins from birth ...

4. Rethinking the training of future teachers
   -Future teachers note the growing presence of SN and
    consider that it would be inappropriate not to have them
   -They demand more training for themselves and for the
    children who should be educated

But how, when and where to do it? It is necessary to articulate a
structure of initial and continuous training in this field