Today, social media has a great impact on people’s daily life.

At this point, it can be said that social

media enables people to ensure a practical communication channel with other people all over the world
and perform many other information-related activities like reaching to the desired information, editing
it or sharing it with other clients over the Internet—web environment. Because their highly interactive
using features and functions, social media services are widely used by people, over computers or
computer related systems like mobile devices. In time, communication and interaction related benefits
of social media have enabled this approach to be used within different fields of the modern life. The
education field is one of these fields in which social media has a remarkable popularity. In the sense of
the related explanations, objective of this work is to evaluate effects of social media on students. At this
point, effects of social media on students have been examined by using a student survey tool. In this
sense, a total of 102 university students (from different departments—study areas) have been enabled
to fill different survey sections in order to receive responses for especially some statements regarding to
effects of social media over students’ general activities. In order to ensure a specific evaluation
perspective, the work has been done in Turkey and in this way; positive and negative effects of social
media over Turkish students have been analyzed briefly. The work has been done because evaluating
both positive and negative effects of social media on students makes it possible to analyze better
importance of social media within students’ life and obtain some certain ideas about effects of the social
media on improving students’ knowledge and abilities or just limiting them. Obtained findings with this
work show that the social media affects (Turkish) students generally in a positive manner. But it can also
be said that negative use of social media can prevent students from improving their cognitive level and
affects their social and physical aspects in a negative manner.

Social Media by Students

Social media are online technology platforms that help to connect people together far and near. It
is used to build relationship among people. The use of social media by students helps to have
access to basic information as quick as possible.

In school, the use of online platforms such as school website will give students the right access to
quality information about the school environment, departments, faculties, rules, and regulations.
It has been observed that social media has a wider and faster means of circulating information
not only to the students of an institution but also to the generality of the public.

Students must use all available online platforms effectively and they must be conscious of social
media positive and negative effects. They should try as much as possible to create a balance so as
not to get carried away while learning. Social media platforms available to students includes
Facebook, Whatsapp, Google Plus, Blogs, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and much more.

So what are the positive effects of Social Media?

1. It Facilitate Online Learning

The use of social media has helped the students to learn through various online learning
platforms available to them. The use of YouTube to watch educational videos has helped the
students to gain wider knowledge.

2. Access to Information

There are many groups that students can join through online platforms, that are related to their
course of study, demographic, school, environment and much more. Joining this group on
Whatsapp, Twitter, Facebook and others will help the students to have access to quality
information as at when needed.

3. It helps to Gain Wider Knowledge

Social media helps to enhance student academic performance and increase their knowledge
through data and information gathering. When students are been given an assignment in school,
they go through various online platforms to gather information so as to find solutions to their
assignment.

4. It helps to build Relationship

Students can get to know each other better through social media networks. It helps to bring
together two or more people, where they can share their problem, which it can get solve by their
fellow colleagues. If a student’s finds out that he or she is having a problem in a particular
course, he or she can open up through chat and finds a genius who can provide a solution to the
problem.

What are the negative Effects of Social Media?

1. It Waste Time

Many students find it difficult to go about their normal life without making use of social media.
It has been observed that student does not listen in class, they are busy chatting and reading
stories online. They waste their time chatting with friends and families, instead of reading and
practicing what they have learned in school.

2. It Causes Distraction

Many students stick to their gadget without concentrating on their study. It is a bad idea to waste
away judicious time on social media platforms without gaining anything from it. Students should
not be carried away by social media platforms because it will affect their academic performance.

3. It causes social problems

Social media has created many social problems in the society. In these modern days, many
students tend to choose online communication rather than having real time conversation, and this
leads to students becoming an introvert.
 4. It Causes Health Problems

The use of computers, mobile phones, and various gadgets to access online platforms by students
may harm the user if they use it for long hours frequently. Students may be exposed to bad
posture, eye strain, physical and mental stress. Too much use of education technology tools for
accessing social media by students is harmful and there must be a limit.

All educational stakeholders must ensure they coordinate the use of social media platforms by
setting up a policy that can help to regulate the negative effects aspect of social media. Students
must also be ready to learn and listen in class, they should not make chatting their priority.
Students should pursue an excellent academic performance and gain adequate knowledge that
will help them in the future.

There are several ways in which peers influence each other. Not all of them are bad. Variables of
peer influence include the ethnicity of the students, the socio-economic background of the
students, family relationships and group interests.

Negative Influences

In some peer groups, being smart is looked down upon. Similarly, these groups tend to share low
aspirations of going to college or getting certain careers. There may be other values in place,
such as taking care of the family or making money sooner rather than going to college first.

In addition, studies suggest that peers influence each other more heavily in the early teen years.
14 year olds are more than twice as likely to engage in risky, self-destructive behavior than 18
year olds are. The theory is that by 18, a young man or woman is more autonomous and has clear
aspirations of where he or she wants to go and how to get there. Consequently, if risky behavior
doesn't fit into the equation, an older teen is able to pass easily without feeling badly. However,
the pressure to 'fit in' for someone entering high school is tremendous.

Positive Influences

Many peer groups can be a positive influence on their friends as well. It is thought that intelligent
students help their peers bring up their grades. Likewise, girls with good friends who are
considered intelligent tend to do better in school. There definitely seems to be a pattern in the
influence of studious kids.With that said, another common theme is similar aspirations. Students
that want to go to a four-year college tend to hang out with others with similar aspirations.

Connecting Through Activities

One way of looking at influence from a parental perspective is to consider that your child will
most likely be friends with students who are interested in the same activities. Most high school
activities require a certain GPA and consequently, kids who are involved in school sports, drama,
student council and other activities tend to do better in school. However, it's important to note
that peer influence is not the most important factor on a student's academic success.
Other Variables that Affect Academic Success

There are several other variables that affect academic success and some argue may actually be
more influential than peers.

Parental Involvement

Across the board, when taken into account with other factors including ethnicity, socio-economic
factors, and even education of parents--parental involvement is the single most influential factor
in academic success. Teens who have parents who are involved in their lives and generally know
what's going on at school are more likely to attend four-year colleges.

Positive Role Models

Positive adult role models help solidify a student's path on the road to academic achievement. Be
it a mentor, or someone in the family, a role model can make a big difference. Setting high
expectations for a student can make that student think twice before engaging in risky behavior
that might "disappoint" his mentor.

Education as a Value

Students who believed that education was a means to pursue something higher and/or believed
that education was valuable tend to do better in school. One may well argue that this attitude
again stems from parents, although teachers can play a significant role as well.

How Influential Are Peer Groups?

It would seem that while peer groups are fairly influential, involved parents are even more so.
Peers can influence each other both positively and negatively.

I just ran across this National Bureau of Economic Research paper called “How Does Peer
Pressure Affect Educational Investments?” Authors Leonardo Bursztyn and Robert Jensen took
two groups of 11th graders and offered them free SAT prep courses. One group had to sign up
publicly, in full view of peers, and the other group signed up confidentially. The experiment was
conducted in both honors and non-honors classes. The authors write, “In non-honors classes, the
signup rate was 11 percentage points lower when decisions to enroll were public rather than
private.” There was no change in honors classes.

To further isolate the impact of peer pressure, the authors studied a group of students enrolled in
both honors and non-honors classes, offering again a free SAT prep course.

When offered the course in a non-honors class, these students were 25 percentage points less
likely to sign up if the decision was public rather than private. But if they were offered the course
in one of their honors classes, they were 25 percentage points more likely to sign up when the
decision was public. Thus, students are highly responsive to who their peers are and what the
prevailing norm is when they make decisions.

They conclude,

Peer pressure appears to be a powerful force affecting educational choices and whether students
undertake important investments that could improve academic performance or outcomes. In our
case, in non-honors classes, even very low-income students are willing to forgo free access to an
SAT prep course that could improve their educational and possibly later life outcomes, solely in
order to avoid having their peers know about it.

In other words, peer pressure profoundly affects student willingness to accept opportunities that
may lead to more post-secondary options. Whatever else you can glean from this experiment, it’s
a powerful argument for school choice programs that allow families to enroll children in schools
outside their zip code.

More recently, Zins, Weissberg, Wang and Walberg, (2004) demonstrated the importance of the
domains of motivational orientations, self-regulated learning strategies, and social/interpersonal
abilities in facilitating academic performance. Zins et al. reported, based on the large-scale
implementation of a Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) program, that student’s who became more
self-aware and confident regarding their learning abilities, who were more motivated, who set
learning goals, and who were organized in their approach to work (self- regulated learning)
performed better in school. According to Greenberg, Weissberg, O'Brien, Zins, Fredericks,
Resnick, & Elias, (2003), Zins et al. (2004) assert that “research linking social, emotional, and
academic factors are sufficiently strong to advance the new term social, emotional, and academic
learning (SEAL). A central challenge for researchers, educators, and policymakers is to
strengthen this connection through coordinated multiyear programming"(p. 470).
Walberg and associates’ conclusions resonate with findings from other fields. For example, the
"resilience" literature (Garmezy, 1993) grew from the observation that despite living in
disadvantaged and risky environments, certain children overcame and attained high levels of
achievement, motivation, and performance (Gutman, Sameroff & Eccles, 2002). Wach’s (2000)
review of biological, social, and psychological factors suggested that no single factor could
explain “how” and “why” these resilient children had been inoculated from the deleterious
effects of their day- to-day environments. A variety of promotive (direct) and protective
(interactive) variables were suggested, which included, aside from cognitive abilities, such
conative characteristics as study habits, social abilities, and the absence of behavior problems
(Guttman et al., 2003).
Haertel, Walberg, and Weinstein (1983) identified 8 major models of school learning that are
either based on psychological learning theory (Glaser, 1976) or time-based models of learning
(Bennett, 1978; Bloom, 1976; Carroll, 1963; Cooley & Leinhardt, 1975; Harnischfeger & Wiley,
1976). Despite variations in names of constructs, Haertel et al. (1983) found that most of the 8
theories included variables representing ability, motivation, quality of instruction, and quantity of
instruction. Constructs less represented in the models were social environment of the classroom,
home environment, peer influence, and mass media (Watson & Keith, 2002). Haertel et al.’s
(1983) review of theories, multiple quantitative syntheses of classroom research, and secondary
data analyses of large- scale national surveys (Reynolds & Walberg, 1992), generally support
Walberg's global model of educational productivity. Walberg’s model specifies that:
Classroom learning is a multiplicative, diminishing-returns function of four essential factors—
student ability and motivation, and quality and quantity of instruction—and possibly four
supplementary or supportive factors—the social psychological environment of the classroom,
education-stimulating conditions in the home and peer group, and exposure to mass media. Each
of the essential factors appears to be necessary but insufficient by itself for classroom learning;
that is, all four of these factors appear required at least at minimum level. It also appears that the
essential factors may substitute, compensate, or trade off for one another in diminishing rates of
return: for example, immense quantities of time may be required for a moderate amount of
learning to occur if motivation, ability, or quality of instruction is minimal (Haertel et al., 1983,
p. 76).

An important finding of the Walberg et al. large scale causal modeling research was that nine
different educational productivity factors were hypothesized to operate vis- à-vis a complex set
of interactions to account for school learning. Additionally, some student characteristic variables
(motivation, prior achievement, attitudes) had indirect effects (e.g., the influence of the variable
“went through” or was mediated via another variable).
The importance of the Walberg et al. group’s findings cannot be overstated. Walberg’s (1981)
theory of educational productivity is one of the few empirically tested theories of school learning
and is based on the review and integration of over 3,000 studies (DiPerna et al., 2002). Walberg
et al. have identified key variables that effect student outcomes: student ability/prior
achievement, motivation, age/developmental level, quantity of instruction, quality of instruction,
classroom climate, home environment, peer group, and exposure to mass media outside of school
(Walberg, Fraser & Welch, 1986). In the current context, the first three variables (ability,
motivation, and age) reflect characteristics of the student. The fourth and fifth variables reflect
instruction (quantity and quality), and the final four variables (classroom climate, home
environment, peer group, and exposure to media) represent aspects of the psychological
environment (DiPerna et al., 2002). Clearly student characteristics are important for school
learning, but they only comprise a portion of the learning equation.
More recently, Wang, Haertel, and Walberg (1993) organized the relevant school learning
knowledge base into major construct domains (State & District Governance &Organization,
Home & Community Contexts, School Demographics, Culture, Climate, Policies &Practices,
Design & Delivery of Curriculum & Instruction, Classroom Practices, Learner Characteristics)
and attempted to establish the relative importance of 228 variables in predicting academic
domains. Using a variety of methods, the authors concluded that psychological, instructional,
and home environment characteristics (“proximal” variables) have a more significant impact on
achievement than variables such as state-, district-, or school-level policy and demographics
(“distal”variables). More importantly, in the context of the current document, student
characteristics (i.e., social, behavioral, motivational, affective, cognitive, metacognitive) were
the set of proximal variables with the most significant impact on learner outcomes (DiPerna et
al., 2002).

The performance of a system, for example a home entertainment system, depends on the components of
the system and on the interactions between these components. Similarly, level of performance of an
individual or an organization depends on the components described in Table 2. Each component is
described using rules and exemplars. An exemplar is a lucid example of a component. The rules in
column four are guidelines to define the component.

Improving Performance

While some factors that influence improving performance are immutable, other factors can be influenced
by the performer or by others. The factors that can be varied fall into three categories.

Performer’s Mindset. Performer’s mindset includes actions that engage positive emotions. Examples
include setting challenging goals, allowing failure as a natural part of attaining high performance, and
providing conditions in which the performer feels an appropriate degree of safety.

Immersion. Immersion in a physical, social, and intellectual environment can elevate performance and
stimulate personal as well as professional development. Elements include social interactions, disciplinary
knowledge, active learning, emotions (both positive and negative), and spiritual alignment.

Reflective Practice. Reflective practice involves actions that help people pay attention to and learn from
experiences. Examples include observing the present level of performance, noting accomplishments,
analyzing strengths and areas for improvements, analyzing and developing identity, and improving levels
of knowledge. The section on Assessment offers a variety of strategies for cultivating reflective practice.

Conditions for optimal performance and improvements in performance can be synthesized in three
axioms: Axiom 1—engage the performer in an optimal emotional state (performer’s mindset). Axiom 2—
immerse the performer in an enriching environment. Axiom 3—engage the performer in reflective
practice.

The ToP presented here is similar to other constructs in the literature. The Parallel Curriculum, advocated
by Tomlinson et al. (2002), advocates four parallel curriculums that reinforce the four adjustable
components in Table 2. The core curriculum and the curriculum of connections focuses on knowledge
construction. The curriculum of practices emphasizes context and promotes skill development. The
curriculum of identity focuses on development of the individual as a member of a professional community.
Support for the three axioms can also be found in writings by Caine et al. Relaxed alertness aligns with
the performer’s mindset. Orchestrated involvement in complex challenges and supportive experiences
aligns with immersion. Active processing of experiences aligns with reflective practice

Additional support for the axioms can be found in the work of Bransford et al. (2000). Their model for
effective teaching and learning includes knowledge-centered, learner-centered, assessment-centered,
and community-centered components. The learner-centered component involves the performer’s
mindset. The knowledge-centered and community-centered components connote immersion in an
enriching environment, while the assessment-centered component embraces elements of reflective
practice. The importance of having a well-founded conceptual model, appropriate methods for data
collection, and reliable and robust system for making inferences about observations is well-established in
the work of Pellegrino and Glaser (2001), and this undergirds reflective practice in organizational
contexts.

Concluding Thoughts

We all want to be high performers: “Be like Mike,” the Nike add suggests. The ToP is a challenge to
educators: by improving our own performance, we empower ourselves to help others learn and grow. As
advocated by Harvard’s Project Zero, performance is closely related to learning-for-understanding (Wiske,
1998). When people learn and grow, they are empowered to create results that make a difference.
Working and learning together in ways that make the world better has been a prim
This study uses structural equations modeling to test a hypothetical social network model with
applications to a sample of 34,896 school children in Abu Dhabi. The main independent
constructs in the model are related to children’s attitude with regard to social networking,
reasons for using social networks, things done on social networks, and topics used. The
dependent constructs cover perceived school performance and social effects of social
networking. The study will describe the relations among the various constructs. The effect of
other variables, such as parental knowhow, is also investigated. Our work has improved our
insight in the social networking model. Results support the idea of reciprocal relations among
perceived performance, learning from social networking, and the effect of social networking.
Evidence for a model that includes opposite pathways implies that the problem of social
networking constructs, its antecedents, and possible consequences should be examined with
caution.

 Previous article
 Next article

Keywords
Social networking

School performance

Learning

Abu Dhabi

1. Introduction

In today’s world, children can access the Internet and social media applications from many
different entry points, including iPads, tablets, desktops, laptops, and smartphones. Deng and
Tavares (2013) noted that social networking has become an integral part of our children’s social
life; it is now seen as a learning platform that could be utilized to enhance student engagement
and performance. Social networking and media tools offer school children the opportunity to
communicate, get in touch, access information, research, and chat (Abdulahi et al., 2014; Ahn,
2011).

Beginning early in development, children learn from watching others and through social
interaction. Some socio-cultural theories suggest that children learn in the context of their social
and cultural environment (Greenfield, 2009). Some suggest that because media are in children’s
learning environments from early on, they are an important influence on burgeoning social
cognition beginning at a very young age and continuing through adolescence and beyond
(Greenfield, 2009; Rideout et al., 2010). Moreover, media connects to salient and important
developmental tasks in adolescence, such as social learning and identity formation
(Subrahmanyam and Smahel, 2010). Rios-Aguilar et al. (2012) noted that “social media is
redefining how individuals create ties with other individuals as well as how individuals establish
relationships with the organizations that serve them.” They also stress that social networking
sites play a key role in peoples’ lives because they provide a space for people to communicate
with friends and peers or share information, and through websites and services that encourage
and facilitate participation, social media allows a person to collaborate and build communities.

In March 2016, Clouds-Media, 2016 reported that 95% of UAE’s population has direct access to
the Internet, and the UAE is one of the largest consumers of social media in the world, with more
than 50% of the population active on social media. The report added that Facebook, Twitter, and
Instagram are the most popular social media platforms, and Snapchat is also witnessing a
massive rise in popularity, especially with younger audiences. However, studies concerning UAE
school children’s use of social networking are rare. Badri et al., 2016 examined the usage of
social media devices and applications among students in Abu Dhabi. A survey of more than
31,000 children from private and public schools showed a high home access to the Internet of
91.7%. Results showed that children used social media mainly for keeping contact with friends
and family and for learning purposes. A report by Al Sayigh (2013) noted that “The new
communication revolution has effected a major change in the culture and lifestyle of people,
particularly of the youth. Many of the prevailing problems afflicting the youth – such as
introversion, social isolation, Internet addiction, poor performance at schools, and the acquisition
of bad habits and values, such as violence and criminal behavior – are a direct consequence of
the big change that has struck our social culture.” The report added that “sophisticated devices,
such as ‘iPad,’ pose a new challenge to Emirati families as they remain in the hands of children
and are a matter of concern for many parents. Some complain that iPad has stolen their kids from
them as these devices divert them from their daily studies, completing their homework, and even
from communicating with the rest of the family.”

The findings of this study will add to the current body of research, furthering the long line of
research that has been conducted on the effects of social networking or social media on school-
aged children. This study examines the structural relations between the major determinants of
social networking. The model of social networking presented incorporates independent
constructs related to children’s attitude with regard to social networking, reasons for using social
networking, things done on social networking, and topics used. The dependent constructs cover
perceived school performance and social effects of social networking. The study will also
explore the influence of other variables such as student’s gender and grade level and school type.
The effect of other variables, such as parental knowhow, is also investigated.

2. Literature review

The research on social networking and children usually focuses on many aspects or dimensions.
Most empirical studies dealt with the relations between using social networking and academic
performance (Alwagait et al., 2015; Hawi and Samaha, 2016). Some studies attempted to shed
light on the learning aspects of using social networking (Zhang et al., 2015; Mao, 2014). Many
studies focused on the negative things that could occur in children using social networking
(Maddena et al., 2016; Koutamanis et al., 2015; Li, 2017). Some studies attempted to focus on
the reasons why children use social networking (Samaha and Hawi, 2017), while others studied
the children’s attitudes toward social networking related to being connected (Miller et al., 2015;
Tomczyk and Kopecky, 2016). Some studies touched on the sensitive role of the involvement of
parents in their children’s use of social networking (Lovea et al., 2016).
Empirical studies showed mixed results with regard to the impact of social networks on
academic performance. Studies have found that the participation of students on social networks
may have both positive and negative impacts on their academic performance. Mehmood and
Taswir, 2013 noted that “the use of social media networks and the Internet is one of the most
important factors that can influence educational performance of students positively or
adversely.”

Several studies in different cultures and countries on the use of social networking and academic
performance found no significant relations. In Ethiopia, Ndaku et al. (2013) found no significant
relation between time spent on social networks and students’ grade point average. In a study in
Pakistan, Ahmed and Qazi (2011) also noted that there was no significant relation between time
spent on social media networks and students’ academic performance. In Nigeria, Akanbi and
Akanbi (2014) found no evidence of a correlation between social media usage and academic
performance. Meanwhile, through studies in the United States, Paul and Gelish (2011) and Kolek
and Saunders (2008) found that the use of social networks was not related to academic
performance.

A number of researchers have found a negative impact that social network participation has on
students’ academic performance. Malaney (2005) found that some students in multiple studies in
2000 and 2003 reported that their grades had suffered as a result of too much time spent on social
media. Banquil et al., 2009 found evidence of a continuing drop of grades among students
because of using social networking. Some studies reported a significant negative relation
between Facebook use and academic performance (Gafni and Deri, 2012; Junco, 2012a,b, 2011;
Ndaku, 2013; Rouis et al., 2011). Banquil et al. (2009) observed a drop in students’ grades and
lack of time as consequences of social networking participation. Other studies also concluded
that the obsession with SN had adverse effects of social networking on student performance
(Paul et al., 2012; Burak, 2012). Results of a study of Swedish students indicated that the
extensive use of social networking and Facebook by students will lead to poor academic
performance (Rouis et al., 2011). Nevertheless, a number of researchers and studies have found a
positive impact that social network participation has on students’ academic performance. Some
studies focused on Facebook usage and its positive impact on academic performance (Junco,
2012a; Tuan, 2013). Many studies found positive impacts of social media and networking on
language and reading (Tuan, 2013; Wood et al., 2014).

Social networking and media can provide rich tools for teaching innovation and compiling ways
to engage students effectively (APA, 2011). Results of some empirical studies show that
educators should embrace social media (Ito et al., 2009). Some suggested that high school
students use it to connect with other students for homework and group projects (Boyd, 2008).
Some teachers use blogs as teaching tools, where they reinforce skills in English, written
expression, and creativity (Borja, 2005). Social media also allow students to get together outside
the class to collaborate and exchange ideas about projects and assignments O'Keeffe and Clarke-
Pearson, 2011.

Gafni and Deri (2012) used the term “social absorption” for students, where they emphasized the
role of social networks in socializing and opening new channels for discovering more academic
resources. Ahmed and Qazi (2011) found that social network sites promote interactions among
students and teachers. Rouis (2012) performed a study on 161 Tunisian students and concluded
that academic performance was improved because of their satisfaction with their family and
friends’ relations and consecutiveness.

With regard to uses and activities of children on social networking, Ito et al., 2009 identified a
number of positive activities that children undertake. The technologies involve several positive
activities mostly related to involvement in interest-driven communities. Ahn (2011) added that
“Social network sites provide a platform for the youth to participate in communities that help
them to learn and practice skills within a particular knowledge area.” Similarly, a study by
Fishman et al., 2005 indicated that “college students produce tremendous volume of writing
through various social media tools such as blogs, emails, and other social media environments.”

In terms of educational benefits, a number of researchers have found positive outcomes in online
community engagement among children and their peers. Tiene (2000) showed that “written
communication on cyberspace enables students to take part in discussions at a time convenient to
them and articulate their ideas in more carefully thought-out and structured ways.” Deng and
Tavares (2013) concluded that “web-based discussions can contribute to the development of
students’ reflective ability and critical thinking skills.” The authors also add that relative to face-
to-face communication, “children are more willing to voice their views (agreements or
disagreements) and are more attuned to others’ opinions in online discussions.” According to
Apeanti and Danso (2014), students think that it is more fun for their teachers to use social
media. The authors also note that children think their academic performance would be better if
they could contact their colleagues and teachers through social media. The authors noted also
that teachers should offer class hours on social media. Researchers have tackled different
methods and ways where social networking could be utilized in education. These methods
included gaining more vocabulary and writing skills (Yunus et al., 2013), exchanging
assignments, discussions, and resources with fellow students (Asad et al., 2012), formulating
group discussions, communicating, and exchanging ideas with fellow students (Salvation and
Adzharuddin, 2014). Other benefits involve teachers being able to share course related materials
with their students, create student groups, collaborate on projects, providing peer support and
facilitating teaching (English and Duncan-Howell, 2008).

Paul and Gelish (2011) noted that students’ social network use is related to their personality and,
hence, attitude toward social networking. They elaborated that “some students are influenced
more than others depending on their personality.” Burak (2012) addressed the issue of risk-
taking behavior when using social networking. The study concluded that multitasking would lead
to “higher risk-taking behavior.” Fowler and Nicholas (2008) reported that clusters of happy and
unhappy people were visible in the social network as well as separation of friends. Tartari (2015)
showed that social media had a positive effect on children and teenagers. A positive impact was
noticed with regard to communication abilities, information research, technical skills
development, and effective use of new technology. Results also showed negative effects of risk,
depression, cyberbullying, and sexual harassment. Ito et al., 2009 reported that social media may
influence aspects such as romance, friendship, social status, and sharing music, movies, video
games, and other aspects of adolescent culture. Boyd (2007) suggested that social media
enhances children’s view of self, community, and the world. Staying connected by social media
helps children to stay connected with friends and family and to make new friends, share pictures
and videos, and exchange new ideas (O'Keeffe and Clarke-Pearson, 2011).

In their study, Akanbi and Akanbi (2014) found a significant difference between males and
females in social media usage. Studies by Brenner (2012) and Rideout et al., 2010 indicate that
girls on average spend more time on social media sites than boys do. The same studies also
indicate that more girls use Facebook and Twitter. Other studies note that more boys use music-
sharing sites (HuffPost Women, 2012; Williams, 2012). A study by Gross (2004) reported that
both genders were embracing the Internet as a means of communicating with their friends. The
author indicates that chatting via instant messaging is the most common activity among
American high school students. Lenhart and Madden (2007a,b) noted that teenage girls in the
U.S. were more active bloggers than boys, but boys were more likely to upload online videos.
Boys spend more time playing video games and visiting video websites (Rideout et al., 2010),
while girls share more videos (Lenhart, 2012; Lenhart et al., 2010). Most reasons cited by young
children in the U.S. for visiting social media sites are to connect and communicate with others
(Urista et al., 2009). Girls generally use social media to communicate with friends, while boys
more often use social media to make new friends (Barker, 2009; Lenhart and Madden, 2007a).

Girls usually post “cute” pictures while boys were more likely to share “self-promoting” pictures
and comments (Peluchette and Karl, 2008). Girls in both the U.S. and Sweden are more likely to
post photographs of themselves with friends (Lenhart and Madden, 2007b). Boys are more likely
to orient toward technology, sports, and humor in the information they post to their profile
(Sveningsson, 2007). Boys are more likely to share their location and/or phone number (Lenhart
and Madden, 2007b; Pujazon-Zazik et al., 2012). Many studies found that girls place more
emphasis on selecting pictures in which they are attractive (Siibak, 2009; Kapidzic and Herring,
2011). Studies in general reported that girls are more likely to restrict access to their profiles
(Patchin and Hinduja, 2010; Thelwall, 2008). Some reported that girls are more likely to restrict
their profile visibility to their friends only (Lenhart et al., 2010).

A study by Ybarra and Mitchell (2008) and Muscanell and Guadagno (2012) indicated that girls
are significantly more likely to have experienced sexual solicitation. Studies have shown that a
majority of American teens viewed sexually explicit websites (Siibak, 2010; Brown and L’Engle,
2009). When it comes to privacy, studies have indicated that in general, both boys and girls often
controlled their audience to be limited to their friends but not usually their parents or teachers
(Qian and Scott, 2007; Kiss, 2013; Peluchette and Karl, 2008). Carmon (2010) found that boys
pretended to be more macho, whereas girls pretended they were older and with higher self-
esteem.

Social media is the undeniable wave of the future. There are a variety of positive and negative
consequences of this new style of interaction. The best way to help children navigate this new world is
to neither deny it nor allow them to be saturated with it. The word is ‘balance.’ A balance should be
created between a young person’s academic, social and physical development. Parents and teachers
should strive to help children achieve this healthy balance by encouraging physical activities away from a
computer screen.