The Open UniversitySkip to content
 

Periscope vs Facebook Live – it isn’t a grudge match

Smith, Andrew (2016). Periscope vs Facebook Live – it isn’t a grudge match. In: 2016 Social Media for Learning in Higher Education Conference (SocMedHE16), 16th December 2016, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, England.

Full text available as:
[img]
Preview
PDF (Supplementary Material) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (1MB) | Preview
URL: https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/socmedhe/16-periscope-vs-f...
Google Scholar: Look up in Google Scholar

Abstract

Periscope and Facebook Live both offer educators an opportunity to extend their ‘typical’ teaching and learning experience into the domains occupied by different social media paradigms. Both are live video streaming technologies – enabling individuals to broadcast live events in an (almost) real time format.

Each entrenched in affordances of their own host system – Periscope is for Twitter, as Facebook Live is for Facebook. Avoiding the obvious, it is clear that Facebook and Twitter serve different social media communities. However, with tools available to interconnect Facebook and Twitter. Live streaming Internet broadcast quality video content can transcend either platform and the behaviours of their respective communities of practice (Lave 1991).

Teaching networking has already been accomplished using Periscope – by virtue that this platform was released a clear year ahead of Facebook Live. Work has been accomplished using this platform as a tool to reach and teach prospective Network Engineers basic practical skills in the domain of Cisco routing (Smith 2015).

Linked to the Teaching by Social Media process, already being researched and developed within a distance learning context. The teaching team were able to integrate a series of live sessions. Presenting a comparable set of online practical sessions via Facebook live.

Using similar sessions, offered an opportunity existed to critically evaluate the respective strengths and weaknesses of each platform. From technological affordances to audience engagement and persistence of the video post broadcast.

Following the first five from the former Periscope weekly sequence (October 2015) the work presented via Facebook Live in May 2016 –covering:

• IP addressing • Subnetting • Static routes • Routing using RIP • Routing using OSPF

This session critically compares the affordances offered by Periscope and Facebook Live – on a 1:1 session basis as well as how:

• The different audiences behaved and the impact on student engagement? • Technology strengths and weaknesses? • Reach and persistence, what was the impact? • Audience perception.

Item Type: Conference or Workshop Item
Academic Unit/School: Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Computing and Communications
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
Interdisciplinary Research Centre: eSTEeM
Health and Wellbeing PRA (Priority Research Area)
Item ID: 48037
Depositing User: Andrew Smith
Date Deposited: 21 Dec 2016 16:31
Last Modified: 17 Aug 2017 10:58
URI: http://oro.open.ac.uk/id/eprint/48037
Share this page:

Download history for this item

These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.

Actions (login may be required)

Policies | Disclaimer

© The Open University   contact the OU