You are here:

#Edchat is Bigger, But Better Only for Some: Revisiting How and Why Educators Use Twitter
PROCEEDING

, Michigan State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, NV, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-37-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This mixed methods study revisits Carpenter and Krutka’s (2014) survey of how and why educators use Twitter, narrowing the scope to a single hashtag, #Edchat. From October, 1, 2017 to June 5, 2018, I collected 1.2 million unique #Edchat tweets from approximately 200,000 different tweeters. Through machine coding I describe how educators contributed to #Edchat, and through human coding I describe why. I found that #Edchat offered educators a content source, a place to grow their reputation, and opportunities to connect with other educators for mutually beneficial purposes. Although the typical contributor retweeted just a single time in eight months, this busy conversation has persisted for a decade—however, the volume of content in #Edchat can be overwhelming for novices. Teacher educators must keep these factors in mind as they guide preservice teachers to appropriate networking, mentoring, and learning opportunities.

Citation

Staudt Willet, K.B. (2019). #Edchat is Bigger, But Better Only for Some: Revisiting How and Why Educators Use Twitter. In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2778-2786). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 9, 2023 from .

© 2019 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Britt, V.G., & Paulus, T. (2016). “Beyond the four walls of my building”: A case study of #Edchat as a community of practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 30, 48–59. Doi:10.1080/08923647.2016.1119609
  2. 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, 414–434.
  3. Carpenter, J.P., Tur, G., & Marín, V.I. (2016). What do U.S. And Spanish pre-service teachers think about educational and professional use of Twitter? A comparative study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 131–143. Doi:10.1016/J.tate.2016.08.011
  4. Chen, G.M. (2011). Tweet this: A uses and gratifications perspective on how active Twitter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 755–762.
  5. Greenhow, C.M., Gleason, B., Marich, H., & Staudt Willet, K.B. (2017). Educating social scholars: Examining novice researchers’ practices with social media. Qwerty – Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 12(2), 30-45. Retrieved from http://www.ckbg.org/qwerty/index.php/qwerty/article/view/269
  6. Hawksey, M. (2014). TAGS: Twitter Archiving Google Sheet (Version 6.1) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://tags.hawksey.info
  7. Honeycutt, C., & Herring, S.C. (2009). Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration via Twitter. Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42), 1–10.
  8. Latzko-Toth, G., Bonneau, C., & Millette, M. (2017). Small data, thick data: Thickening strategies for trace-based social media research. In L. Sloan& A. Quan-Haase (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media research methods (pp. 199-214). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
  9. Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2014). Twitter as a tool to promote community among language teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(2), 187–212. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/49768
  10. Luo, T., & Clifton, L. (2017). Examining collaborative knowledge construction in microblogging-based learning environments. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 365-390. Doi:10.28945/3869
  11. Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  12. Murthy, D. (2017). The ontology of tweets: Mixed-method approaches to the study of Twitter. In L. Sloan& A. Quan-Haase (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media research methods (pp. 559-572). Los Angeles,
  13. Rehm, M., & Notten, A. (2016). Twitter as an informal learning space for teachers!? The role of social capital in Twitter conversations among teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 215–223.
  14. Xing, W., & Gao, F. (2018). Exploring the relationship between online discourse and commitment in Twitter professional learning communities. Computers& Education, 126, 388-398.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read