You are here:

A Tale of Two Twitters: Synchronous and Asynchronous Use of the Same Hashtag
PROCEEDING

, Michigan State University, United States ; , Georgia Southern University, United States ; , Michigan State University, United States ; , Michigan State University, United States ; , Michigan State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Austin, TX, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-27-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Communication in online settings can occur at the same time (synchronously) or at different times (asynchronously). A new form of online learning in which teachers communicate both at the same time and at different times is through social media platforms such as Twitter. In this descriptive, exploratory study, we set out to explore differences between synchronous and asynchronous interactions through a State Educational Twitter Hashtag (SETH) for educators in Michigan in the United States of America. We collected more than 8,000 tweets and coded for whether the tweet was during either part of a once-per-week synchronous “chat” or all other times of the week. We compared #miched between the two modes and then determined differences in terms of interactions and sentiment. Our analysis is discussed in light of findings from research on synchronous and asynchronous learning.

Citation

Rosenberg, J., Akcaoglu, M., Staudt Willet, K.B., Greenhalgh, S. & Koehler, M. (2017). A Tale of Two Twitters: Synchronous and Asynchronous Use of the Same Hashtag. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 283-286). Austin, TX, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 9, 2023 from .

© 2017 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Rosenberg, J.M., Greenhalgh, S.P., Koehler, M.J., Hamilton, E., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). An investigation of State Educational Twitter Hashtags (SETHs) as affinity spaces. E-Learning and Digital Media, 13(1-2), 2444.
  2. Bourne, J.R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J.O. (1997). Paradigms for online learning: a case study in the design and implementation of an asynchronous learning networks (ALN) course. Proceedings of Frontiers in Education 1997 27th Annual Conference. Teaching and Learning in an Era of Change, 1, 245–255.
  3. Cao, Q., Griffin T.E., & Bai, X. (2009). The importance of synchronous interaction for student satisfaction with course websites. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(3), 331-339.
  4. Carpenter, J.P., & Krutka, D.G. (2014). How and why educators use Twitter: A survey of the field. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(4), 414-434.
  5. Chen, C.C., & Shaw, R.S. (2006). Online synchronous vs. Asynchronous software training through the behavioral modeling approach: A longitudinal field experiment. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 4 (4), 88-102.
  6. Huang, X., & Hsiao, E. (2012). Synchronous and asynchronous communications in an online environment: Faculty experiences and perceptions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 15–30.
  7. Johnson, G.M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TechTrends, 50(4), 46-53. Doi:10.1007/s11528-006-0046-9
  8. Tait, A. (2003). Guest editorial-reflections on student support in open and distance learning. The International Review of Research in Open And Distance Learning, 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/index
  9. Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: a case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 77–90. Doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00164-1
  10. Walther, J.B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52-90.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read