Abstract
Chat applications (apps) are used to create portable or mobile learning environments known as m-learning environments in higher education settings. These m-learning environments can support networked learning as students are provided with opportunities to break time and distance barriers to establish relationships with others and learn from each other. However, even though chat apps are similar on the most basic level, the core functions of the apps used in the South African context differ in important ways. Therefore it is reasonable to argue that one app might be more effective than the others when creating m-learning environments in higher education contexts.
It has already been found that Telegram is more useful than WhatsApp, but only a few of the core functions were investigated. The University of South Africa (Unisa) – which can be regarded as a leader in online education – points out a few of the differences between the apps on their website to motivate the phasing out of WhatsApp in favour of Telegram. Although the apps differ in significant ways, not a single study could be found that compared the most popular chat apps in the South African context, namely WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal, to help lecturers select an app to use in their classrooms. Therefore, the aim of this research was to compare these three apps and recommend the most appropriate app for South African higher education.
For the purpose of this comparative study, WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal were used to create three m-learning environments. Thereafter, three smartphones were used to create three users to participate in similar discussions in these m-learning environments. Screenshots of these discussions were then used to compare the three m-learning environments.
The three m-learning environments were found to be very similar on the most basic level and it might seem reasonable to argue that findings of other researchers about the usability of each of these apps can be generalised to the other apps. However, as soon as the core functions were compared, one of the apps stood out above the others.
Telegram has more useful features than the two other apps. Lecturers can create groups for up to 200 000 students in Telegram, compared to the limitations of 1 000 (Signal) and 256 (WhatsApp). Telegram offers more submenus (media, files, voice notes, music, links to websites, and GIFs), which can improve access to the shared knowledge base, whereas Signal offers only one submenu and WhatsApp three. Telegram also allows users to share media and documents with a size of up to 2 gigabytes – therefore, almost all media and documents can be shared in the groups – whereas Signal and WhatsApp limit the size of documents being shared. The search function is, however, not as effective as that of WhatsApp, but better than the that of Signal. Telegram is also the only app that allows organisations – such as universities – to create bots to help students find existing groups, and if a group has not yet been created, the bot can even be requested to create such a group.
Telegram supports spontaneous communication better than the two other apps. New users receive access to all the messages and resources shared since the group was created, whereas WhatsApp and Signal allow access to only the parts of the chat sent after the user has joined the group. This function can improve networked learning and reduce additional admin by not having to resend previously shared information. Telegram is also the only app that allows users to edit comments after they have been published – a function that can reduce stress and confusion levels as students and lecturers will see only the edited versions. Both WhatsApp and Signal have time limitations on the option to delete messages sent, and even if the messages are deleted within this time frame, a telltale message is left on the timeline with regard to the deletion. Telegram is the only app that allows users to delete messages over any period of time without a telltale message on the wall. Telegram is also the only app that allows users to pin a message on the wall to bring it under the attention of the other members of the group.
Telegram can support planned communication better than the two other apps. Lecturers can create a channel to post all information in an organised way. If they create a group for the channel, the channel then posts to the group automatically. Channels differ from groups in that students cannot post as well – they can only comment on the posts. Therefore, the lecturer’s posts do not get lost between too many other messages. Lecturers can monitor students’ participation in their shared information, as they can see which members of the channel have read the shared information and how many have commented. The size of the channels is not limited.
Lastly, Telegram can be regarded as a safer app than WhatsApp, although not as safe as Signal. For the purpose of this study, an app is regarded as safe if the personal information collected is limited and outsiders cannot gain access to the messages. Although Telegram collects more personal information than Signal, it is the only app that allows users to use usernames rather than their smartphone numbers to chat – a function that improves the safety of online chatting. It is also the only app that allows users to start personal messages in the group without having to exchange smartphone numbers. Even though Telegram can be regarded as a safe app, it is recommended that students are still trained in online security as people tend to share too much personal information online.
The uptake of Telegram will be influenced as its user base and social impact grows. The information in this article may also have an impact on the uptake as the differences in core functions are discussed in depth. This could positively impact perceptions of the usefulness, the expectations of the input needed to learn to use the app, and how work can be improved when using Telegram to create m-learning environments.
Keywords: applications (apps); comparative research; core functions; higher education; mobile learning; networked learning; Signal; Telegram; WhatsApp