Social media usage amongst Lecturers, a study of Cross river University of Technology lecturers, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Community Journalism

Download Social media usage amongst Lecturers, a study of Cross river University of Technology lecturers and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Community Journalism in PDF only on Docsity! CHAPTER ONE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.0 Background to the Study Human activities and events have been altered by the emergence of the internet especially in the last ten years. One of the aspects of life that has been seriously redefined is communication. Before now, people communicate with friends, families, institutions etc. via letter either sent through a commercial bus or somebody travelling to the same spot; and later through the post office and other means peculiar to different people in different regions with no feedback or with a delayed feedback. The search for better and effective means of communication led to the development of telephone which most homes cannot afford and it was wired then until the GSM came to the rescue. However, the arrival of the internet and the proliferation of the social networking platforms have completely revolutionalised the means, efforts, time and speed of communication coupled with effective feedback and interaction that goes into communication in this era. Business and commerce have moved from physical buying and selling to e-commerce, e- marketing, e-shopping, e-banking. Sport and game have shifted to e-game and virtual games, education has become e-learning and e-book. Other activities that the internet has plugged into are e-dating, e-friend, e-marriage, e-politics, e-music, e-movies, e-meeting, e-tourism, e- communication and interaction (Colin, 2014). Today, not only the students of tertiary institutions but also the lecturers and non-teaching staff are making use of social media for the social interaction and information which could focuses on the official information, gist and other activities. There is no doubt that social media are elements of the new media and according to Danny (2010) have become the highest activity on the internet today. The concept of “social media” or “social network site” is broadly used to refer to websites that enable users to articulate a network of connections of people with whom they wish to share access to profile information, news, status updates, comments, photos, or other forms of content. Social media is a form of electronic communication which facilitates interaction based on certain interests and characteristics. Boyd and Ellison (2007) write that social media are media for social interaction, using highly accessible and scalable publishing techniques. They use web- based technologies to transform and broadcast media monologues into social dialogues. They support the democratization of knowledge and information and transform people from content consumers to content producers. Olayinka (2013) observes that the rapid growth of social media activities that has been observed over the last five years is indicative of its entry into mainstream culture and its integration into the daily lives of many people because it disseminated information at a very high speed, it is cheaper and enhances immediate feedback. Social media are web-based and mobile technologies that facilitate interaction between organizations, communities and individuals. Important characteristics are that the technologies are ubiquitous, instantaneous and they enable the creation and exchange of user-generated content. Some of the popular social media in Nigeria include but not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp, Google+, etc. are just a few of the hundreds of applications that make participatory information sharing and social networking possible. Sometime, serious issues are discussed on the platform especially after office meeting. Strike, struggles and other mobilisations are initiated most time online. Social media can be seen as one of the tools or platforms available on the internet that facilitate effective communication and interactions among people. In Nigeria, chatting, tweeting, vi. To ascertain the mostly use social networking platform among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar? 4. Research Questions i. What is the impact of social media in tertiary institutions? ii. To what extent are lecturers of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar compatible with social media? iii. To what extent has social media altered the social interaction among lecturers of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar? iv. What factors are responsible for social media usage as tools for academic advancement among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar? v. To what extent do lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar access social media in the institution? vi. Which of the social networking platforms are often used by the Lecturers? 1.5 Significance of the Study Since social media have emerged as tool for interaction and communication. The academic environment has witnessed a surge in activities that relates to information gathering and knowledge advancement, lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar, are not left out, this has continued to influenced their ways of life including their interaction, feedback and socialisation in general apart of academic advancement. Thus, the value of this study will be beneficial to the management team, students, lecturers, future researchers and technical centre of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar. The management and lecturers at the Cross River University of Technology, Calabar could use this research to create programmes and formulate better lecture materials or study guides that include social media as a learning and communication tool and this would in turn boost academic performance and social interaction between and among lecturers. The outcome of this research will lead to a better understanding of social media, its uses towards social interactions for class and outside lecture. Future researchers and scholars who may what to carry out research in this area or related aspect will find this material very useful. Finally, this work would add to the body of existing literature in the field of academics. 1.6 Scope of the Study The research which examines social media compatibility among lecturers has been narrowed in scope to lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar due to the proximity to the researcher. Other factors include the time available for this study since it will not only be difficult but may be impossible to study all tertiary institutions in Nigeria. 1.7 Operational Definition of the Terms Social Media: It is a group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0 which allow the interaction, creation and sharing of information (as a text, video, audio, pictures, animation or combination) such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp etc. Compatibility: This refers to the capability of two or more items or components to exist and function in the same system or environment. CHAPTER TWO Literature Review 2.1 Conceptual Review 2.1.1 What is Mass Media? Mass media is an umbrella term used for all means of communication to a wider and larger audience residing in different geographical locations. Akinfeleye (2004) defines mass media as a means or channel through which messages or information are transferred or disseminated to a wider and larger heterogeneous audience who are residing in a diverse location. Mass media organization is described as platforms that produce news or entertainment content and distribute that content to a large number of geographically separated people through a technologically based medium (David, 2005, p.182). The term mass media simply translates to the modern means of giving news, opinion, education and entertainment to large numbers of people, especially through radio, television, newspapers, magazines and films. (Isamuko, 2011) writes that news is distributed in Nigeria through print and electronic media. These include radio, television, newspaper and magazine. 2.1.2 Types of Mass Media Although, mass media can be classified as Electronic or Broadcast Media (Radio and television) and Print Media (Newspapers and Magazine). However, in this study, the classification will be: i. Traditional Media (radio, television, newspaper and magazine) ii. New Media (Social media, blogs etc). Julien Mailland in his article on www.historyofthenet.com published on the 5th April 2018 laid claims to Classmates being one of the Internet's earliest social networking websites, appearing in December 1995, followed by Six Degrees in May 1997, Open Diary in October 1998, Ryze in October 2001, Friendster in March 2002, LinkedIn in May 2003, hi5 in June 2003, MySpace in August 2003, Orkut in January 2004, Facebook in February 2004, Yahoo! 360° in March 2005, Bebo in July 2005 and Google+ in July 2011. 2.1.5 Some common features of social media: Paul Dourish (2018) in his book; The once and future of the Internet listed some common features of social media: 1. Social media are interactive Web 2.0 Internet-based applications. 2. User-generated content, such as text posts or comments, digital photos or videos, and data generated through all online interactions, is the lifeblood of social media. 3. Users create service-specific profiles for the website or app that are designed and maintained by the social media organization. 4. Social media facilitate the development of online social networks by connecting a user's profile with those of other individuals or groups. Users typically access social media services via web-based technologies on desktop, computers, and laptops, or download services that offer social media functionality to their mobile devices (e.g., smartphones and tablet computers). When engaging with these services, users can create highly interactive platforms through which individuals, communities, and organizations can share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content or pre-made content posted online. 2.1.6 Other Features of Social Media as Online Chatting Platform Below are some of the features of social media/new media according to Rus (2002) i. Speed of information: The pace at which information is distributed or shared is very fast and is in just a click or touch of screen. ii. Reduce cost of communication: information and communication technology has reduced the cost of communication to a large extent. Platforms such as video chats, emails and instant messaging have drastically brought to the barest minimum cost of communication. iii. Access to more information: The proliferation of social media, online forums and other available media offers people multiple access to information than before. v. No Barrier: Social media has helped so many barriers to effective communication which includes the barrier of distance, language, culture and time frame. Social media helps remove such barriers of distance and ensure a level ground for everyone all over the one to relate. v. Interactive Communication: It eases communication and makes communication interactive since there is always room for feedback that is very spontaneous. 2.1.7 Different Types of Internet Mass Communication Platforms Adeniran, (2014) highlighted some of the Internet Communication Platforms below: Communication Blogs: Blogger, Live Journal, Open Diary, TypePad, WordPress, Vox, Micro-blogging/Presence applications: FMyLife, Jaiku, Plurk, Twitter, Tumblr Social Networking: Facebook, MySpace, Meetup, Eskimi, WeChat, Whatsapp etc Collaboration: Wikipedia, Wikimedia, Wikia, PBworks, Wetpaint Social Bookmarking (or social tagging): Delicious, StumbleUpon, Google Reader, Photography and art sharing: Instagram, Deviantart, Flickr, Photobucket, Picasa, Zooomr. Video sharing: YouTube, Viddler, Vimeo, sevenload Livecasting: Ustream.tv, Justin.tv, Stickam, Skype, OpenCU, Livestream Music and audio sharing: NaijaLoaded, NaijaMouthed, MySpace, Music, ShareTheMusic, Search engines: Yahoo.com, Google.com, Ask.com, Bing.com Email: gmail.com, yahoomail.com, aimmail.com, outlook.com inbox.com, mywaymail.com Website/blog: www.researchcage.com, nairaland, lyindaikeji.com etc News: BBC, CNN, NTA, AIT, Channels, Punch, Tribuneonline, Sunonline etc 2.1.8 Popular Social Media in Use in Nigeria Below are some of the popular social media platforms that are available to lecturers and the general public in Nigeria and across the globe. Facebook.com: This is the most visited and used social media worldwide with estimated users of 1.94 billion monthly active users as at March 2017 (Poulsen, 2017). It was developed by Mark Zuckerberg. It was founded on February 4, 2004 (13 years ago). Facebook is accessed on laptop, desktop, smartphone, tablet and many GPRS enable phones. Today, there are over 16 million facebook users in Nigeria as at 2017 (Adeniran, 2017). YouTube.com: According to Harry Raffal (2018) in his book; Tracing Online Development, YouTube began on February 14, 2005 when Chad Hurley, Steve Chen and Jawed Karim who were former PayPal employees launched a domain name “YouTube.com” and started to create a video-sharing website on which users could upload, share and view videos. The first actions by their interaction partner(s). Kimberly Moffitt (2014) defines social interactions as the processes by which we act and react to those around us. Encyclopaedia, (2015) sees social interaction as the way people talk and act with each other and various structures in society. It may involve interactions from family or bureaucracies that are formed out of the need to create order within the interaction itself. Social interaction is a process of reciprocal stimulation or response between 2 people. It develops competition, interaction, influences social roles and status and people for social relationships (Nugent, 2013). A social interaction is a social exchange between two or more individuals. These interactions form the basis for social structure and therefore are key object of basic social inquiry and analysis (Boundless, 2015). Social interaction includes those acts people perform toward each other and the responses they give in return. It should be noted that social interaction can be studied between groups of two (dyads), three (triads) or larger social groups or institutions. Social interactions are the acts, actions, or practices of two or more people mutually oriented towards each other's selves, that is, any behaviour that tries to affect or take account of each other's subjective experiences or intentions (Rummel, 1976). Weber (1947) cited in Rummel (1976) writes that social interaction is when behaviour was social virtue of the meaning the actor attaches to it. It takes account of the behaviour of others and is therefore oriented in its course. This means that the parties to the social interaction must be aware of each other, have each other's self in mind. This does not mean being in sight of or directly behaving towards each other. Friends writing letters are socially interacting, as are enemy generals preparing opposing war plans. Social interaction is not defined by type of physical relation or behaviour, or by physical distance. It is a matter of a mutual subjective orientation towards each other. Thus, even when no physical behaviour is involved, as with two rivals deliberately ignoring each other's professional work, there is social interaction (Rummel, 1976). Weber's definition of social interaction is still the most commonly accepted. According to Weber, social behaviour has two components. The first is the action or the behaviour itself. The second is the meaning that the actor attaches to his or her behaviour which Weber referred to as orientation, is how a person perceives his behaviour in relationship to other people. It is that knowledge of another who is affected that makes an action or interaction social (Humphrey, 2015). Moreover, social interaction requires a mutual orientation. The spying of one on another is not social interaction if the other is unaware. Nor do the behaviours of rapist and victim constitute social interaction if the victim is treated as a physical object; nor behaviour between guard and prisoner, torturer and tortured, machine gunner and enemy soldier. 2.1.12 Types of Social Interactions There are four types of social interactions (Kimberly, 2014). i. Accidental, ii. Repeated, iii. Regular, and iv. Regulated 2.2.11.2 Elements of Social Interaction Fred (2014) offers the following as the elements of social interaction: 1. Two or more than two persons 2. Reciprocal relationship among them 3. Influence on the event, behaviour, brain of the persons. These three conditions inter-relate the people among themselves and convert them into social groups. 2.1.13 Types of Social Interaction According to Young and Mack (n.d) cited in Fred, (2014), there are two types of social interaction between people and societies. Direct or Physical Interaction: it involves physical action among the individuals. Beating, biting, thrashing, pulling, pushing, killing, scratching, boxing, wrestling, kissing etc. are the examples of direct interaction. Two teams playing match and a war between the forces of two countries are also examples of this interaction. This types influences other by physical action in different ways. Symbolic Interaction: There are different types of relationships between people. It involves the use of language and symbols. It means communication through a common language is symbolic process. This is the most common method of human societies. Human beings convey their ideas through language and it is completed by reciprocal response. The methods of communication devised by man are sharp and effective than these of animals. All cultures develop, expand and change only through language symbolic interaction. Without language no culture can live. There is no culture in animals due to the fact that there is no common language among them. Through language man stores its previous experiences and transmits them to the following generation with a change. Man uses instruments to facilitate this. Telephone, wireless, telegraph, postal system, rail, road, sea and air services all are various means of communication and transportation. Gestures are also symbolic ones. Deaf and dumb convey their ideas through voice, and gestures of hands and eyes. 2.2.12 What are the Forms of Social Interaction in a Society Fred (2014) provides various forms of social interaction that can be experienced in the society especially in this era. It is found in various forms among human societies 3. Use Twitter in the classroom to create a career list: Set up an interesting assignment requesting that students set up Twitter for education lists following feeds relevant to their career goals and keep a daily journal on any trends that crop up along the way. 4. Coordinate assignments: Rather than keeping up with an e-mail train, students can use Twitter to collaborate on different projects and keep a quick reference on any changes. 5. Track a hash tag: More ambitious educators may want to incorporate Twitter in lessons that track hash tags for another interesting lesson in how trends spread and the various ways in which people use social media to communicate ideas. 6. Connect with the community: Partner up with local government or charitable organizations and use education Twitter to reach a broad audience discussing the latest cultural or educational events in the area and encourage others in the community to attend. 7. Follow the issues: Bring a little technology into debates by asking the class which issues they would like to follow. Subscribe to relevant hash tags and accounts from all perspectives and compile an updated resource cobbling together as much research as possible. 8. Write a story or poem: Many writers and poets have experimented with Twitter’s 160- character format to bring new, serialized works in small chunks to attention-divided audiences. Some educators may like the idea of asking their students to apply their creative writing skills to a restrictive social media outlet. 9. Ask questions: Monica Rankin at University of Texas-Dallas uses Twitter as a way for her students to keep a running stream of questions going during lectures – an application that works in any computer-enabled lecture hall. 10. Connect classrooms: Teachers and students from around the world can collaborate on projects using Twitter as a communication tool that simultaneously educates students in different classroom and cultural protocols. 11. Facilitate research: Typing keywords into Twitter’s search engine wields every microblog entry on the subject, providing an excellent way for students to research ideas, opinions and movements as they happen. 12. Facilitate discussions: Take supplementary material postings one step further by requiring students to post their own succinct responses to the main theses and open up intelligent discussions with one another. 13. Live tweet a book or a movie: Ask students to use the microblog format to record their initial reactions and responses to movies and books as they indulge in them for class. It certainly makes for an excellent lesson in how perceptions change over time as more information and perspectives become available. 14. Take a poll: Teachers who enjoy polling their students on what activities to do or their opinions on current events may want to keep a running tab of results they find when working in conjunction with SurveyMonkey or another similar site. 15. Direct message students and parents: Because e-mail filtering frequently ships important messages off to the trash can, some educators may prefer talking privately with kids and their parents via the direct message feature on Twitter instead. 16. Network with other educators: Beyond using it for lessons, teachers who use Twitter have at their disposal a vast network of like-minded professionals with whom they can trade ideas and insights regarding social networking in the classroom and other topics. Empirical Framework 2.1.1 Rising Trend in the Use of Social Media Networks by Lecturers in Seeking Information The study conducted by Ummaira (2015) is another study relevant to this study. She observed that ICTs particularly social media have changed the way we used to communicate and interact to an unimaginable extent in this era of advanced technology. Before now, we relied on sending hand written messages, greeting cards, listen to news on radio, reading news on newspaper and watching television but today, social media has made audience active rather than being passive as they are part of information gathering and distribution. The study used survey research method with 130 copies of questionnaire that were administered to the respondents in Kaduna State University. Probability and non-probability method was used. Ummaira (2015) found out that many lecturers have access to multiple social media platforms most especially WhatsApp, BBM and Facebook while they also spend substantial amount of time (6-10 hours) socialising and relating with friends and family online. Some of the problems of social networking sites as sources of information are that it lacks credibility, poor and cost of data subscription, epileptic power supply and poor internet service from network providers. Most of the users of social media spend 6-10 hour on social media while most frequent activities that users engaged are reading of news and other information on social media, chatting, dating and business. The study recommended that people should in the first instance know why they are on social media and the benefits derive from it use. 2.3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This study is anchored on the Technological Determinism Theory. 2.3.1 Technological Determinism Theory This research is anchored on Technological Determinism Theory (TD). The term ‘technological determinism’ was coined by Thorstein Veblen in 1929 and this theory revolves around the proposition that technology in any given society defines its nature. Therefore, media of technology shapes how we as individuals in a society think, feel, act and relate. It stressed that CHAPTER THREE 3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The research methodology covers the research design, the target population, sample size, description of sampling procedure, research instruments, data collection method, validity and reliability of data collection instrument and method of data analysis. 3.1 Research Design The research design is the set of methods and procedures used in collecting and analysing measures of the variables specified in the research problem. The data collection methods and a statistical analysis plan. 3.2 Research Method The research method for this study is survey method. It will afford the researcher to use questionnaire in gathering data from the respondents. Abdulwahab (2012) writes that survey is a type of research method associated with research situation where the research subjects run into hundreds or even thousands, spreading across a large area. 3.3 Study Population The research population of the study comprised Lecturers of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar campus. According to the Establishment Unit of the University, the Academic Staff strength of the Calabar campus is 432, comprising 352 males and 80 females. Abdulwahab, (2012) describes population as the totality of the research subject in a research situation. 3.4 Sample Size Therefore, the sample size for this research was narrowed down to 50 respondents that were drawn from all the five faculties in the institution. Sample size determination is the act of choosing the number of observations or replicates to include in a statistical sample (Wikipedia, 2018). The researcher used the Yaro Yamane formula to calculate a suitable sample size since the population is finite. The formula is given as : n Where : n the sample size N= the finite population e= level of significance(or limit of tolerable error) 1 unity (a constant). The population for this research work is 432. e = 0.12. Therefore, n= = = = 59.82 (Approximately 60). 5. Sampling Technique The research adopted probability sampling technique to select respondents. All the faculties in the Calabar campus are considered i.e Faculty of Communication Technology, Faculty of Education, Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Faculty of Science. In each faculty selected, one department was selected and ten (10) respondents were accidentally selected with 7 males and 3 females in view of the gender parity. The same steps and approach were used to select respondents in other faculties. Thereby making a total of fifty (50) respondents in all. 3.6 Data Collection Instrument The main data collection instrument for this research work was questionnaire. Questionnaire was structured and designed in a way that afforded the respondents to answer the research questions appropriately. The questionnaire comprised two sections. “Section A” was embedded with respondents’ bio-data in order to elicit respondents’ demographic details while “Section B” was concerned with questions relating to the research questions. 3.7 Validity and Reliability of Research Instrument Since the data collection instrument (questionnaire) is a standard instrument of gathering data. The researcher consulted the research supervisor to test the validity and reliability of the research tool before use by making adjustment where necessary, it gave accurate and unbiased data for effective and efficient analysis. Therefore, any findings arrived at can be generalized. 3.8 Method of Data Collection The method of data collection for this research was face to face administration of questionnaire to the respondents. The consent of the selected respondents was sought before administration of the research instrument (questionnaire) for immediate and later collection depending on respondents’ disposition. 3.9 Data Analysis Method Data analysis has two prominent methods: qualitative research and quantitative research and since the research at hand is quantitative the method suitable is statistical analysis. The technique for analyzing the data to be collected for this research was a descriptive statistics using (frequency and percentage method). Table 4.3: Distribution of Respondents by Religion Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Christianity 51 92.7 Islam 4 7.3 Others specify - - Total 55 100.0 Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the religion table of the respondents above, 92.7% were member Christian. Thus, substantial numbers of the respondents were Christian. Table 4.4: Distribution of Respondents by Marital Status Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Single 8 14.5 Married 47 85.5 Total 128 100.0 Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the marital status distribution table above, 14.5% were single, whereas 85.5% were married. It is clear that majority of the respondents are married. Table 4.5: Distribution of Respondents by Educational Qualification Variable Frequency Percentage HND/BSC 6 10.9% PGD/MSC 32 58.2% PhD 17 30.9% Total 100 100.0 Analysis: From the academic qualification table above, 10.9% were holders of HND/BSC certificate, 58.2% were PGD/MSC holders whereas 30.9% were PhD holders. Therefore, it is obvious that at least many of the respondents have PGD/MSc. Table 4.5: To what extent do you have access to social media? Variables Frequency Percentage (%) High Extent 20 36.4 Moderate Extent 23 41.8 Low extent 10 18.2 Very Low Extent 2 3.6 Total 55 100.0 Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the table above, 36.4% submitted that they use social media to a high extent. While 41.8% of the respondents said they access social media to a moderate extent, 18.2% accessed social media to a low extent while 3.6% access social media to very low extent. It is established that majority of the respondents (41.8%) use social media to a moderate extent. Table 4.6: Devices used by respondents to access social media? Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Desktop computer 4 7.2 laptop 14 25.5 smartphone 22 40 ipad/tablet 15 27.3 Total 55 100.0 Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: The table above indicated that 7.2% use desktop computer to access social media; 25.5% used laptops whereas 40% used smartphone, and 27.3% use Ipad/tablet to access social media of their choice. It is obvious that substantial numbers of the respondents use Smartphones and other latest devices such as ipad, iphone and tablet to access the social media and internet. Table 4.7: How much time do you spend on social media daily? Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Less than 1 hour 14 25.5 1-3 hours 21 38.2 4-6 hours 9 16.4 6-8 hours 5 9.1 More than 8 hours 4 7.3 Total 55 100.0 Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: The table above indicated that 25.5% of the respondents spend less than 1 hour daily on social media of their choice, 38.2% of the respondents spent 1-3 hour daily on social media while 16.4% spend 4-6 hours on social media, 9.1% spend 6 -8 hours while 7.3% spend more than 8 hours daily on social media. It is evident that many of the respondents (38.2%) spend reasonable amount of time on social media doing different things. Table 4.8: Which of the social media do you prefer? Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Facebook 28 50.9 Whatsapp 18 32.7 Twitter 12 21.8 Analysis: From the table above, 7.3% of the respondents mostly chat on social media, 5.5% use social media for dating, 3.6% use it to shop, 34.5% use it for opinion sharing, 40% use it to gather information, while 9.1% use social media for networking. Thus, we can consider that majority of the respondents (74.5%) use social media for gathering information and sharing opinions. Table 4.12: Will face-to-face communication ultimately diminish because of these new social technologies. Variables Respondents Percentage (%) Completely 3 5.5% partially 17 30.9% Not at all 33 60% Undecided 2 3.6% Total 55 100% Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the table above, 5.5% of the respondents agree that social media will completely diminish face-to face communication, 30.9% partially agree, 60% do not believe that social media can diminish face to face communication while 3.6% were undecided in their opinion. Thus, majority (60%) of the respondents do not believe that the emergence of social technology will diminish face to face communication. Table 4.13: What is the impact of social media among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology? Variables Respondents Percentage (%) For social interaction 29 52.7% For feedback 11 20% Group discussion 15 27.3% Total 55 100% Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the table above, 52.7% of the respondents said social media have enhanced social interactions, 20% said it aids immediate feedback, 27.3% said it promotes group discussion and meetings. It is obvious that social media have enhanced group discussion, social interactions and high responsive feedback. Table 4.14: Have Social media altered the social interaction among lecturers of Cross River University of Technology? Variables Respondents Percentage (%) Strongly Disagree 2 3.6% Disagree 9 16.4% Neutral 11 20% Agree 33 60% Total 128 100% Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the table above,3.6% of the respondents strongly agreed that social media have altered social interaction among lecturers of Cross River University of Technology, 16.4% Disagreed, 20% were neutral, 60% agreed to the fact that social media have altered the social interaction among lecturers of Cross River University of Technology. Thus, majority of the respondents representing 60% agree that social media influenced interaction. Table 4.15: What factors are responsible for social media usage as tool for social interaction among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology? Variables Respondents Percentage (%) Convenience 22 40% Cheap 11 20% Effectiveness 9 16.4% Instantaneous 10 18.2% Borderless 3 5.5% Total 55 100% Field Survey: 2019 Analysis: From the table above,40% of the respondents said the main factors responsible for social media usage as tool for social interaction among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology is the convenience of the platforms, 20% said because the platforms are cheap, 16.4% said because social media are effective, 18.2% said due to the instantaneous nature of the social media, while 5.5% said it was because social media is borderless. Thus, the unique WhatsApp, and Instagram, these platforms are the most widely use. However, substantial numbers of the respondents use Smartphones and other latest devices such as IPad and tablet to access the social media and internet. It was evident that majority of the lecturers (85%) spend reasonable amount of time on social media doing different things available on their preferred platforms. Despite that many of the users gather information on social media, it is obvious that majority of the respondents have been affected by limiting their relationship with people to online and gradually eradicating the idea of visiting their family relatives and friends. It should be noted that many of the respondents (65.5%) share their personal, family and work place information on social media. It is of note that the busiest activities among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar source for information, sharing opinions and chatting with friends while substantial number of them admitted partially that social media and social networking is already diminishing face to face interaction as they meet, call and text rather than getting to each other physically. It is obvious that social media have enhanced group discussion, social interactions and high responsive feedback while majority of the lecturers agreed that social media have altered social interaction among lecturers of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar due to the unique features of the social media that offers them convenience and instant response, apart from its cheap nature. CHAPTER FIVE 5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations 5.1 Summary The research assesses social media usage among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar. The study was conducted to know the extent and popularity of social media among lecturers, what do they do on social media and what impact it has because of the studies on social media within academic cycle often tailored towards students. Meanwhile, social media usage is high among lecturers as well, not only within the students, therefore, the arrival of the internet and the proliferation of the social networking platforms have completely revolutionised the means, efforts, time and speed of communication coupled with effective feedback and interaction that goes into communication in this era. Today, not only the students of tertiary institutions but also the lecturers and non-teaching staff are making use of social media for the social interaction and information which could focuses on the official information, gist and other activities. The social interaction is considered to be a dynamic sequence of social actions between individuals or groups who modify their actions and reactions due to actions by their interaction partner(s) which has been highly enhanced by the emergence of social media. However, proliferation of social media has serious altered our social relationships among other physical meetings. Among the many ironies of our modern digital age, is that, social networking is actually ushering anti-social relationship when you consider its tendency to displace “real life” or “face-to-face communication” to virtual reality. 5.2 Conclusion References Abdulwahab, O. I. (2012) Practical Guides to Project Writing. Offa: Wunmi Commercial Press. Adeagbo, S. A. (2011). Introduction to Research Writing. Osogbo: Omilomo Publishing Firm. Alexarank (2016). The top 500 sites on the web. Retrieved March 1, 2016 from http:// www.alexa.com/topsites Anaeto, S. G., Onabanjo, O. S. and Osifeso, J.B. (2008). Models and Theories of Communication. Bowie, Maryland: African Renaissance Books. Boundless (2015). Understanding Social Interaction. Retrieved August 9, 2017 from https:// www.boundless.com/sociology/textbooks/boundless-sociology- textbook/social-interaction-5/ understanding-social-interaction-50/understanding- social-interaction-314-5912/ Boundless. "Understanding Social Interaction." Boundless Sociology Boundless, Invalid Date Invalid Date. Invalid Date. Retrieved 26 Agẹmọ. 2017 from https://www.boundless.com /sociology/textbooks/boundless-sociology- textbook/social-interaction-5/ understanding- social-interaction-50/understanding- social-interaction-314-5912/ Boyd, D. and Ellison, N., (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History and Scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication,11-13. Christopher, H. (2002). The New Mass Media. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company CiCso, (2015). The Zettabyte Era, Trends and Analysis. Retrieved February 23, 2017 from http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual- networking- index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html Claudio, Z. D. (1988). Formal, Non-Formal and Informal Education: Colin, B. (2014). 25 billion connected devices by 2020 to build the Internet of Things. Concepts/Applicability . A paper Presented at the Interamerican Conference on Physics Covay, E., & Carbonaro W. (2010). After the bell: Participation in extracurricular activities, classroom behavior, and academic achievement. Sociology of Education, 83(1), 20-45. JSTOR 25677180 Ebizmba (2017). Top 10 Social Media. Retrieved May 15, 2017 from http:// www.ebizmba.com/ Education”, Oaxtepec, Mexico. Published in “Cooperative Networks in Physics Education - Conference Proceedings 173”, American Institute of Physics, New York, 300 - 315. Retrieved May 12, 2017 from http://techne-dib.com.br/downloads/6.pdf Elshout, A. (2012). Twitter geeft de massa tanden, Volkskrant, 8 Feb 2012:7 Encyclopaedia (2015). Social interaction. Retrieved August 23, 2017 from https:// simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_interaction Enejah, F. (2017). Relevance of traditional media in Nigeria. Retrieved December 28, 2017 from https://blueprint.ng/relevance-of-traditional-media-in-nigeria/ Erik, S. (2016). People Prefer Social Media To Face-to-Face Communication. Retrieved August 3, 2017 from https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/2786 20/people-prefer- social-media-to-face-to-face-communi.htm Federal Republic of Nigeria (2017). History of Nigeria. Retrieved August 18, 2017 from Fred, L. (2014). Social Interaction and elements. Retrieved August 22, 2017 from http:// www.studylecturenotes.com/basics-of-sociology/social-interaction-definition- elements- types-forms Gascoigne, B. (2001). History of Communication, Better than shouting. Retrieved November 24, 2016 from http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/plaintexthistories . asp?historyid=aa93 Halima, L. (2016). Influence of Twitter on the Reading Ability of Bowen University Undergraduates. Journal of Communication and New Media. 3(1), 133-146 http://www.nigeria.gov.ng/index.php/2016-04-06-08-38-30/history-of-nigeria Humphrey, H (2015). Social Interaction Theories. Retrieved August 28, 2017 from http:// peopleof.oureverydaylife.com/social-interaction-theories-8629.html Igi global, (2016). Formal education. Retrieved May 20, 2017 from http://www.igi- global.com/dictionary/formal-education/11377 International Telecommunication Union (2011). Nigerian Communications Commission Delivering broadband for development in Nigeria. Retrieved September 2, 2016 from http://www.itu.int/net/itunews/issues/2011/05/25.aspx Journal of Communication, 50 (3):18-32 Kimberly Moffitt (2014). Social interactions. Retrieved August 13, 2017 from http:// study.com/academy/lesson/social-interactions-definition-types-quiz.html Kirk-Greene, A. H. M.,Ajayi, J. F., Udo, R. K. and Falola, T. O. (2017). See Article History https://www.britannica.com/place/Nigeria Kur, J. T. (2004). The Perceptual Impact of Online Advertising on Internet Users in Nsukka Town. Nsukka Journal of Technology, 2(4): 18-32 Margaret, R. (2005). Definition of chatting. Retrieved August 14, 2017 from http:// searchmicroservices.techtarget.com/definition/chatting Mark, G. (2007). How Cell Phones Are Killing Face-to-Face Interactions. Retrieved August, 2 2017 from http://mediashift.org/2007/10/how-cell-phones-are-killing- face-to-face-interactions295/ Melissa, N. (2012). Technology is Destroying the Quality of Human Interaction. Retrieved July 30, 2017 from https://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2012/01/technology- is- destroying-the-quality-of-human-interaction Nugent, M. S. (2013). Social Interaction. In PsychologyDictionary.org. Retrieved August 13, 2017 from https://psychologydictionary.org/social-interaction Olayemi, K. (2014). Internet: The New Global System. Lagos: Smalic Publications Ltd. Olutope, A. (2010). An Introduction to Basic Language Skills in Communication. Ibadan: Akinbola Ventures Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. Soyinka, A. (2005). Save Your Child from the Net” in Tell No. Oregun: Tell Communications Limited. Tammy, K. F. (2012). OMG! Over 40 Twitter Abbreviations You Should Know. Retrieved March, 6, 2016 from http://www.socialmediatoday.com/content/omg- over-40- twitter-abbreviations-you-should-know Ummaira, S. (2015). Rising Trend in the Use of Social Media Networks by Students in Seeking Information. Retreived on April 21, 2016 from www.youngscholar.wordpress.com Vangie, B., (2005). Types of Internet Communications. Retrieved August 23, 2017 from http:// www.webopedia.com/DidYouKnow/Internet/internet_communications.asp Wikipedia, (2017). Online Chat. Retrieved August 28, 2017 from https:// en.wikipOnline edia.org/wiki/Online_chat Wikipedia, (2017). Social Interaction. Retrieved July 26, 2017 from https:// simple.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Social_interaction Wright, K. (2000). Computer-Mediated Social Support, Older Adults, and Coping. 13. What factors are responsible for social media usage as tools for social interaction among lecturers in Cross River University of Technology, Calabar? Convenience [ ] Cheap [ ] Effectiveness [ ] Instantaneous [ ] others [ ] 14. What is your busiest activity on social media? Chatting [ ] Dating [ ] Shopping [ ] Opinion sharing [ ] Information [ ] Gossiping [ ] Networking [ ] Others [ ] 15. Will face-to-face communication ultimately diminish because of these new social technologies. Completely [ ] Partially [ ] Not at all [ ] Undecided [ ] 16. What are the challenges hampering effective use of social media for social interaction? Poor Network [ ] Poor Source of Power [ ] Cost of browsing/data [ ] Problem of access to the right information [ ] Virus/damages [ ] Others [ ] 17. What type of information do you share on social media? Personal [ ] Family [ ] Work Place [ ] Friends [ ] Others [ ] All [ ] 18. What does the future holds for social media as a platform for social interaction among Lecturers and students? Very Bright [ ] Bright [ ] Partially Bright [ ] Not Bright [ ] Undecided [ ] Thanks for your time and understanding.