Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
This article examines the role of social media metadata in conducting studies of professional development in social media spaces. It traces the brief history of research surrounding social media spaces, noting the lack of research that drills into social media metadata in research on professional development. Framed through a software studies perspective, this article provides a deeper examination of the historical nuances of metadata and explores two distinct methods to procuring social media metadata for research on social media enhanced professional development: using pre-built tools and calling an API (application programming interface) directly. The article raises important ethical considerations around using social media metadata, and touches briefly upon ideological questions associated with the ways companies collect, store, share, and monetize users’ metadata. To overcome these limitations and biases, the authors propose a mixed methods approach through examining back end metadata, employing front-end surfacing techniques of the social media applications, and engaging in traditional qualitative methods of interviews and focus groups for the richest research.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Berry, D. (2011). The philosophy of software: Code and mediation in the digital age. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossRef
boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. CrossRef
Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2013). Crisis communication in natural disasters: The queensland floods and christchurch earthquakes. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M.
Carpenter, J., Abrams, A., & Dunphy, M. (2016). Educators’ professional uses of pinterest. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2016 (pp. 1925–1930). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Cohen, L. (2007). Social scholarship on the rise. Retrieved May 17, 2016 from http://www.stoa.org/archives/628
Curwood, J. C. (2014). Reader, writer, gamer: Online role-playing games as literary response. In H. R. Gerber & S. S. Abrams (Eds.), Bridging literacies with videogames (pp. 53–66). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.
Ebner, M. (2009). Introducing microblogging: How single presentations can be enhanced by the mass. Journal of research in Innovative Teaching, 2(1), 91–100.
Elavsky, C. M., Mislan, C., & Elavsky, S. (2012). When talking less is more: Exploring outcomes of Twitter usage in a large-lecture hall. Learning, Media, & Technol, 36(3), 215–233. CrossRef
Frabetti, F. (2015). Software theory: A cultural and philosophical study. New York: Rowan & Littlefield Education.
Gao, F., Luo, T., & Zhang, K. (2012). Tweeting for learning: A critical analysis of research on microblogging in education published in 2008–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(5), 783–801. CrossRef
Gerber, H. R., Abrams, S. S., Curwood, J. S., & Magnifico, A. M. (2017). Conducting qualitative research of learning in online spaces. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishers.
Gitelman, L. (2013). “Raw data” is an oxymoron. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Greenhow, C. & Gleason, B. (2014). Social scholarship: Reconsidering scholarly practices in the age of social media. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Haworth, R. (2016). Personal learning environments: A solution for self-directed learners. TechTrends, 60(4), 359–364. CrossRef
Highfield, T. (2013). Following the yellow jersey: Tweeting the tour de france. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and society (pp. 249–261). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.
Ingram, J., Niemeyer, D. J., & Gerber, H. R. (2015). #Satire, fandom, and the US testing culture paper presented at the 19th European conference on literacy. Austria: Klagenfurt.
Internet World Statistics (2016). Internet World Statistics. Retreived from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
Jockers, M. L. (2014). Text analysis with R for students of literature. New York: Springer. CrossRef
Jungherr, A., Jurgens, P., & Schoen, H. (2012). Why the pirate party won the German election of 2009 or the trouble with predictions: a response to tumasjan, sprenger, sander, & welpe, ‘predicting elections and twitter: what 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Social Science Computer Review, 30(2), 229–234. CrossRef
Kimmons, R., & Veletsianos, G. (2016). Education scholars’ evolving uses of twitter as a conference backchannel and social commentary platform. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(3), 445–464. CrossRef
Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/space: software and everyday life. Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossRef
Lee, J., & Bonk, C. (2016). Social network analysis of peer relationships and online interactions in a blended class using blogs. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 35–44. CrossRef
Li, J., & Greenhow, C. (2015). Scholars and social media: tweeting in the conference backchannel for professional learning. Educational Media International, 52, 1–14. CrossRef
Lynch, T. L. (2015). The hidden role of software in educational research: policy to practice. New York: Routledge.
Manguel, A. (2008). The library at night. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Manovich, L. (2012). Trending: The promises and the challenges of big social data. Retrieved May 21, 2016, from http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/debates/text/15
Manovich, L. (2013). Software takes command. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.). Twitter and society (pp. 373–384). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishers.
Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research (version 2.0): Recommendations from the AoIR working committee.
Niemeyer, D., & Gerber, H. R. (2014). Proceedings of the 10th annual games, learning, and society conference a framework for understanding student perceptions of academic writing connections in fandom spaces. Madison: WI.
O’Halloran, K. L., Tan, S., Pham, D. S., Bateman, J., & Moere, A. V. (2016). A digital mixed methods research design: integrating multimodal analysis with data mining and information visualization for big data analytics. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. doi: 10.1177/1558689816651015.
Pasquinelli, M. (2015). Italian operaismo and the information machine. Theory, Culture, Society, 32(3), 49–68. CrossRef
Rambukanna, N. (2015). Hashtag publics: The power and politics of discursive networks. New York: Peter Lang Publishers. CrossRef
Roach, A. K., & Beck, J. J. (2012). Before coffee, facebook: New literacy learning for 21st century teachers. Language Arts, 89(4), 244–255.
Tumsjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sander, P. G., Welpe, I. M. (2009). Predicting elections and Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, (pp. 178-185).
Welevrede, E. (2016). Repurposing digital methods: The research affordances of platforms and engines. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
Williams, J. A., Berg, H., Gerber, H. R., Miller, M. S., Cox, D., Votteler, N. K., et al. (2011). I get distracted by their being distracted: the etiquette of in-class texting. Eastern Education Review, 40(1), 48–56.
Williamson, B. (2015). Governing software: networks, databases and algorithmic power in the digital governance of public education. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(1), 83–105. CrossRef
Yau, N. (2011). Visualize this: The FlowingData guide to design, visualization, and statistics. Indianapolis: Wiley.
Yousefi, A., & Yousefi, S. (2007). Metadata: A new word for an old concept. Library Philosophy and Practice, August, 1–7.
Zimmer, M. (2010). “But the data is already public”: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12, 313–325. CrossRef
Zimmer, M. (2016, May). OkCupid study reveals the perils of big-data science. Wired Magazine
- Into the Meta: Research Methods for Moving Beyond Social Media Surfacing
Hannah R. Gerber
Tom Liam Lynch
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA, Erfolgsfaktoren sensitiver Robotertechnologien/© Composer | Fotolia