Abstract

The widespread use of social media by students for educational purposes has led to a growing trend. This research aims to provide new perspectives on how to effectively incorporate digital technology into university education by examining the usage patterns of media. Theoretical framework comprised of Bandura's Social Learning Theory and Davis's Technology Acceptance Model. Study has a descriptive approach. Four hundred students responded to the surveys. The researcher has created a questionnaire that is designed at a frequency scale and Liker scale rating. The use of social media was prevalent among students, and many of them believed it to be helpful for fostering learning, communication, teamwork, and knowledge development. The research also showed that distracting issues, privacy concerns, and the potential of cyberbullying were the biggest obstacles. It is suggested that further investigation is needed to determine how social media interacts and collaborate with student, and barriers in educational settings.

Key Words

Students’ Perceptions, Social Media Use, E-learning, Higher Educational Institutes

Introduction

As mobile and internet technology have become more prevalent, social media (SM), including YouTube, WhatsApp etc. have become part of daily life. The benefits of incorporating SM in higher education (HE) classrooms for teaching and learning have been demonstrated by research conducted globally (Lo, 2012). The importance of social media amongst professional businesspeople, teachers, and students in higher secondary schools is undeniable, with platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp etc being commonly used (Manca & Ranieri, 2017).

According to Hussain and Cakir (2015), social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube etc have gained popularity among university students. Researchers, university administrators, and policymakers are investigating how platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Wikis, and Instagram can be used to advance academics, society, and business. Chu (2020) argues that digital technology has a significant impact on higher education, leading to discussions on the use of technology in classrooms. Bolat (2018) notes that social media networks are expanding their influence in various fields, including education. Jukes et. al. (2010) state that student’s today use digital technology "transparently," primarily communicating through social media and establishing connections. Presnky (2001) claims that modern students are "natural speakers" of digital technology. Between 2012 and 2016, revenues for the global e-learning market are expected to reach $51.5 billion, at 7.9% annual growth rate, and the Asian e-learning industry is predicted to have the fastest growth rate at 17.3% per year (Docebo, 2014).

According to Kirschner and Karpinski (2010), social networking sites acquired popularity in 2010 and were quickly adopted by schools, colleges, and institutions. As a result, the direct or indirect relationship between teacher performance and the purpose and frequency of use of social media sites for capacity building cannot be overlooked.

Due to the rapid development of technology and the exponential rise of social media websites, the distinction between a student's personal and academic lives has become increasingly hazy (Wang, Chen, & Liang, 2011). Social media has improved academic results by introducing new educational tools, which have made it possible for teachers to communicate with students more effectively both within and outside of the classroom (Al-Bahrani, Patel, & Sheridan, 2015). Research suggests that the effects of social media on students' academic performance might vary and can be either positive or detrimental, raising questions about the educational usefulness of integrating social media into classroom settings (Owusu & Larson, 2015).

Additionally, this way of thinking is supported by empirical data in the area of online education (Kuh, 2009). The drawbacks of social networking sites have been extensively researched. Concerns regarding how social media affects students' performance in classrooms have been raised by several researchers (Wu & Cheng, 2019).

There have been noteworthy changes brought about by web 2.0 platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube for Pakistani citizens. Internet users can now connect with one another and engage in social media activities thanks to its growth. Despite their financial struggles, Pakistanis continue to use various social media-related gadgets and content (Kuzma, 2010).

There appear to be a variety of justifications for the practice of social media in higher instruction (Hussain, 2012).  Its use was supported by reiterating the claim that it is employed to improve students’ academic experiences by offering them e-support services (Dabner, 2011). According to Tariq, Mehboob et al. (2012) research, students’ life and education are being severely impacted by media and specifically social interacting sites like Facebook, Orkut, and Twitter. 

Understanding the educational pros and cons of using social media for knowledge is important for faculty working with students (Lohnes & Kinzer, 2007). The current study aims to aid educators in comprehending how social media's emerging technology affects students' learning behaviors and experiences. This study intends to examine how social media is viewed as useful for e-learning in Lahore, Pakistan. The study intends to draw conclusions about the advantages and drawbacks of e-learning and to emphasize the difficulties that students have when utilizing it. These barriers are described as drawbacks identified by students in their responses.




Statement of the Problem

It examines how university students learn through the use of social platforms to improve their learning outcomes. It aims to pinpoint the pressing concerns around social media use for education as well as the variables affecting students' perceptions of its use. The study also looks at the challenges that students face. This study aims to evaluate university students' current use of social platforms for online learning. The study's problem statement, Perceived Usability of Social Media as an E-Learning Tool, was developed.




Objectives

Following are the objectives of study as per derivative of statement of the problem.

1. To determine why and how frequently social networking sites are used as e-learning tools in higher education.

2. To investigate into the experiences of university students how they employ social platforms as e-learning resources.

3. To analyze usage patterns how students utilize social platforms as e-learning resources

4. To investigate how university students view teachers’ utilization of social media resources in educational setting.

5. To evaluate the benefits of utilizing social platforms as e-learning tool

6. To ascertain how students feel about social media's limitations in terms of enhancing university learning.




Research Questions

The research questions listed below are put out based on objectives to address the study goal.

1. How consistently do students use social networking sites as e-learning resources at the higher education level?

2. How much do university students use social networking sites for online education?

3. How much do students have experience with using social media?

4. How much do teachers utilize social platforms in the educational environment?

5. What are the perceived usefulness of social networking sites as e-learning resources?

6. How do students at the university level view the drawbacks and challenges of utilizing social networking sites as e-learning resources?




Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of the research is enrooted in Technology Acceptance Model which helps to determine Perceived usability of social networking sites as e-learning resources.  The TAM model offers a framework for comprehending the steps users take to adopt and employ contemporary technologies. The model of Davis can be used to develop expectations regarding to adopt and utilization of IT. The consumer's behavioral intent is then determined by their attitude. The procedure concludes with the actual application of the system or technology if the mindset is positive (Kitchakarn, 2016).

To better understand an individual's IT adoption behavior, Davis and colleagues (1989) created the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in 1989. TAM was derived from the Theory of Reasoned Action. The goal of TAM is to examine how a user's attitudes and beliefs affect whether they accept or reject IT. PU and PEOU are main aspects in this theory in determining a person's propensity to adopt a technology. The phrase "the extent to which a person believes that utilizing a specific system will increase his or her performance" is used to define perceived usefulness (PU), while perceived ease of use (PEU) relates to how easy a person perceives utilizing a particular system to be. According to Davis (1993), perceived usefulness has a 50% higher influence on a user's attitude towards using a system than perceived utility or perceived simplicity of use. A person's desire to use these systems in a variety of situations, such as e-learning, has been found to be significantly influenced by their perception of its usefulness and simplicity of use (Deng et al., 2005). Researchers have used TAM in the field of e-learning and discovered that perceived utility and simplicity of use have a considerable influence on a person's propensity to utilize e-learning systems (Liu et. al., 2009). This study provides a method for doing research based on the TAM framework how social networking media's perceived usability and simplicity of use affect e-learning. The model takes into account elements including social networking sites, perceived elements, attitudes, and behavioral intentions. This demonstrates the impact of virtual distraction as an e-learning tool on students' perceptions.

Figure 1

Conceptual Framework



By incorporating the concept of perceived usefulness (PU) into this study, the model assists in understanding how students view e-learning as a substitute for gaining their educational information. This framework has developed a superior approach 

for comprehending the differences in how students utilize social networking sites as an e-learning resources, and it appears to be beneficial and appropriate to assess the ongoing usage of social networking sites as an e-learning instrument.




Theoretical Consideration

The Bandura's SLT and TAM were chosen by the researcher because they were appropriate for the topic of the study and, more importantly, because there was a good correlation between their presumptions and the results of the examination. For this investigation, the SLT is appropriate. Social learning is made possible by SMTs because they allow students who are interacting to share knowledge and learn new things. The TAM has been extensively used to gauge user approval of SMT use for instruction. The key justification for this is that SLT and TAM can help in comprehending the realities of utilize social networking sites as an e-learning resource from the standpoint of the students.

Methodology

This research has a descriptive approach. A quantitative method was utilized to address the questions raised by the research. Written survey design is the methodology used in this research.

Population, Sample and Sampling Process

The study’s population was comprised of 35 (public: 14, private: 21) universities in Lahore, Pakistan, with a total enrollment of 263,959 students (Higher Education Commission, 2017-2018). From this large population sample was drawn through multi-stage sampling. The processed used different sampling technique on each stage. At first stage the universities were selected through convenience sampling technique and that was 6 universities in Lahore (3 public and 3 private). The Yamane (1967) formula was used to aid in the selection of the sample. Using a finite population, here is the formula for sample size:



 Where n is the required sample, N is the study's whole populace, and e is the degree of accuracy with a 0.05 margin of error (Ninlawan, 2015). The calculated sample is 400 when Yamane's formula is used. Of the four hundred and thirty questionnaires distributed, four hundred were complete and usable, resulting in a sample of four hundred respondents from public and private universities for analysis.




 

Table 1. Dispersion of Sample of Study

Variables		Mean	Std. Deviation	Percent
Gender	Male	1.78	.418	22.5
	Female			77.5
Age	18-22	1.82	.927	49.0
	23-26			24.5
	27-30			22.0
	30 and above			4.5
Specialization	Science studies	1.42	.494	58.0
	Human studies/arts			42.0
Smart device	Android mobile	1.02	.131	36.25
	Laptop			53.25
	Tablet			10.5
Social media use	Yes	1.05	.218	95.0
	No			5.0

 




Table 1 indicated that 90(22.5%) male students as well as 310(77.5%) female students of universities used social media. The table also explained that 196(49%) having 18-22 age group, 98(24.5%) having 23-26 age group as well as 88(22%) having 27-30 age group used social media. Table explored that 380 (95%)students  were using social media, 20(5%) students were not using social media, 42 (10.5%) students were using  tablet as a tool of social media, 213 (53.25%) students were using laptop as a tool of social media and 145(36.25%)students were using cell phone as a tool of social media.

 

Instrument of the Study

The questionnaire consisted of 7 parts first was on Demographic, second on social media usage which was adapted from Alshehri, Omar Abdullah (2021). The questionnaire followed the TAM guidelines. Because the survey was highly reliable because it had a score of.950, indicating a high reliability index. So the questionnaire was according to our research objectives by doing the minimal changes not having the open-ended questions. Questions were only close-ended. The questionnaire made use of both the frequency scale and the Likert scale. The first segment of the questionnaire collected data on the students' demographics including gender, age, specialization, smart devices and social media use, while the second section focused on the objectives for which students used electronic devices (10 items). The third section examined the students' experiences with using virtual amusement (6 items), and the fourth section looked at the students' viewpoints on utilizing social networking sites for e-learning (14 statements). The final section investigated the students' attitudes towards the potential drawbacks of utilizing social networking sites as an e-learning resource (11 statements). To determine the instrument's dependability, Cronbach's alpha values were computed. The instrument's reliability is shown in the following table;




 

Table 2. Reliability Analysis

Factors	Cronbach's Alpha Score	Total Items	Total Respondents
Usage	.873	4	400
Examples	.844	6	400
Experience	.863	6	400
Tools Advantage	.902	6	400
Advantage	.899	8	400
Disadvantage	.868	11	400
Total	.886	41	400

Result

The purpose of this section is to determine the perceived usability of social platforms as an e-learning resources through data analysis and interpretation. The study's findings are presented in the part that follows in accordance with each goal and related research question.

The first goal investigated the reasons for and frequency of student use of SM. The identified goals are social interaction, news consumption, education, and amusement. To do this, descriptive statistics were used. Data were shown in the form tables. The frequency and percentage are displayed in the table.




 

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for the purposes of using Social platforms as e-learning resources among students

Purpose	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Often	Frequently
Social communication	F	5	16	72	168	139	1
	%	1.2	4.0	18.0	42.0	34.8
News	F	22	117	117	92	52	4
	%	5.5	29.2	29.2	23.0	13.0
Learning	F	14	28	97	159	102	3
	%	3.5	7.0	24.2	39.8	25.5
Entertainment	F	2	12	124	141	121	2
	%	5.0	3.0	31.0	35.2	30.2




Table 3's data show that social media (SM) was the most commonly used form of social communication by participants, with frequencies and percentages of (n=4+5=307, 76.75%). After this amusement came, which was cited (n=262, 65.5%).The frequencies and percentages of (n=261, 65.25%) for learning. The Fourth was for news, with (n=144, 36%) in terms of frequencies and percentages.

The second objective examined the usage of social platforms as e-learning among students. Results accumulated on six different SMTs. The pupils were requested to rate their utilization of SMTs.




 

Table 4. Frequencies and Percentages of usage Related to Social media Tools

Social media	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Often	Frequently
Facebook	F	32	139	114	70	45	4
	%	8.0	34.8	28.5	17.5	11.2
Twitter	F	222	98	48	15	17	5
	%	55.5	24.5	12.0	3.8	4.2
YouTube	F	7	37	70	130	156	2
	%	1.8	9.2	17.5	32.5	39.0
WhatsApp	F	8	9	11	47	325	1
	%	2.0	2.2	2.8	11.8	81.2
Wikis or Wikipedia	F	78	93	83	70	76	3
	%	19.5	23.2	20.8	17.5	19.0
Skype	F	238	101	30	20	11	6
	%	59.5	25.2	7.5	5.0	2.8

 




WhatsApp was the platform that was utilized the most, with frequencies and percentages of (n= 4+5= 372, 93%). YouTube came in second (n = 286, 71.5%), followed by Wikipedia (n = 146, 36.5%), Facebook (n = 115, 28.75%), and Twitter (n = 32, 8%). Skype was the SM platform that was used the least (n=31, 7.75%).

The final goal of the questionnaire, which looked at how the students responded to six different SMTs, was provided in this section. The participants were questioned about how they experienced utilizing these technologies.




 

Table 5. Descriptive Statistics of Experience using Social Platforms

Experience	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Often	Frequently
Facebook	F	75	138	118	46	23	4
	%	18.8	34.5	29.5	11.5	5.8
Twitter	F	210	79	65	26	20	5
	%	52.5	19.8	16.2	6.5	5.0
YouTube	F	17	28	82	144	129	2
	%	4.0	7.0	20.5	36.0	32.2
WhatsApp	F	11	25	32	111	221	1
	%	2.8	6.2	8.0	27.8	55.2
Wikis or Wikipedia	F	71	48	76	130	75	3
	%	17.8	12.0	19.0	32.5	18.8
Skype	F	254	69	41	25	11	6
	%	63.5	17.2	10.2	6.2	2.8




The most often utilized media was WhatsApp (n= 4+5= 332, 83%). The second was YouTube (n=273, 68.25%), followed by Wikipedia (n=205, 51.25%), Facebook (n=69, 17.25%) and Twitter (n=46, 11.5%). Skype was on least used media (n=36, 9%).

Fourth objective related to the advantages of social platforms as e-learning medium. The purpose of the first sub-question was to gauge how frequently tutors used SM when imparting knowledge. The following seven SMTs were listed, and students were asked to describe how much their tutors utilized each one in any of their classes.




 

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics for the Purposes of the extent Social Platforms as E-learning Resources is used in classes by Tutors

Social Studies	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Often	Frequently
Facebook	F	208	70	82	26	14	5
	%	52.0	17.5	20.5	6.5	3.5
Twitter	F	254	80	42	23	1	6
	%	63.5	20.0	10.5	5.8	0.2
YouTube	F	65	37	88	137	73	2
	%	16.2	9.2	22.0	34.4	18.2
WhatsApp	F	45	56	86	91	122	1
	%	11.2	14.0	21.5	22.8	30.5
Wikis or Wikipedia	F	79	70	78	83	90	3
	%	19.8	17.5	19.5	20.8	22.5
Skype	F	255	65	29	26	25	4
	%	63.8	16.2	7.2	6.5	6.2

 




According to Table 6, WhatsApp (n=213, 53.25%), YouTube (n=210, 52.5%), Wikis (n=173, 43.25%), and Skype (n=51, 12.75%) were the SMTs that tutors used the most frequently to instruct. 10% of the participants (n=40) admitted to occasionally using Facebook. Twitter was the SMT that was utilized for instruction the least (n=24, 6%). The results unequivocally show that tutors use SMTs much less frequently than students do.

Finding out what the students thought about using social platforms to support their study was the fifth goal. There were eight different statements. The respondents were asked to rate how much they supported the statement.




 

Table 7. Frequencies and Percentages of the Advantages of using Social Platforms

Statements	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
Discuss topics of interest	F	40	12	34	186	124	3
	%	10.0	3.0	8.5	46.5	32.0
Find and share educational resources.	F	19	22	15	172	172	1
	%	4.8	5.5	3.8	43.0	43.0
Develop and promote knowledge.	F	37	6	48	140	169	4
	%	9.2	1.5	12.0	35.0	42.2
Enhances learning experiences.	F	22	18	30	202	128	2
	%	5.5	4.5	7.5	50.5	32.0
Greater involvement in the learning process	F	18	32	67	174	109	5
	%	4.5	8.0	16.8	43.5	27.2
Refine the instructors’ individuality through the breadth of their expertise	F	8	47	115	139	91	7
	%	2.0	11.8	28.8	34.8	22.8
Owns various hobbies and encourage them.	F	11	30	124	176	59	6
	%	2.8	7.5	31.0	44.0	14.8
Decreases the effort and cost to communicate	F	56	43	78	146	77	8
	%	14.0	10.8	19.5	36.5	19.2

 




The study of frequencies and percentages is shown in Table 7, which reveals that benefits 2 and 4 were most commonly noted (n=344, 86%, and n=330, 82.5%). According to the participants, using social platforms for IT learning enhances learning chances (item 4). With frequencies and percentages of (n=309, 77.25%), they agreed that social platforms helps scholars to exchange resources related to education as well as gain and disseminate knowledge. Students reportedly involved in the educational process by frequently (n=283, 70.75 percent), according to the statement 5.

With descriptive statistics of (n=230, 57.5%), (n=235, 58.75%), and (n=223, 55.75%), respectively, items 6, 7, and 8 had the least amount of mentions. The statistics also revealed that the participants did not agree that SM promotes and unites people with diverse interests (item 7). According to the majority of participants, one of the fewest advantages of using social platforms as online learning was the decreased work and price of communicating with professors and friends (item 8).

Examining the disadvantages of adopting Social platforms as e-learning resources was the aim of the sixth objective having eleven propositions. Scholars were asked to rate these propositions on Likert scale.




 

Table 8. Descriptive Analysis Regarding the Disadvantages

Statements	Frequencies and Percentage						Rank
	Stats.	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
Distract students’ focus on academic learning.	F	17	66	61	172	84	5
	%	4.2	16.5	15.2	43.0	21.0
Privacy issue	F	21	86	86	145	57	8
	%	6.5	21.5	21.5	36.2	14.2
Risks of hacking and spam attacks	F	47	80	116	123	34	11
	%	11.8	20.0	29.0	30.8	8.5
Studies can become time-consuming.	F	18	39	90	206	47	6
	%	4.5	9.8	22.5	51.5	11.8
Vague copyright and intellectual property issues	F	21	39	139	170	31	9
	%	5.2	9.8	34.8	42.5	7.8
Understanding of websites that are in English.	F	17	18	44	216	105	1
	%	4.2	4.5	11.0	54.0	26.2
Oppose Islamic religious teachings.	F	17	33	92	165	93	4
	%	4.2	8.2	23.0	41.2	23.2
Inappropriate or offensive use	F	11	20	139	156	74	7
	%	2.8	5.0	34.8	39.0	18.5
Hinder capacity to express feelings and opinions.	F	13	118	98	139	32	10
	%	3.2	29.5	24.5	34.8	8.0
Improper use of technology.	F	10	47	41	198	104	2
	%	2.5	11.8	10.2	49.5	26.0
Cyberbullying that can cause profound psychosocial outcomes.	F	27	17	68	155	133	3
	%	6.8	4.2	17.0	38.8	33.2

 




Items 11 and 10—which address cyberbullying, the risks of students utilizing tech recklessly, and checking social platforms use—were thought to be the biggest drawbacks of using social media platforms as an online learning instrument, according to descriptive statistics of (n=302, 75.5 %; n=288, 72 %), respectively. Even so, item 8 doesn't have the greatest flaw (n=230, 57.5%). English language proficiency received the highest rating (n=321, 80.25%). With numbers and percentages of (n=258, 64.5%; n=256, 64%; n=253, 63.25%; n=202, 50.5%; n=201, 50.25%; n=171, 42.75%), the obstacles deemed to be least significant were items 7,1, 4,2, 5 and 9 referring to diversion, vague digital rights and intellectual, countering Islamic religious teachings, and hindering capacity to communicate opinions and perceptions.

The study's fifth and sixth goals involved examining the observed benefits and drawbacks of social platforms as e-learning resources. The researcher applied descriptive statistics to determine these objectives. It displays the Mean, Standard Deviation, and MPI.




 

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics on Advantages and Disadvantages of SMeLT on Students

Variable	Mean	SD	MPI
Advantage	30.4225	6.53074	3.8
Disadvantage	39.0550	6.48708	3.5

 




The findings show that the student has a high level of advantage awareness. Additionally, they are also generally aware of the drawbacks. The benefits of utilizing social platforms as an e-learning resources, in the eyes of students, outweigh the drawbacks.

Discussion

The initial goal of the study was to ascertain how frequently people used social networking sites for e-learning, which includes four components: social communication, news, education, and amusement. The findings of Al-Bermany (2011) and Aljaad (2016), which show that students at university in Riyadh use social platforms for social communication, forming connections with individuals who are intrigued in a specific scientific subject, exchanging resources and knowledge, and obtaining professional scientific consultancy services, support the conclusion that social media is primarily used for social communication.

The second goal was to look at social media's role as e-learning resources. Most students utilized WhatsApp. Although Lau (2017)'s study results, which assert that the literature revealed Facebook had the most users, are in conflict with this fact. WhatsApp, according to research by Haworth (2016), improves student community-level communication and social presence while enabling them to get knowledge from a range of experts and professionals. The second part of the objective was examining social media's potential as e-learning resources. Students had highest experience in using WhatsApp and YouTube and least used social media was skype. The research on YouTube's use in higher education validates these students' favorable opinions. Sherer and Shea (2011) shown that utilizing YouTube as online learning resource intensify the involvement and develops learners' technology capabilities in higher learning. According to Berk (2009), watching videos can have a significant impact on one's brain and senses. Greenhow and Gleason (2012) found that WhatsApp improves student engagement and enhances learning experience by enabling access to resources and interaction with tutors.

The second part is about perceptions regarding the advantages. The most highly cited advantage was the ability to share educational resources online. Participants also reported overwhelmingly favorable opinions of social media's contribution to informational development, dissemination, and cooperation as well as to task completion, cooperative learning, and self-learning. Due to their experience with social media platforms like YouTube, Wikipedia, and Facebook, some participants claimed that they considered using these tools to be simple. The majority of students also thought that integrating websites like Facebook, YouTube, and WhatsApp into the classroom helped others with similar interests connect and support one another. These results are consistent with earlier research (Saqr et al., 2018; Imlawi, 2015; Sarapin, 2015; Sim, 2014, Dunn, 2013) that social media supports student-led learning, greater engagement, and the formation of informal learning groups. These outcomes are consistent with the theory that social networking sites encourages student self-learning by letting them gather, plan, and create their own educational experiences. (Haworth, 2016; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2013).

Students in a study perceived cyber bullying and improper use of technology to be the main disadvantages. These results are consistent with earlier study, such as that by According to Lederer (2012), 25% of college students who reported encountering online harassment at the Dominican University in the US stated it occurred via media platforms. Similarly, Erdur-Baker (2010) found that 32% of students at Middle East Technical University in Turkey have experienced both traditional and cyberbullying. Students who participated in the study expressed privacy concerns when utilizing social networking sites in the classroom, which is similar with many researches (Kuzma, 2011; Mao, 2014; Lupton, 2014 Risk at spam and attacking, an inadequate control, improper handling, and higher education institutions in the UK and two public universities in Taiwan reported similar findings from Hung & Yuen (2010) and Jones et al. (2011). Some students felt that social platforms distracted them from their learning environment and teacher, which is consistent with the findings who assert that digital technologies produce a generation with short attention spans that is easily distracted (Odom, 2013; Flanigan, 2015, Aifan, 2016; Alshehri & Lally, 2019; Purcell 2013).

Students' willingness to learn socially through the utilization of social platforms technologies was examined in this research using Bandura's SLT, which affirms that all learning is societal. The findings provided substantial evidence in favor of this approach, with students interacting with SMTs and emphasizing their social aspect as a means of fostering cooperation, communication, and mutual learning. The majority of students said that using social media platforms was an excellent example of the idea of social education, in which people pick up knowledge through modelling, imitation, and observation. In order to enable continued learning in the digital age, the need of sustaining engagement with different databases and the knowledge-based environment is strongly emphasized by the Social Learning theory. The TAM contends that perceived usefulness and simplicity of use are crucial adoption drivers for social media technologies in order to maximize their utilization. The study's findings demonstrated that students' decisions to utilize social media tools were influenced by their perceptions of their educational benefits and uses, and that this perception played a substantial role in the technologies' uptake.

Conclusion

In this survey, most students expressed favorable thoughts. about the usage of social networking sites tools in the classroom. The most popular tools were WhatsApp, YouTube, Wikipedia, and Facebook. Students were also encouraged to take control of their education by selecting and organizing their own materials using social platforms as an e-learning resources. The main pros of using social platforms as e-learning resources included ease of use, improved interaction with other students, sharing and collaboration, access to various sources of information, increased student engagement, and more independent learning. Cyberbullying was the biggest concern among students (75.5%). Language and cultural barriers, such as a lack of English proficiency, were also cited as challenges (80.5%). Problems with using these tools can discourage students from using them and impact their educational application. It is therefore important to provide a supportive environment for learning with these modern tools.

References

• Aifan, H. A. (2016). Usage of Social Media Technologies by Saudi Instructors at King Abdul-Aziz University to Support Students’ Learning. Garj.org. http://garj.org/garjerr/10/2016/5/6/usage-of-social-media-technologies-by-saudi-instructors-at-king-abdul-aziz-university-to-support-students-learning
• Alamri, M. M. (2019). Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions toward Social Media Usage and Academic Performance: A Study from Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 14(03), 61. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i03.9340
• Al-Bahrani, A., Patel, D., & Sheridan, B. (2015). Engaging students using social media: The students’ perspective. International Review of Economics Education, 19, 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2015.06.001
• Al-Bermany, A. K., Kadem, B. Y., Obiad, R. M., & Nasser, L. F. (2011). Study of some mechanical and rheological properties of PVA/FeCl3 by ultrasonic. International journal of Advanced Scientific and Technical Research, 1(2), 222- 231.
• Aljaad, N. H. M. (2016). The Role of Social Communication Tools in Education from the Saudi Female Students’ Perceptions. International Education Studies, 9(8), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n8p194
• Alshehri, O. A. (2021). Examining the existing reality of using social media as E-learningtools at an Emerging University in Saudi Arabia from the viewpoint of tutors and students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow.
• Alshehri, O., Lally, V. (2019). 'Students’ Perceptions of the Use of Social Media in Higher Education in Saudi Arabia. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Science Index 145, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 13(1), 28 - 31. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3607729
• Berk, R. A. (2009). Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 1- 21. Bolat, Y. (2018). Research on the Use of Social Media Networks by Teacher Candidates. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 7(1), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v7n1p147
• Chu, S. K. W. (2020). Developing an Experiential Internship Program with Social Media and a Participatory Design Approach. In Social Media Tools in Experiential Internship Learning (pp. 83-98). Springer, Singapore.
• Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). The role of social media in self-regulated learning. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 9(2), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijwbc.2013.053248
• Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1022
• Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: a Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982– 1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
• Deng, X., Doll, W. J., Hendrickson, A. R., & Scazzero, J. A. (2005). A multi-group analysis of structural invariance: an illustration using the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(5), 745–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2004.08.001
• Docebo, (2014), E-learningMarket Trends & Forecast 2014-2016. http://www.docebo.com/landing/contactform/elearning-market-trends-and-forecast-2014-2016-docebo-report.pdf
• Dunn, L. (2013). Teaching in higher education: can social media enhance the learning experience? In: 6th Annual University of Glasgow Learning and Teaching Conference, Glasgow, UK.
• Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2009). Cyberbullying and its correlation to traditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of internet-mediated communication tools. New Media & Society, 12(1), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809341260
• Flanigan, A. E., & Babchuk, W. A. (2015). Social media as academic quicksand: A phenomenological study of student experiences in and out of the classroom. Learning and Individual Differences, 44(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.003
• Greenhow, C., & Gleason, B. (2012). Twitteracy: Tweeting as a New Literacy Practice. The Educational Forum, 76(4), 464–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2012.709032
• Haworth, R. (2016). Personal Learning Environments: A Solution for Self-Directed Learners. TechTrends, 60(4), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0074-z
• Hung, H.-T., & Yuen, S. C.-Y. (2010). Educational use of social networking technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(6), 703–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.507307
• Hussain, I., & Cakir, O. (2015). Use of Social Networking for Collaborative Learning: a networked paradigm of learning. In A paper presented in 9th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium (ICITS-2015) (pp. 20-22).
• Imlawi, J., Gregg, D., & Karimi, J. (2015). Student engagement in course-based social networks: The impact of instructor credibility and use of communication. Computers & Education, 88, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.015
• Jukes, I., McCain, T., & Crockett, L. (2010). Understanding the digital generation: Teaching and learning in the new digital landscape. Corwin Press.
• Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237–1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024
• Kitchakarn, O. (2016). How Students Perceived Social Media as a Learning Tool in Enhancing Their Language Learning Performance. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 15(4), 53-60.
• Kuh, G. D. (2009). What Student Affairs Professionals Need to Know About Student Engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099
• Kuzma, J. (2010). Asian Government Usage of Web 2.0 Social Media. European Journal of EPractice, 9, 1–13. https://eprints.worc.ac.uk/id/eprint/878
• Lau, W. W. F. (2017). Effects of social media usage and social media multitasking on the academic performance of university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 68(68), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.043
• Lederer, K. (2012). Pros and cons of Social Media in the classroom. Campus Technology, 25(5), 1- 2.
• Liu, S.-H., Liao, H.-L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3), 599–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.002
• Lo, Y. H. (2012). What is the participant learning experience like using YouTube to study a foreign language?. University of Arkansas
• Lohnes, S., & Kinzer, C. (2007). "Questioning Assumptions About Students' Expectations for Technology in College Classrooms," Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(5), https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol3/iss5/2
• Lupton, D. (2014). ‘ Feeling Better Connected’: Academics’ Use of Social Media. News Media Research Centre, University of Canberra.
• anca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2015). Implications of social network sites for teaching and learning. Where we are and where we want to go. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 605–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9429-x
• Mao, J. (2014). Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances andperspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.002
• Ninlawan, G. (2015). Factors Which Affect Teachers’ Professional Development in Teaching Innovation and Educational Technology in the 21st Century under the Bureau of Special Education, Office of the Basic Education Commission. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1732–1735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.228
• Odom, S., Jarvis, H., Sandlin, M., & Peek, C. (2013). Social Media Tools in the Leadership Classroom: Students’ Perceptions of Use. Journal of Leadership Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.12806/v12/i1/r3
• Owusu-Acheaw, M., & Larson, A. G. (2015). Use of social media and its impact on academic performance of tertiary institution students: A study of students of Koforidua Polytechnic, Ghana. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(6), 94-101.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently?. On the horizon.
• Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J., & Friedrich, L. (2013). How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project.
• Saqr, M., Fors, U., Tedre, M., & Nouri, J. (2018). How social network analysis can be used to monitor online collaborative learning and guide an informed intervention. PLOS ONE, 13(3), e0194777. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194777
• Sarapin, S. H., & Morris, P. L. (2015). Tutors and Facebook friending: Instructor-student onlinesocial communication from the professor’s perspective. The Internet and higher education, 27, 14-23
• Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using Online Video to Support Student Learning and Engagement. College Teaching, 59(2), 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.511313
• Sim, T. Y. (2014). Improving Students Engagement through Social Media a Case Study of a Private University in Malaysia Using Facebook. International Journal of E- Education, E-Business, E-Management and E- Learning, 4(6). https://doi.org/10.17706/ijeeee.2014.v4.354
• Wahid, F. (2007). Using the Technology Adoption Model to Analyze Internet Adoption and Use among Men and Women in Indonesia. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 32(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.16814835.2007.tb00225.x
• Wang, Q., Chen, W., & Liang, Y. (2011). " The Effects of Social Media on College Students". MBA Student Scholarship. 5. https://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/mba_student/5
• Waters, S. (2008). Quick start tips for new Skype users.
• Wu, J.-Y., & Cheng, T. (2019). Who is better adapted in learning online within the personal learning environment? Relating gender differences in cognitive attention networks to digital distraction. Computers & Education, 128, 312– 329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.016