MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410233203 · doi:10.54097/07fqa170

The Role of Social Media in Enhancing Collaborative Learning in Online Education

2025· article· en· W4410233203 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Humanities and Social Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaCollaborative learningOnline learningPsychologyComputer scienceSociologyMathematics educationMultimediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research explores the impact of social media as a tool for enhancing online education, focusing on its role in fostering collaborative learning. With the rise of online education, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, social media platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp have transitioned from mere networking sites to integral components of digital learning environments. This research highlights the advantages of social media in educational settings, such as increased student engagement, the facilitation of peer-to-peer interaction, and improved access to diverse resources. The study also addresses theoretical frameworks, including Vygotsky's social constructivism, which underscores the role of social interaction in knowledge acquisition, and the Technology Acceptance Model, which examines factors influencing the use of social media in education. Despite the benefits, the study acknowledges challenges, including privacy concerns, information overload, and potential distractions. These limitations require careful consideration and strategic management to maximize the educational potential of social media. The findings suggest that, when properly utilized, social media can enhance online learning by promoting inclusivity, motivation, and academic performance. The paper concludes with recommendations for integrating social media into educational practice, proposing guidelines for balancing its educational advantages with privacy and focus concerns. Future research should continue to explore best practices for using social media to support effective digital learning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.380 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Humanities and Social SciencesSame topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207