Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Construction and validation of Mobile Social Network Sites Utility Perceptions Inventory (MUPI) and exploration of English as foreign language teachers’ perceptions of MSNSs for language teaching and learning

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was three-fold: first, it aimed to develop a scale to shed light on English as Foreign Language (EFL) teachers’ perceptions of using Mobile Social Network Sites (MSNSs) in language teaching and learning. To this end, a 36-item MSNSs Utility Perceptions Inventory (MUPI) was developed. Second, the current study made an attempt to investigate the construct validity and reliability of the MUPI through collecting data from 184 Iranian EFL teachers. The factorability of the data has been substantiated by running Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity. The results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) revealed a three-factor solution for the inventory items. Furthermore, it was deemed that the scale had a high level of internal consistency. Third, this study strove to explore EFL teachers’ perceptions of MSNSs use by analyzing the results of the administered scale. The findings showed that teachers put more emphasis on factor one (Advantages of MSNSs for Teaching and Learning) and factor three (Barriers to Using MSNSs for Teaching and Learning). The findings also indicated that approximately half of the teachers believed MSNSs allow them to have a more detailed, in depth conversation with their peers and colleagues in the course. Moreover, student distraction, insufficient Internet bandwidth/speed, and insufficient technical support for teachers were some barriers to using MSNSs in classrooms. It was also confirmed that developing communication skills, increasing communication, motivating students, and sharing feedback are some advantages of using MSNSs for teaching and learning. This study has some implications for EFL teachers, teacher educators, and syllabus designers to pay particular attention to the positive features of MSNSs and harness their pedagogical benefits in English language teaching and learning on the one hand, and teacher education courses on the other hand.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydin, S. (2012). A review of research on Facebook as an educational environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 1093–1106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16(Series B), 296–298.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Baſöz, T. (2016). Pre-service EFL teachers attitudes towards language learning through social media. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 430–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blankenship, M. (2011). How social media can and should impact higher education. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 76(7), 39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, K. P., & Conn, K. (2006). Bullying without Borders: The rise of cyberbullying in America’s schools. School Business Affairs, 72(9), 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, K. P., Holcomb, L. B., & Smith, B. V. (2010). The use of alternative social networking sites in higher educational settings: A case study of the e-learning benefits of Ning in education. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 151–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H.R., Hwang, J.P., Wu, T.T., Huang, Y.M., & Hsueh, H.T. (2011). Assessment of implementing a digital game-based learning system over Facebook. Paper presented at the 11th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, Athens, GA.

  • Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • CommonSense Media (2009). Hi-tech cheating: Mobile phones and cheating in schools: A National Poll. Retrieved from http://www.commonsensemedia.org/ hi-tech-cheating.

  • Cooke, S. (2015). Social teaching: Student perspectives on the inclusion of social media in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 22(1), 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9444-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, L., & Yuen, A. H. K. (2011). Towards a framework for educational affordances of blogs. Computers & Education, 56(2), 441–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faizi, R. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions towards using Web 2.0 in language learning and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 1–12.

  • Faizi, R., El Afia, A., & Chiheb, R. (2014). Social Media: An optimal virtual environment for learning foreign languages. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 9(5), 64–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gammon, M. A., & McGranahan, C. (2015). Theory through application: A study in the use of social Media for Teaching. The Journal of Faculty Development, 29(2), 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C., & Askari, E. (2015). Learning and teaching with social network sites: A decade of research in K-12 related education. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 623–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9446-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruzd, A., Haythornthwaite, C., Paulin, D., Gilbert, S., & del Valle, M. E. (2018). Uses and gratifications factors for social media use in teaching: Instructors’ perspectives. New Media & Society, 20(2), 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816662933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafiz Zakaria, M., Watson, J., & Edwards, S. L. (2010). Investigating the use of web 2.0 technology by Malaysian students. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 4(1), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, T. (2013). The potential of online technologies and social media in 21st century teacher professional development & practice: A mixed methods study exploring teachers’ personal, professional development and/or classroom use of online technologies in Ireland and United States of America (Doctoral dissertation, Dublin City University).

  • Hamid, S., Kurnia, S., Waycott, J., & Chang, S. (2011). Exploring Malaysian students' perspectives of Online Social Networking (OSN) use for higher education. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference ISANA International Education Association (ISANA) 2011, Hobart, Tasmania.

  • Idris, H., & Ghani, R. A. (2012). Construction of knowledge on facebook. 3L; Language, Linguistics and Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18(3), 61–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inayati, N. (2013). Systemic analysis of TESOL practitioners' use of social media in the higher education sector. International Journal of Innovation in English Language Teaching and Research, 2(2), 193–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joosten, T. (2012). Social media for educators: Strategies and best practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabilan, M., & Rajab, B. (2010). The utilisation of the internet by Palestinian English language teachers focusing on uses, practices and barriers and overall contribution to professional development. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 6(3), 56–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 179–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35(4), 401–415.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Karal, H., Kokoc, M., & Cakir, O. (2015). Impact of the educational use of Facebook group on the high school students’ proper usage of language. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 677–695.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampe, C., Wohn, D. Y., Vitak, J., Ellison, N. B., & Wash, R. (2011). Student use of Facebook for organizing collaborative classroom activities. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 329–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeNoue, M., Hall, T., & Eighmy, M. (2011). Adult education and the social media revolution. Adult Learning, 22(2), 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2013). Is it a tool suitable for learning? A critical review of the literature on Facebook as a technology-enhanced learning environment. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 29(6), 487–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016). Facebook and the others. Potentials and obstacles of social media for teaching in higher education. Computers & Education, 95, 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, K. H. (2009). Virtual communities for educators: An overview of supports and best practices. [electronic version]. Proceedings from Technology, Colleges, and Community Conference (pp. 137–142). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i at Manoa.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (2010). Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first year experience. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 729–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, S., Houk, K., Higginbotham, D., Johnson, G., & Liu, Y. (2006). Turning iPod into an effective portable learning tool. In C. Crowford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 438–443). Chesapeake: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, N. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 345–368.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, C. J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co..

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, J. A., Baker, H. M., & Cochran, J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2117–2127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasojo, L. D., Habibi, A., & Mukminin, A. (2017). Managing digital learning environments: Student teachers' perception on the social networking services use in writing courses in teacher education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(4), 42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prichard, C. (2013). Training L2 learners to use SNSs appropriately and effectively. CALICO Journal, 30(2), 204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pursel, B. K., & Xie, H. (2014). Patterns and pedagogy: Exploring student blog use in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(2), 96–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racthman, P., & Firpo, D. (2011). Using social networking technology to enhance learning in higher education: A case study using Facebook. Paper presented at the 44th Hawaii international conference on systems sciences Hawaii, USA.

  • Rezaei, S., & Meshkatian, M. A. (2017). Iranian teachers’ attitude towards using social Media and technology to increase interaction amongst students inside or outside the classroom. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(6), 419–426. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0706.02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Hoyos, C., Haya Salmón, I., & Fernández-Díaz, E. (2015). Research on SNS and education: The state of the art and its challenges. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 100–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, H. J., & Son, J. B. (2007). EFL teachers' perceptions and perspectives on internet-assisted language teaching. CALL-EJ Online, 8(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., & Yousuf Zai, S. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ and teacher-educators’ experiences and attitudes toward using social networking sites for collaborative learning. Educational Media International, 51(4), 278–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tay, E., & Allen, M. (2011). Designing social media into university learning: Technology of collaboration or collaboration for technology? Educational Media International, 48(3), 151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tess, P. A. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual)–a literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), A60–A68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. M., & McGee, C. D. (2012). The only thing we have to fear is … 120 characters. TechTrends, 56(1), 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tozer, B. C. (2017). Pennsylvania Teachers’ Perceptions and Use of Social Media Communication Technologies as a Pedagogical Tool. (PhD Dissertation), Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania.

  • Veletsianos, G., Kimmons, R., & French, K. (2013). Instructor experiences with a social networking site in a higher education setting: Expectations, frustrations, appropriation, and compartmentalization. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9284-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, R. B., & Du, C. T. (2014). Mobile social network sites as innovative pedagogical tools: Factors and mechanism affecting students’ continuance intention on use. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(4), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0015-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., Quek, C. L., Yang, Y., & Liu, M. (2011). Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 428–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01195.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202–1211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal for Educational Technology, 39(6), 987–995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xodabande, I. (2017). The effectiveness of social media network telegram in teaching English language pronunciation to Iranian EFL learners. Cogent education, 4(1), 1347–1381.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Isfahan) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Funding

It is noteworthy to mention that this research study has not been funded by any organization, people, etc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

    Saeedeh Kavoshian, Saeed Ketabi & Mansoor Tavakoli

  2. Institute for Vocational Education and Didactics, Education Sciences Department, Faculty of Education, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Thomas Koehler

Authors
  1. Saeedeh Kavoshian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saeed Ketabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mansoor Tavakoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Koehler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors cooperated in each and every step of the paper preparation. They read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saeed Ketabi.

Ethics declarations

Availability of data and material

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1 Rotated factor matrix

Rotated factor matrixa

 

Factor

1

2

3

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to share feedback by posting messages to others.

.911

  

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to exchange TESL related information, knowledge and stories with teachers.

.900

  

MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) are useful for teaching English.

.886

  

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to receive professional support from teachers.

.882

  

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to increase communication between teachers.

.877

  

Students can improve their English skills through the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

.871

  

Students can be motivated by the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) in the classroom.

.870

  

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to be involved in a world of information.

.853

 

.345

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to develop communication skills.

.837

  

Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) allows teachers to access online content more easily.

.828

  

EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to give professional support to teachers.

.810

  

Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) can better facilitate sharing of experiences, ideas and advice among professionals/peers.

.797

  

I am competent to use mobile-based materials in the classroom.

.795

  

I know how to integrate mobile resources into existing classroom curricula.

.785

  

I would like to use mobile-based materials and activities in my classroom as much as possible.

.757

.414

 

Students will be more attentive in mobile-assisted English language teaching classes.

.741

.433

 

I believe that the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) increases students’ motivation.

.736

  

Students try harder when they are learning with technology.

.690

  

Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) should be used as a means to connect with students beyond the classroom.

.680

  

I am confident using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) as a social media as a teaching tool.

.664

  

It is easy to find ESL/EFL materials on the MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

.660

  

I believe that the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) positively impacts student higher order thinking skills.

.607

  

Internet resources can replace textbooks.

.485

.341

 

I feel more comfortable sharing and discussing my ideas on MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) than I do in a traditional face-to-face classroom.

 

.828

 

MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to comment and discuss ideas with my peers and colleagues more efficiently as compared to traditional face-to-face classes.

 

.798

 

MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to express my thoughts more clearly and openly.

 

.784

 

MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to have a more detailed, in depth conversation with my peers and colleagues in the course.

 

.682

 

Compared to face-to-face classes, I prefer using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to share and discuss ideas because it is convenient.

 

.676

 

Compared to face-to-face classes, I am more comfortable responding to online discussions using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

 

.599

 

School/university computers are not currently functioning (e.g., out of date or needing repair).

.326

 

.741

There is insufficient Internet bandwidth/speed for integration of social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) at my school/institute/university.

  

.652

Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) will distract my students in the classroom.

  

.643

There is a lack of control on social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) in my school.

  

.643

Access to social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) is restricted in my school/institute/university.

  

.629

There is insufficient technical support for teachers using social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) in my school/institute/ university.

.319

 

.609

There are insufficient numbers of computers/laptops/tablets/smart phones for integration of social media (Telegram/WhatsApp).

  

.475

Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

  1. *Each item having a substantial [>.4] loading on only one factor
  2. aRotation converged in 5 iterations

Appendix 2 The MUPI Scale

Survey Items

Dear participant, thank you for agreeing to take the following survey. The survey should take approximately 30 min to complete, as the bulk of it asks you to show your perceptions associated with using Mobile Social Network Sites (e.g., Telegram, WhatsApp) in English language teaching and learning.

The first set of questions asks you to provide basic personal information (demographic data) in order to set the context for your responses. No information that can identify you personally as the responder to the survey will be revealed (such as name, email address, date of birth, etc.). The second set of questions concerns your perceptions regarding the benefits, limitations and challenges associated with using Mobile Social Network Sites.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to email me at saiedeh.kavoshian@gmail.com. I look forward to receiving your response by September 5th, 2018.

Thank you in advance,

  1. A)

    Demographic Data

figure a
  1. B)

    Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each statement when thinking about using Telegram/WhatsApp as a sort of social media in English language teaching and learning. Please read each statement carefully and mark your ideas as 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = no opinion (neutral) 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree.

  1. 1.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to share feedback by posting messages to others.

  2. 2.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to exchange TESL related information, knowledge and stories with teachers.

  3. 3.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to receive professional support from teachers.

  4. 4.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to increase communication between teachers.

  5. 5.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to develop communication skills.

  6. 6.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to give professional support to teachers.

  7. 7.

    EFL Teachers may use MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to be involved in a world of information.

  8. 8.

    MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to have a more detailed, in depth conversation with my peers and colleagues in the course.

  9. 9.

    MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to comment and discuss ideas with my peers and colleagues more efficiently as compared to traditional face-to-face classes.

  10. 10.

    MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) are useful for teaching English.

  11. 11.

    MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) allow me to express my thoughts more clearly and openly.

  12. 12.

    I believe that the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) increases students’ motivation.

  13. 13.

    I feel more comfortable sharing and discussing my ideas on MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) than I do in a traditional face-to-face classroom.

  14. 14.

    I would like to use mobile-based materials and activities in my classroom as much as possible.

  15. 15.

    Compared to face-to-face classes, I prefer using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) to share and discuss ideas because it is convenient.

  16. 16.

    I believe that the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) positively impacts student higher order thinking skills.

  17. 17.

    Compared to face-to-face classes, I am more comfortable responding to online discussions using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

  18. 18.

    Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) will distract my students in the classroom.

  19. 19.

    Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) allows teachers to access online content more easily.

  20. 20.

    Access to social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) is restricted in my school/institute/university.

  21. 21.

    Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) should be used as a means to connect with students beyond the classroom.

  22. 22.

    Social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) can better facilitate sharing of experiences, ideas and advice among professionals/peers.

  23. 23.

    I know how to integrate mobile resources into existing classroom curricula.

  24. 24.

    I am confident using MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) as a social media as a teaching tool.

  25. 25.

    I am competent to use mobile-based materials in the classroom.

  26. 26.

    There are insufficient numbers of computers/laptops/tablets/smart phones for integration of social media (Telegram/WhatsApp).

  27. 27.

    There is insufficient Internet bandwidth/speed for integration of social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) at my school/institute/university.

  28. 28.

    There is insufficient technical support for teachers using social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) in my school/institute/ university.

  29. 29.

    There is a lack of control on social media (Telegram/WhatsApp) in my school.

  30. 30.

    School/university computers are not currently functioning (e.g., out of date or needing repair).

  31. 31.

    Students can improve their English skills through the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

  32. 32.

    Students try harder when they are learning with technology.

  33. 33.

    Students can be motivated by the use of MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp) in the classroom.

  34. 34.

    Students will be more attentive in mobile-assisted English language teaching classes.

  35. 35.

    Internet resources can replace textbooks.

  36. 36.

    It is easy to find ESL/EFL materials on the MSNSs (Telegram/WhatsApp).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kavoshian, S., Ketabi, S., Tavakoli, M. et al. Construction and validation of Mobile Social Network Sites Utility Perceptions Inventory (MUPI) and exploration of English as foreign language teachers’ perceptions of MSNSs for language teaching and learning. Educ Inf Technol 25, 2843–2869 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10078-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10078-2

Keywords