TY - JOUR
T1 - Identifying multiple learning spaces within a single teacher-focused Twitter hashtag
AU - Greenhalgh, Spencer P.
AU - Rosenberg, Joshua M.
AU - Staudt Willet, K. Bret
AU - Koehler, Matthew J.
AU - Akcaoglu, Mete
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2020/4
Y1 - 2020/4
N2 - The existing work on teacher-focused Twitter hashtags typically frames each hashtag as a single, unified phenomenon, thereby collapsing or erasing differences between them (and any resulting implications for learning). In this study, we conceived of teacher-focused hashtags as affinity spaces potentially containing subspaces distinguished by synchronous chats and other, asynchronous communication. We used computational methods to explore how participation differed in terms of content, interactions, and portals between these contexts within the #michED hashtag used by Michigan teachers. During the 2015–2016 academic year, #michED saw more non-chat activity than chat activity, and most participants only engaged in one mode of activity or the other. Participation during chats was associated with more replying as well as more socially-, affectively-, and cognitively-related content, suggesting a focus on social interaction. In contrast, non-chat participation was associated with more retweeting, mentioning, hyperlinks, and hashtags, suggesting a focus on content dissemination. These results suggest that different affinity spaces—and different literacy practices—may exist within the same hashtag to support different objectives. Teachers, teacher educators, and researchers should therefore be careful to make these distinctions when considering Twitter as a learning technology for teachers.
AB - The existing work on teacher-focused Twitter hashtags typically frames each hashtag as a single, unified phenomenon, thereby collapsing or erasing differences between them (and any resulting implications for learning). In this study, we conceived of teacher-focused hashtags as affinity spaces potentially containing subspaces distinguished by synchronous chats and other, asynchronous communication. We used computational methods to explore how participation differed in terms of content, interactions, and portals between these contexts within the #michED hashtag used by Michigan teachers. During the 2015–2016 academic year, #michED saw more non-chat activity than chat activity, and most participants only engaged in one mode of activity or the other. Participation during chats was associated with more replying as well as more socially-, affectively-, and cognitively-related content, suggesting a focus on social interaction. In contrast, non-chat participation was associated with more retweeting, mentioning, hyperlinks, and hashtags, suggesting a focus on content dissemination. These results suggest that different affinity spaces—and different literacy practices—may exist within the same hashtag to support different objectives. Teachers, teacher educators, and researchers should therefore be careful to make these distinctions when considering Twitter as a learning technology for teachers.
KW - Twitter
KW - social media
KW - teacher professional learning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078106712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85078106712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103809
DO - 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103809
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85078106712
SN - 0360-1315
VL - 148
JO - Computers and Education
JF - Computers and Education
M1 - 103809
ER -