nach oben

TechTrends

Erschienen in:

18.06.2018 | Original Paper

Tweet, and We Shall Find: Using Digital Methods to Locate Participants in Educational Hashtags

verfasst von: Spencer P. Greenhalgh, K. Bret Staudt Willet, Joshua M. Rosenberg, Matthew J. Koehler

Erschienen in: TechTrends | Ausgabe 5/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Although researchers have discovered a great deal about who uses Twitter for educational purposes, what they post about, when they post and why they participate, there has so far been little work to explore where participants in educational Twitter contexts are located. In this paper, we establish a methodological foundation that can support the exploration of geographical issues in educational Twitter research. We surveyed 46 participants in one educational Twitter hashtag, #michED, to determine where they lived; we then compared these responses to results from three digital methods for geolocating Twitter users (human coding, machine coding and GPS coding) to explore these methods’ affordances and constraints. Human coding of Twitter profiles allowed us to analyze more participants with higher levels of accuracy but also has disadvantages compared to other digital—and traditional—methods. We discuss the additional insights obtained through geolocating #michED participants as well as considerations for using geolocation and other digital methods in educational research.

Vorheriger Artikel Public Internet Data Mining Methods in Instructional Design, Educational Technology, and Online Learning Research

Nächster Artikel A Methodological Case Study with Mobile Eye-Tracking of Child Interaction in a Science Museum

Baker, L. M. (2008). Unobtrusive research. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 905–906). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

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. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.925701.

Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2015). Engagement through microblogging: Educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41, 707–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.939294.

Carpenter, J. P., Tani, T., Morrison, S., & Keane, J. (2018). Exploring the education Twitter hashtag landscape. In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference 2018 (pp. 2230–3325). Waynesville: Association for the Advancement of computing in Education (AACE).

Cheng, Z., Caverlee, J., & Lee, K. (2010). You are where you tweet: A content-based approach to geo-locating Twitter users. In X. J. Huang, G. Jones, N. Koudas, X. Wu, & K. Collins-Thompson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19 ^th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 759–768). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Fiesler, C., & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of Twitter research ethics. Social Media + Society, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118763366.

Gao, F., & Li, L. (2017). Examining a one-hour synchronous chat in a microblogging-based professional development community. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48, 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12384.CrossRef

Gentry, J. (2015). twitteR: R based Twitter client (Version 1.1.9) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=twitteR

Gleason, B. (2013). #Occupy Wall Street: Exploring informal learning about a social movement on Twitter. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 966–982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479372.

Graham, M., Hale, S. A., & Gaffney, D. (2014). Where in the world are you? Geolocation and language identification in Twitter. The Professional Geographer, 66, 568–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2014.907699.

Greenhalgh, S. P., & Koehler, M. J. (2017). 28 days later: Twitter hashtags as “just in time” teacher professional development. TechTrends, 61, 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0142-4.CrossRef

Hawksey, M. (2014). Need a better Twitter Archiving Google Sheet? TAGS v6.0 is here! [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://mashe.hawksey.info/2014/10/need-a-better-twitter-archiving-google-sheet-tags-v6-0-is-here/

Jurgens, D., Finnethy, T., McCorriston, J., Xu, Y. T., & Ruths, D. (2015). Geolocation prediction in Twitter using social networks: A critical analysis and review of current practice. In Proceedings of the twenty-ninth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence and the twenty-seventh innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference. Palo Alto: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.

Krutka, D. G., Asino, T. I., & Haselwood, S. (2018). Editorial: Eight lessons on networked teacher activism from #OklaEd and the #OklaEdWalkout. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2) Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org.

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.CrossRef

Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabási, A.-L., et al. (2009). Computational social science. Science, 323, 721–723. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167742.CrossRef

Lee, R. M. (2015). Unobtrusive measures. https://doi.org/10.1093/OBO/9780199846740-0048.

Lee, R. M., Fielding, N., & Blank, G. (2008). The internet as a research medium: An editorial introduction to The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods. In N. Fielding, R. M. Lee, & G. Blank (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 2–22). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.CrossRef

Luo, T., & Clifton, L. (2017). Examining collaborative knowledge construction in microblogging-based learning environments. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 365–390.CrossRef

Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee (Version 2.0). Chicago: Association of Internet Researchers.

Marres, N. (2016). Foreword. In H. Snee, C. Hine, Y. Morey, S. Roberts, & H. Watson (Eds.), Digital methods for social science: An interdisciplinary guide to research innovation (pp. viii–viix). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Greenhow, C. (2016). The work of educational psychologists in a digitally networked world. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed., pp. 29–40). New York: Routledge.

Munzert, S., Rubba, C., Meißner, P., & Nyhuis, D. (2015). Automated data collection with R: A practical guide to web scraping and text mining. West Sussex: Wiley.

Rosenberg, J. M., Greenhalgh, S. P., Koehler, M. J., Akcaoglu, M., & Hamilton, E. (2016). An investigation of State Educational Twitter Hashtags (SETHs) as affinity spaces. E-Learning and Digital Media, 13, 24–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753016672351.

Rosenberg, J. M., Akcaoglu, M., Staudt Willet, K. B., Greenhalgh, S. P., & Koehler, M. J. (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 2017 (pp. 283–286). Waynesville: Association for the Advancement of computing in education (AACE).

Rudis, B. (2016). nominatim: Tools for working with the “Nominatim” API. (Version 0.2.2.9000) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://github.com/hrbrmstr/nominatim

Salganik, M. J. (2018). Bit by bit: Social research in the digital age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Shaffer, D. W. (2017). Quantitative ethnography. Madison: Cathcart Press.

Sloan, L. (2017). Social science ‘lite'? Deriving demographic proxies from Twitter. In L. Sloan & A. Quan-Haase (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media research methods (pp. 90–104). London: SAGE.

Snee, H., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S., & Watson, H. (2016). Digital methods as mainstream methodology: An introduction. In H. Snee, C. Hine, Y. Morey, S. Roberts, & H. Watson (Eds.), Digital methods for social science: An interdisciplinary guide to research innovation (pp. 1–11). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Takhteyev, Y., Gruzd, A., & Wellman, B. (2012). Geography of Twitter networks. Social Networks, 34, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2011.05.006.

Veletsianos, G. (2017a). Three cases of hashtags used as learning and professional development environments. TechTrends, 61, 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0143-3.CrossRef

Veletsianos, G. (2017b). Toward a generalizable understanding of Twitter and social media use across MOOCs: Who participates on MOOC hashtags and in what ways? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9131-7.

Welser, H. T., Smith, M., Fisher, D., & Gleave, E. (2008). Distilling digital traces: Computational social science approaches to studying the internet. In N. Fielding, R. M. Lee, & G. Blank, The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 116–141). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Wesely, P. M. (2013). Investigating the community of practice of world language educators on Twitter. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113489032.

Titel: Tweet, and We Shall Find: Using Digital Methods to Locate Participants in Educational Hashtags
verfasst von: Spencer P. Greenhalgh
K. Bret Staudt Willet
Joshua M. Rosenberg
Matthew J. Koehler
Publikationsdatum: 18.06.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: TechTrends / Ausgabe 5/2018
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Elektronische ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0313-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2018

Q Methodology and Q-Perspectives® Online: Innovative Research Methodology and Instructional Technology

It’s Not ‘Hippies Running Barefoot Through a Field of Daisies’ and Other Contemplations on Creativity with Dr. Jonathan Plucker

Ecologically Valid Assessments of Attention and Learning Engagement in Media Multitaskers

Action Research Experiences for Scholarly Practitioners in an Online Education Doctorate Program: Design, Reality, and Lessons Learned

The Embedded Lesson Approach to Social Media Research: Researching Online Phenomena in an Authentic Offline Setting

Phenomenological Methodologies in the Field of Educational Communications and Technology