nach oben

TechTrends

Erschienen in:

19.12.2016 | Original Paper

Preservice Teachers’ Participation and Perceptions of Twitter Live Chats as Personal Learning Networks

verfasst von: Tian Luo, Jamie Sickel, Li Cheng

Erschienen in: TechTrends | Ausgabe 3/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This study presents two cases in which undergraduates were introduced to Twitter in their teacher preparation program as a means of developing a personal learning network. Twitter live chats are synchronous discussions that allow education stakeholders to discuss issues and share resources, engaging on potentially a global scale via the social networking platform. This study examines how students participated in these live chats, perceived benefits and challenges and how prior experience and preconceived perceptions of Twitter influenced the live chat experience and intentions for continued participation. Pre-activity reflections, student tweets and post-activity reflections were analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. While familiarity with Twitter varied, no participants had previously participated in a professional Twitter live chat; the majority of participants indicated a positive perception and intensions to continue participating in Twitter live chats. Plans for introducing, scaffolding and reflecting on initial Twitter live chat experiences are detailed and considerations and implications are discussed.

Vorheriger Artikel Conversations with Innovators in Learning and Technology: Stephanie Evergreen

Nächster Artikel Mapping Playgrids for Learning Across Space, Time, and Scale

Agrifoglio, R., Black, S., & Metallo, C. (2010). Twitter acceptance: The role of intrinsic motivation. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 10(9). Retrieved from http://sprouts.aisnet.org/10-9.

Barnes, S. J., & Böhringer, M. (2011). Modeling use continuance behavior in microblogging services: the case of twitter. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 51(4), 1. Retrieved from http://iacis.org/jcis/articles/Barnes_Bohringer_2011_51_4.pdf.

Borau, K., Ullrich, C., Feng, J., & Shen, R. (2009). Microblogging for language learning: Using twitter to train communicative and cultural competence. Paper presented at the Advances in Web Based Learning–ICWL 2009.

Branon, R. F., & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education: A survey of instructors. TechTrends, 45, 36–42.CrossRef

Burnett, C. (2003). Learning to chat: Tutor participation in synchronous online chat. Teaching in Higher Education, 8, 247–261.CrossRef

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRef

Cronin, J. J. (2011). The classroom as a virtual community: An experience with student backchannel discourse. Business Education Innovation Journal, 3(2), 56–65.

Crosswell, L., & Beutel, D. (2013). A bridge over troubling waters: A snapshot of teacher graduates’ perceptions of their ongoing professional learning needs. Asia - Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 144. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2013.777022.CrossRef

Davidson-Shivers, G. V., Muilenburg, L. Y., & Tanner, E. J. (2001). How do students participate in synchronous and asynchronous online discussions? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(4), 351–366.CrossRef

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management cience, 35(8), 982–1003.

Diaz-Ortiz, C., & Stone, B. (2011). Twitter for good: change the world one tweet at a time. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Duemer, L., Fontenot, D., Gumfory, K., Kallus, M., Larsen, J., Schafer, S.,…Shaw, B.C. (2002). The use of online synchronous discussion groups to enhance community formation and professional identity development. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/ARCHIVES/2002/2/04/index.html.

Dunn, J. (2011). The A-Z Dictionary of Educational Twitter Hashtags. Retrieved 01/05/2016, from: http://edudemic.com/2011/10/twitter-hashtag-dictionary/.

Ebner, M., & Maurer, H. (2009). Can weblogs and microblogs change traditional scientific writing? Future Internet, 1(1), 47–58. doi:10.3390/fi1010047.CrossRef

Ebner, M., Lienhardt, C., Rohs, M., & Meyer, I. (2010). Microblogs in higher education – A chance to facilitate informal and process-oriented learning? Computers & Education, 55(1), 92–100. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.006.CrossRef

Elavsky, C. M., Mislan, C., & Elavsky, S. (2011). When talking less is more: exploring outcomes of Twitter usage in the large‐lecture hall. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(3), 215–233. doi:10.1080/17439884.2010.549828.CrossRef

Forte, A., Humphreys, M., & Park, T. (2012). Grassroots professional development: How teachers use Twitter. In Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 106–113). Dublin, Ireland: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.

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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01357.x.CrossRef

Gao, F., & Li, L. (2016). Examining a one‐hour synchronous chat in a microblogging‐based professional development community. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi:10.1111/bjet.12384.

Herriot, R. E., & Firestone, W. A. (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: Optimizing description and generalizability. Educational Researcher, 12(3), 14–19.CrossRef

Ingram, A. L., Hathorn, L. G., & Evans, A. (2000). Beyond chat on the internet. Computers & Education, 35(1), 21–35.CrossRef

Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2002). Web-based cases in teaching and learning – the quality of discussion and stage of perspective taking in asynchronous communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10, 1–22.CrossRef

Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., & Tseng, B. (2007). Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis, WebKDD/SNA-KDD’07 (pp. 56–65). New York, NY: ACM.CrossRef

Jeong, A. (1996). The Structures of Group Discussions in Online Chats. Journal of Visual Literacy, 16(1), 51–63.CrossRef

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.CrossRef

Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119–132. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x.CrossRef

Knowlton, D. S. (2001). Promoting durable knowledge construction through online discussion. Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference. Retrieved from http://www.mtsu.edu/~itconf/proceed01/11.html.

Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 19–38.

Lalonde, C. (2012). How important is Twitter in your Personal Learning Network?. eLearn, (9)3. doi:10.1145/2371029.2379624.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Lobel, M., Neubauer, M., & Swedburg, R. (2002). Elements of group interaction in a real-time synchronous online learning-by-doing classroom without F2F participation. USDLA Journal, 16(4). Retrieved from http:// www.usdla.org/html/journal/APR02_Issue/article01.html.

Luo, T. (2015). Instructional guidance in microblogging-supported learning: insights from a multiple case study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(3), 173–194. doi:10.1007/s12528-015-9097-2.CrossRef

Luo, T. (2016). Enabling microblogging-based peer feedback in face-to-face classrooms. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(2), 156–166. doi:10.1080/14703297.2014.995202.CrossRef

Luo, T., & Franklin, T. (2015). Tweeting and Blogging: Moving Towards Education 2.0. International Journal on E-Learning, 14(2), 235–258.

Luo, T., & Gao, F. (2012). Enhancing classroom learning experience by providing structures to microblogging-based activities. Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 199–211.

Martin, H. (2012). Topic trends on #edchat and what they say about education today. Retrieved from http://tristanverboven.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/topic-trends-on-edchat-and-what-they-say-about-education-today/.

McCormack, A., Gore, J., & Thomas, K. (2006). Early career teacher professional learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 95–113. doi:10.1080/13598660500480282.CrossRef

Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7. Retrieved from http:// www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/v7n3_meyer.asp.

Perifanou, M. A. (2009). Language micro-gaming: fun and informal microblogging activities for language learning. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 49, 1–14. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04757-2_1.CrossRef

Rajagopal, K., Joosten-ten Brinke, D., Van Bruggen, J., & Sloep, P. B. (2011). Understanding personal learning networks: Their structure, content and the networking skills needed to optimally use them. First Monday, 17(1). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3559/3131.

Richardson, W., & Mancabelli, R. (2011). Personal learning networks: Using the power of connections to transform education. Solution Tree Press.

Schwienhorst, K. (2003). Learner autonomy and tandem learning: Putting principles into practice in synchronous and asynchronous telecommunications environments. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 16, 427–443.CrossRef

Shotsberger, P. G. (2000). The human touch: Synchronous communication in web-based learning. Educational Technology, 40, 53–55.

Terrell, S. (2014). Tips for joining #edchat: The education conversation. Retrieved 12/1/2015, from: http://edchat.pbworks.com/w/page/40546805/Tips.

Traphagan, T. W., Chiang, Y. H. V., Chang, H. M., Wattanawaha, B., Lee, H., Mayrath, M. C., et al. (2010). Cognitive, social and teaching presence in a virtual world and a text chat. Computers & Education, 55(3), 923–936. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.003.CrossRef

Whitby, T. (2012). How does #Edchat connect educators? Retrieved from http://smartblogs.com/education/2012/08/06/how-edchat-connect-educators-2.

Wright, N. (2010). Twittering in teacher education: reflecting on practicum experiences. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 25(3), 259–265. doi:10.1080/02680513.2010.512102.CrossRef

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods. London: Sage Publication.

Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Titel: Preservice Teachers’ Participation and Perceptions of Twitter Live Chats as Personal Learning Networks
verfasst von: Tian Luo
Jamie Sickel
Li Cheng
Publikationsdatum: 19.12.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: TechTrends / Ausgabe 3/2017
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Elektronische ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0137-1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2017

Finding Meaning in Flow: A Conversation with Susan K. Perry on Writing Creatively

Three Cases of Hashtags Used as Learning and Professional Development Environments

Conversations with Innovators in Learning and Technology: Stephanie Evergreen

Student Visa Approved, Beam Me Up, Scotty!: Being a Legal Alien in American Graduate School

Ordóñez de Pablos, P., Tennyson, R. D., & Kytras, M. D. (eds): Assessing the role of mobile technologies and distance learning in higher education

Local Social Media Policies Governing Teachers’ Professionally Oriented Participation Online: a Content Analysis