Disability and Rehabilitation

ISSN: 0963-8288 (Print) 1464-5165 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/idre20

Teachers’ perceptions of Twitter for professional development Kerry Davis To cite this article: Kerry Davis (2015) Teachers’ perceptions of Twitter for professional development, Disability and Rehabilitation, 37:17, 1551-1558, DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576

Published online: 01 Jun 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 217

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=idre20 Download by: [University of Tasmania]

Date: 26 September 2015, At: 10:22

http://informahealthcare.com/dre ISSN 0963-8288 print/ISSN 1464-5165 online Disabil Rehabil, 2015; 37(17): 1551–1558 ! 2015 Informa UK Ltd. DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576

RESEARCH PAPER

Teachers’ perceptions of Twitter for professional development Kerry Davis

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

Newton Public School District, Newton, MA, USA

Abstract

Keywords

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine how school teachers in the United States (US) perceived using Twitter as a means for professional development, engagement in communities of practice, and any benefits or drawbacks to participating in Twitter. Method: This qualitative research utilized an embedded case design with three sources of data: (a) three consecutive months of tweet data from late 2011 archived on the host website, relating to #EdChat, a weekly online chat in Twitter about education issues; (b) interviews with 19 school teachers in the US who participated in the #EdChat online discussions in Twitter; and (c) Twitter bio and Tweet data of the 19 teachers interviewed. All data were entered into NVIVO (QSR International Pty. Ltd., Doncaster, Australia) for content thematic coding, and The Communities of Practice and Connectivist Conceptual Framework was used to inform this analysis. The researchers’ interpretations were verified with participants, and data triangulated across all sources to strengthen confidence in the results. Results: Five main themes and 17 subthemes emerged from the data across all sources. The main themes were teachers’ perceptions of sharing knowledge and resources, Twitter promoting a sense of belonging, Twitter providing meaningful professional development, and teachers’ views on the technical benefits and drawbacks of using Twitter. Conclusion: Regardless of years teaching, subject area, or age, educators perceived Twitter as providing an online forum to reflect upon practice, exchange knowledge and experience, and be in the presence of supportive colleagues. While participants experienced the pace and volume of information as being overwhelming at times, educators developed skills to managing this and perceived discussions to be learner-centered and supportive. Teachers valued the sense of community and learning that they reported were not otherwise available in their own physical workplace. Overall, participants perceived that the benefits of participation in online Twitter chats for learning outweighed any drawbacks experienced. This article includes implications for future research and how social network sites may be used as a supportive venue for educators, therapists, and students, including individuals with disabilities.

Communities of practice, informal learning, online communities, PLNs, social network sites, virtual learning History Received 19 December 2014 Revised 1 April 2015 Accepted 14 May 2015 Published online 1 June 2015

ä Implications for Rehabilitation   

Social networking sites such as Twitter may provide teachers instant access to information and colleagues to support professional growth. Social networking sites such as Twitter may provide a forum for teachers to feel professionally and emotionally supported by a larger learning community. Social networking sites such as Twitter may provide a learner-centered way for teachers to access meaningful professional development.

Introduction In the United States (US), legislative acts such as No Child Left Behind [1] and the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act [2] require equal educational opportunities for people with disabilities. These legislated mandates create the need to educate school leaders and school communities on how to teach students with disabilities more effectively. The pedagogical implications Address for correspondence: Kerry Davis, 10 Curtis Road Hopkinton, MA 01748, USA. Tel: +1 508 497 0878. E-mail: [email protected]

for this legislation are that teachers need resources to meet the needs of increasingly diverse classrooms. An important consideration in addressing the pedagogical implications of legislation around educating all students, including those with disabilities, includes training and supporting staff in continuing professional development in effective and cost-efficient ways [3]. Continual access to learner-centered models of professional development is one way to help teachers support students with varied academic needs [4]. When educators have the opportunity to choose the context of their own learning, they more readily apply newly learned information into their practice [4–6].

1552

K. Davis

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

In a longitudinal study of public schools [7] improved academic student achievement was noted in schools where (a) educators have 50 or more hours of collegial activities related to one topic, (b) learning activities integrate knowledge with practice, and (c) learning activities include opportunities for collaboration and peer feedback [7]. Yet, despite the need for learning activities to be frequent, integrate knowledge and practice, and involve collaboration with peers, a 2009 report from the National Development Staff Development Council [7], including a survey of 40 520 US teachers, revealed that 42% of respondents spent 16 h or fewer per year on one specific subject area [7]. Furthermore, while collaborative opportunities support both job retention [8,9] and life-long learning habits [4], only 16% of teachers viewed that such opportunities existed in the workplace [7]. Thus, despite the need for sustained in-depth training opportunities for school staff to refine and improve upon practice, meaningful professional learning, including collaboration, was reportedly inconsistent [7,10].

Disabil Rehabil, 2015; 37(17): 1551–1558

learner creates an aggregate knowledge base accessible to a community of practitioners that is in constant flux [20]. The Connectivist perspective capitalizes on the value of learning through interaction of objects in one’s environment whether in face–face situations, or through accumulation through online interactions [19]. Participation in online venues may provide a sense of community or support [22], particularly in professions such as teaching that can be isolating [23]. Special education teachers who perceive being a part of a professional community can help mitigate the effects of burn-out, and reduce job attrition [22]. Online learning platforms provide a way for professionals to ‘‘step outside’’ of their physical workplace, and find support with different professionals globally [20]. Access to mobile technologies such as smartphones means that colleagues can almost instantly connect with one another online. Such accessibility to communities of practice online can reduce feelings of isolation in professions that have limited opportunities to socialize with peers during the day [24]. Online forums and communities of practice

Supporting students with special educational needs According to the American Speech Hearing and Language Association (ASHA), almost half (44%) of school-based caseloads for Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) includes students with moderate communication impairments, and 26% of the caseload included students with severe to profound communication impairments [11]. As more students with complex learning profiles enter the classroom, teachers need efficient ways to access related information and services for support. U.S.-based speech–language pathologists and general education teachers can mutually benefit from opportunities to share resources and ideas that support vulnerable students in the classroom [12,13]. In the U.S., the speech–language pathologist is a critical part of the student’s intervention team [14], time constraints related to other work duties, and travel between multiple school sites [15] can limit how often SLPs are able to collaborate with teachers. The challenge for school personnel in leadership positions remains on how to create meaningful learning opportunities for teachers and other educators, such as speech language pathologists, in an environment rife with policy mandates and budget constraints [3]. It is possible that the opportunities afforded by online learning through interaction and collaborative engagement could benefit both teachers and speech language pathologists, and other related service providers who support children with learning challenges. However, there is little research examining how these diverse professionals might participate in ‘‘communities of practice’’ [9] such as social networking sites including Twitter [16]. Conceptual framework for the study This study was guided by the Community of Practice and Connectivist learning models. The Community of Practice (COP) is a learning model based upon the principles of apprenticeship, and cooperative learning [17,18]. According to the model, learning occurs through formal and explicit learning activities. The COP model includes many forms of interaction, categorized into three parts: domain (area of interest), community (social interactions), and practice (tools, stories) [17,18]. From a Connectivist learning model perspective, learning occurs through perceived patterns in information gleaned from a variety of digital and non-digital sources and environments [19]. The availability of online tools provides an added dimension to user-centered learning that may contribute to a learning community [3,20,21]. In digital environments, learners become adept at prioritizing and sifting through dense volumes of information. From a COP perspective, the dynamic between information and

Communities of practice forums may emerge in online venues, including synchronous and asynchronous venues for interaction [16]. In an online forum, participants may exchange information and develop a sense of belonging with others who share common interests [24]. Asynchronous forms such as Web-logs (blogs) and messaging threads allowing multiple participants to engage in chronologically -organized dialogue. In asynchronous platforms, participants do not need to be online at the same time, allowing users to post information according on their own accord [16]. Synchronous web-based discussion tools, such as instant messaging and social network sites, also have benefits for learning. Synchronous interactions, which happen in almost real-time, contribute to a sense of social availability in building online relationships [25]. Synchronous online activity in social networking sites can be an effective way to convey information quickly to a large group of networked users during a live event [26]. For example, participants at a professional conference can hold real-time discussions online, while those not physically present can reap the benefits of viewing the real-time comments, information, and multi-media hyperlinks. Synchronous and asynchronous online discussion forums can provide teachers’, therapists’, and students’ resources that would otherwise be beyond financial or physical reach [27]. Online interactions are user-controlled, allowing users time to reflect upon what they are going to say before responding to another participant’s comments [28,29]. When used in structured situations, such as an instructional forum as part of a class, the process of thinking about another participant’s post, and formulating a written response, encourages the forum participants to reflect upon content [29]. In this way, online forums may mirror the process of writing daily professional experiences, a tool often recommended to novice teachers as a method to reflect upon their own teaching [28]. However, the drawback to this form of communication is that dialogue momentum or urgency may be lost if too much time passes between respondents’ online interactions [16,30,31]. Finally, online forums may not necessarily or automatically foster a sense of community or learning; traditional mindsets of what constitutes ‘‘instruction’’ and ‘‘community’’ may, by default, place higher value on learning through physical face-to-face interactions [30]. Twitter for learning with a sense of community Following its launch in 2006, Twitter became the fastest growing social network site between 2006 and 2009 [5]. Between 2010 and 2014, global Twitter use rose from 8% in 2010, to 19%

Twitter for professional development

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576

in 2014 [32–34]. Mobile technologies such as tablets and smartphones allow constant access for users to find information and connect to friends, family, colleagues, and peers. However, attitudes toward technology and social media may affect how the mainstream public views such a tool for learning [35,36]. Twitter can be used for both synchronous and asynchronous communication. Tweets can be posted in real-time within a discussion and publicly archived using a range of purpose-designed software. The introduction of social networking sites such as Twitter offers freely accessible opportunities to build a digital platform for learning resources [20]. An increased presence of mobile technologies, means that educators, therapists, and students have unprecedented access to a global network of resources for professional and personal support. Social network sites may provide a platform for individuals to consider viewpoints different from their own, and develop a sense of belonging [24,25]. With the emergence of social network technologies, Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) are also gaining increasing attention in the literature. Personal Learning Networks include the collection of resources networked through technology [20]. People are included as part of this network of information, opening up channels of resources, and forming bonds connecting individuals and communities. The primary characteristic of PLNs is that it is individualized and user-centered; it expands and changes based on the initiative and needs of the user [19–21]. The common interests and needs between users potentially forms social and professional bonds and contribute to learning communities. In Twitter, members of the PLN are connected by tweets and using the @ symbol or hashtag (#), and individuals who have common interests and needs aggregate information through social network sites and share personal knowledge. Few studies in the literature examine online communities of practice related to synchronous social network sites, such as Twitter [16]. Despite the wealth of online resources and PLNs, little research exists on how and why such connections may support professional development and contribute to online communities of practice in schools. The purpose of this study was to investigate how and why the social network Twitter may support professional development in teachers who teach students ages 6–18 (grades K-12). Specifically, (i) how do the U.S. K-12 public school teachers use Twitter, a social networking website, for professional development? (ii) how do the U.S. K-12 public school teachers perceive participation in a subnetwork of Twitter (#EdChat) as contributing to an online community of practice? and (iii) what are the perceived benefits or drawbacks of the U.S. K-12 public school teachers who use Twitter as a means for professional development?

from the same 3-month timeframe. From these Tweets, a purposeful sampling of US public school teachers was selected by usernames posted from the online archived #EdChat discussions. Data source two, interviews Following the review of Twitter chat data, the researcher recruited 19 K-12 public school educators who had participated in two or more #EdChat discussions. A summary of interview questions are included in Appendix. Participants’ interviews were conducted via phone and recorded, transcribed, and de-identified for analysis of content themes. The 19 Interview and Twitter data participants included eight males and 11 females. Participants were teachers from 15 different US states who taught a variety of subject areas, summarized in Table 1. To protect the privacy of participants in regard to personally identifying information, only ranges in age, and years’ teaching is reported. Demographic information is summarized in Table 2. Table 1. Participants’ teaching information. Location

Grade

Subject area

Alabama California Connecticut Indiana Indiana Iowa Iowa Louisiana Louisiana Missouri New Jersey New York Ohio Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Virginia Wisconsin

9–12 9, 10 11 9–12 7–12 9 5 11, 12 4 7, 8 7, 8 7–12 8 K-7 3 10–12 9, 11 8 5

Library English Science Science Frency, library Science Literacy, science Math, social studies Math, social studies Science, technology Technology French English Technology All Science Engineering Geography All

English included English Language Arts, technology included game design. Science included general science, zoology, biology, and chemistry.

Methods The study received approval through the Institutional Board Review for Ethics through the author’s university. An embedded case study design was chosen to include individuals or a group within a specific context defined by the boundaries and scope of the study [36]. Different from other case study methods such as single and multiple case studies, an embedded case study design was chosen because the context included several individuals, ‘‘bound by common place activities’’ [36], specifically, US teachers participating in Twitter discussions, centered upon 3 consecutive months of one-hour Twitter chats held by the group #Edchat on Tuesday evenings, from 2011. Three sources of data for the study were gathered using three methods outlined in this section. Overview of data sources Data source one, archived Twitter chat data Archived Twitter data (Tweets) from 2011, were retrieved from the #EdChat website [37]. The author reviewed 15,120 Tweets

1553

Table 2. Participants’ age and years’ experience teaching. N Age 18–28 29–39 40–50 51–61 Total

1 9 5 4 19

Years’ teaching 1–5 6–11 12–17 18–23 24–29 30–35 36–40 Total

2 6 4 6 0 0 1 19

1554

K. Davis

Data source three, Tweet data of interview participants Tweets of teachers interviewed that were date and time-stamped for the one-hour weekly chat sessions were examined for content themes. Recruitment for data sources

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

Participants Potential participants were identified through #Edchat online posts, and their demographic information was gathered through the biographical information posted on the individual’s public Twitter profile. For the purposes of adequate data collection, potential participants included teachers who submitted posts in at least two #Edchat discussions under review. A review of the potential participant’s biographical information helped determine whether the person was a US K-12 public school teacher. The researcher sent an initial solicitation to all #Edchat participants from the archived documents who may be the U.S. K-12 school teachers. Follow up Direct Messages were sent to the participants via Twitter. Participants were e-mailed a copy of interview questions and confidentiality forms. Only those who met the inclusion criteria agreed to participate, and returned confidentiality forms were included in the research. Procedure for interviews The first two interviews served as pilot interviews to finalize the interview protocol [18] developed through consideration of Communities of Practice and Connectivist [19] theoretical models. The interview protocol was devised to gather participants’ views on experiences in #Edchat, resources shared and perceptions as #Edchat as a community of practice. Participants were interviewed by phone with digital audio recording for later verbatim transcription with identifying information removed. As a form of member checking, transcribed interviews were sent by email with an invitation to review and verify the accuracy of the transcript. After the first two interviews, one question was added to the interview protocol, and three questions were modified for clarity. The final interview protocol comprised 28 questions relating to professional demographic information, experiences with #Edchat discussions, and professional experiences related to #Edchat and Twitter. Following the first two interviews, which both served as a pilot and provided interview data, further telephone audio recorded interviews were conducted with the remaining 17 US K-12 public school teachers who participated in at least two of the archived discussions in Data Source One. Participants were emailed a copy of questions before the scheduled phone interview. To ensure confidentiality and anonymity in transcription, participants’ real names were replaced with codes. Transcribed interview data was collected and entered into N-Vivo9 (QSR International Pty. Ltd., Doncaster, Australia), a software program designed for qualitative data storage, analysis, and retrieval. Procedure for extracting tweets The author reads and re-reads the archived transcripts of the Twitter chats (#EdChat) to gain an appreciation of the context and content of discussions. Using the participant’s Twitter name, text was extracted from the online archives, and entered into N-Vivo9 (QSR International Pty. Ltd., Doncaster, Australia) as a single file set for each participant within the NVIVO software program (QSR International Pty. Ltd., Doncaster, Australia). Archived tweets and related documents (twitter polls, discussion topics) were retrieved from the archived records available on the #Edchat public website

Disabil Rehabil, 2015; 37(17): 1551–1558

Table 3. Pilot study results. Themes and subthemes Sharing knowledge and resources Collaborative inquiry Sense of belonging Emotional support Meaningful professional development Diverse perspectives and experiences Reflective thinking Choice Technological benefits Instant access Technological drawbacks Managing flow of information Misperceptions of Twitter Limits to participation

Participant A

Participant B

X X X X X X X

X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X

Data analysis A content analysis of the first two pilot interviews was conducted using a pre-set list of codes based on the conceptual framework [38]. A pilot study helped triangulate the data by comparing information to theoretical prepositions, and to refine the questions contained in the interview protocol [36]. Using the Community of Practice and Connectivist learning models as the theoretical framework to guide the study, the objective of the data analysis was to examine how the U.S. school teachers who participated in weekly Twitter #Edchat discussions perceived the use of a social network site for professional development. Following coding of the pilot interviews, these coding categories were organized into themes and subthemes by sorting information into ‘‘intellectual bins’’ to categorize and reveal relationships between constructs [38]. Results of the pilot are listed in Table 3. As a result of the pilot, one new category coding emerged in a sub-theme ‘‘misperceptions of Twitter for professional development’’ and this was added to the list of codes. Overall, for the remaining 17 interviews, five main themes, and 15 subthemes emerged from the analysis of all data sources. To reduce repetition across the paper, results are discussed as they are presented.

Results Table 4 contains a theme-based matrix to display the findings. Pilot study findings are included in the total. Themes were presented using numerical data to note frequency of occurrence by theme; numerical information was not used to determine causation. Example quotes from each data source reflecting the themes and sub-themes are highlighted below. Sharing knowledge Sharing knowledge’ emerged as the first main theme. All participants valued the #Edchat forum as a place to share knowledge and resources. Sharing knowledge included stories, information, and exchanging best practices. Collaborative inquiry The subtheme ‘‘collaborative inquiry’’ included how study participants used the #Edchat forum to ask questions, solicit feedback, and engage in collaborative dialogue. Communities of practice become self-sustaining when seasoned practitioners and novice members engage in collaborative inquiry [17]. Participant H stated, ‘‘I feel like a lot of the time professional development meetings are very consumer based. Where someone will be talking, and we just take it in, and we don’t really collaborate

Twitter for professional development

DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

Table 4. Study themes and subthemes. Themes and subthemes

n

Sharing knowledge and resources Collaborative Inquiry Filtering information Sense of belonging Emotional support Meaningful professional development Diverse perspectives and experiences Reflective thinking Choice Technical benefits Flow of information Instant access Concise communication skills Ease of use Technical drawbacks Managing flow of information Misperceptions of Twitter Time Misunderstandings Limits to participation Reduced access Not feeling heard

19 19 12 17 9 19 16 13 13 19 19 19 11 7 17 14 11 11 6 6 5 2

1555

participants viewed their relationships and interactions with others in the #Edchat forum. Interviews with all participants reflected that they experienced a sense of belonging, as Participant N stated: ‘‘I can sit on #Edchat and feel like I’m one of the group. And feel professional’’. Emotional support A related subtheme included emotional support. Emotional support focused on how participants perceived #Edchat as a source of encouragement from other #Edchat participants. Participant K noted, ‘‘When you feel discouraged, you can go on #Edchat and get some ideas, as opposed to saying oh, I can’t do anything about it’’. Participants’ online contributions reflected this same kind of support, as seen in online conversations between study participants J and K who provided compliments, and supportive language to one another related to teaching decisions. Regardless of age or years’ experience, educators benefit from a supportive community, whether in the physical workplace, or as an online community [24,39,40]. For practitioners in rural communities [19] or for those who have to travel throughout the workday, access to an online community of practice may help provide a sense support [13,39]. Meaningful professional development

on it. So the knowledge that’s being spread is very collaborative and very applicable rather than here it is just go [emphasis added]’’. Tweets also reflected collaborative inquiry as Participant A asked another #Edchat user, ‘‘@[name removed] Demo how stdnts [students]evaluate their own work w/stdnt [student] created rubrics . . .?’’ The structure of #Edchat may have guided the nature of conversations; every week before the start of the discussion, a volunteer moderator sends out a public twitter poll, which determines the weekly topic. All topics surrounding collaborative inquiry related to teaching. Of the 12 discussions under analysis, all focused upon how teachers considered their role within their profession or workplace. Some topics focused on specific instructional methods, while others discussed teaching philosophy or reflecting upon teachers’ role in the workplace and policy decisions. Filtering information ‘‘Filtering information’’ emerged as a subtheme to sharing knowledge and resources. Filtering information included how participants brought new information from external sources to the group, including hyperlinks and retweets. Sixty-three percent of participants made comments related to how the forum served as an automatic filter. This was also reflected in tweets that participants shared to add to #Edchat discussions through hyperlinks. The synchronous nature of the platform required participants to consider what parts of information to take, and which to discard. Participant D remarked, ‘‘If you follow someone through #Edchat you know that most of their stuff is going to be through education, and that’s very valuable, it almost works as a filter’’. Many participants added hyperlinks to contribute, as reflected in archived tweets. The volume of available information channeled through discussion and hyperlinks can help users pick and choose what best applies to their own learning needs [13,39]. Sense of belonging The second main theme which emerged from the data, was teachers experiencing a sense of belonging through engagement in the #Edchat Twitter chat. ‘‘Sense of belonging’’ included how

The third main theme included meaningful professional development. Subthemes related to professional development included subthemes related to diversity of perspectives, reflective thinking, and choice. All participants valued the online forum as meaningful professional development because of the varied kinds of people and topics they perceived beneficial to their practice as educators. Diverse perspectives and experiences Diverse perspectives and experiences emerged as a subtheme related to meaningful professional development. Participants commented on how perspectives and experiences from other #Edchat participants enriched their professional development. Because #Edchat is accessible in any country where Twitter is used, many educators remarked on how they appreciated the variety of perspectives and professional experiences. Participant H, the youngest participant in the study, noted, ‘‘There’s younger teachers like me who are looking for older, wiser teachers, and there’s older, wiser teachers looking for younger teachers, so we can all bridge that age difference and the gap that comes from experience’’. In this way, #Edchat provided opportunities for seasoned and less experienced to learn from one another, much in the same way mentors and mentee mutually benefit from working together [1,41,42]. While the study was limited to US public school teachers, educators from other countries contributed to discussions, Participant L noted, ‘‘It’s nice to speak to people who are doing totally different things in totally different circumstances and see how they approach it. It’s easy to get tunnel vision at your own school, even in your own district’’. Reflective thinking The subtheme ‘‘reflective thinking’’ included how teachers reassessed instructional strategies. The ability to reflect upon practice contributes to professional growth [17,18]. Participant N remarked, ‘‘I clearly remember the one #Edchat where we were talking about grading, or assessment, and I tweeted something about grades, and I was immediately struck by the people challenging my thinking on that. It’s amazing in 140 characters how a whole paradigm shift has changed for me about grading, and it really led from a discussion on Twitter, and Edchat,

1556

K. Davis

in particular’’. Participant L online posts included, ‘‘@Participant M that’s an interesting point. Hmm. Food for thought’’. Choice The sub-theme of ‘‘choice’’ included how teachers liked the ability to choose when or how they contributed to discussions. Teachers found learning meaningful because, as Participant R noted Edchat is ‘‘professional development on my own terms’’. Participant C added, ‘‘Edchat PD for teachers needs to be individual and not an agenda for admin [pause], it works better’’. Practitioners who have the option of learning through more informal interactions, such as #Edchat can control how and when they learn. This choice hones in on specific skills or knowledge that teachers can instantly apply to their practice [4,39].

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

Technology benefits Technology benefits emerged as the next main theme. Participants were asked to identify the technological aspects of Twitter that they perceived helpful as part of the weekly discussions. The related subthemes included flow of information, instant access, concise communication, and ease of use.

Disabil Rehabil, 2015; 37(17): 1551–1558

Technological drawbacks The final main theme included technological drawbacks. All participants noted drawbacks in using Twitter to participate in professional development. Subthemes related to technological drawbacks included: managing the flow of information, misperceptions of Twitter for professional development, time, misunderstandings, limits to participation, reduced access, and not feeling heard. Managing flow of information The sub-theme ‘‘managing the flow of information’’ included how participants may have negative experiences related to the amount and pace of information during an #Edchat session. Over 12 discussions, the number of posts ranged from 696 to 1992 posts in 1 h. While many noted flow of information as a benefit, the same teachers also mentioned the flow of information as, ‘‘it can be overwhelming at times, trying to follow everything that’s happening all at the same time (Participant H)’’. This was also reflected in participants’ online posts, ‘‘Can you state the question again? Seeing many diff conversations. Trying to catch up. Thx! (Participant N)’’. Several participants mentioned using third party software to help manage and sort Twitter chats. Misperceptions of Twitter

Flow of information The subtheme ‘‘Flow of information’’ included the perceived amount of helpful posts and resources added to the #Edchat hashtag during weekly discussions. This included Participant T described #Edchat as a ‘‘. . . free-flowing kind of information, there’s always somebody that has information, or knows somebody that’s on Twitter that has information’’. Participant G added, ‘‘Twitter is like a waterfall, you stick your cup in when you want to drink’’. An online post related to this subtheme from Participant E, ‘‘Thanks for another hectic #edchat! Tip of the hat to [name removed]’’. Instant access and concise communication Related to technological benefits, the subthemes ‘‘instant access’’ and ‘‘concise communication’’ emerged from the study. Related to accessibility, Participant G continued, ‘‘Twitter in general, and Edchat specifically, is a 24/7 professional development tool. You can get ideas and feedback very quickly’’. The short 140 character posts helped #Edchat contributors keep their thoughts concise and meaningful. Teachers in the study felt that the tool was a good exercise in improving communication skills. ‘‘You know you only have 140 characters to get your point across in a very concise manner, and make it so that everyone understands what you mean’’ (Participant C). Participate K concluded, ‘‘With Twitter, it’s cutting to the chase. Especially with jargon, you really don’t get to use that as a crutch’’. Microblogging provides the opportunity for users to think how information can be delivered quickly and accurately [25]. Ease of use ‘‘Ease of use’’ included how participants perceived Twitter as a tool to participate in online discussions. Many mentioned third party applications which helped them manage the number of posts during the discussion. ‘‘It’s nice that I have the Twitter app on my smartphone. I can follow Edchat if I’m not in my house on my computer’’ (Participant J). The increased use of smartphone technology [21] means practitioners who need to access information quickly can easily reach thousands of people at one time.

Another subtheme which emerged included, ‘‘misperceptions of Twitter’’. Many participants (n ¼ 11) expressed dismay that Twitter may not be considered as a legitimate tool for teachers’ professional development. The shift to consider social networking sites for learning continues to be a relatively novel endeavor [8], as users primarily think about Twitter for sharing comments and photos between friends and family [8,25]. As Participant C stated, ‘‘Unfortunately, there are still a lot of people, that when you say Twitter, that people mindlessly tweet out oh, I’m having cappuccino right now [emphasis added]. They don’t see it as a very valuable tool. Especially in education, I can’t think of a content area that doesn’t have its own chat’’. Attitudes toward technology, including social network sites for learning, may be positively influenced by users’ experiences [35,42]. From the archived posts, Participant R conveyed a conversation with her principal, ‘‘@[name removed] I spoke to her about it just the other day. I remind her often that I learn so much on Twitter #edchat’’. This means that teachers may benefit from guided trainings or mentoring relationships to further understand how social network sites may be used for learning, while minimizing feeling overwhelmed with the amount of information available online [1,18,39,40]. Changing traditional mindsets of how learning can occur informal online settings can be an obstacle for teachers and administrators [30]. The implication of this is that school administrators such as principals and supervisors could benefit from training as to how Twitter may benefit teachers’ professional development and growth. Time ‘‘Time’’ emerged as a subtheme related to technological drawbacks. While perceived as accessible, the scheduled chat times may not be convenient for teachers to participate. Teachers who do not have the option or do not feel supported in using online venues during the school day may have difficulty balancing work and personal commitments [40]. Participants in this study noted that being in different time zones can be difficult given other family or professional obligations. However, Participant T noted, ‘‘I know that everybody has a busy schedule, so when you get there, you get there. If you really want to discuss a topic, you will make the time to get there’’. Other limitations to participation

Twitter for professional development

DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576

included workplace policy bans on social network sites for students and staff access. Indeed, many schools in the US have incomplete or absent policies related to social network site use, particularly related to use for educational purposes [3]. School policy makers and other stakeholders need to continue to develop policies that support online, user-centered learning, including social network sites [39]. Miscommunications in Twitter While the 140 character limitation forced users to communicate concisely, many participants felt miscommunications often happened through a combination of lack of nonverbal signals (facial expressions, tone of voice), or simply through accidental misspellings, as seen in Participant C, ‘‘sorry ment [sic] thanks! fingers not typing well LOL’’. As seen in other online venues, lack of face-to-face interactions in online environments can lead to breakdowns in communication [25,40].

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

Limits to participation This sub-theme related to design aspects of the social network site that limited participation. Participant M noted, ‘‘Twitter does have a limit of Tweets that you can send out in a period of time, and I’ve hit that a couple of times on Edchat. At that point you’re stuck, you can’t do anything’’. Reduced access included infrastructure or policy limitations. Participant N remarked, ‘‘Before Twitter was blocked at my school . . . it’s now blocked. But before it was blocked, I could tweet something even during a class period’’. This theme was reflected in interviews and tweets, ‘‘Help us get social media unblocked #edchat’’ (Participant J). Technology infrastructure and school policy related to social network sites need to be considered as a tool for learning [3]. Not being heard Finally, two participants perceived difficulties being heard; that is they felt their opinions were not recognized in the Twitter chat group. Participant N noted, Sometimes I will throw something out there and there’s nobody responding, and you can go for 10–15 minutes, and you kind of think . . . hmmm. Almost feeling invisible, which is weird, because it’s social media and you don’t even know these people, but sometimes, I feel invisible. Sometimes the online venue of interactions can leave some participants feeling left out of the experience [18]. Online moderators can be one way to redirect the conversations so that they do not appear to neglect differing points of view, and keep members engaged [18,39,40].

1557

with shared interests, including people with disabilities may use such a venue as a means for knowledge sharing and personal support.

Discussion The aim of this study was to determine how and why teachers might use the social network Twitter as a means of professional development, and the technological benefits and drawbacks of using Twitter for professional development. Through archived documents and participant interviews, results of the study indicated that teachers used the online forum as a way to share knowledge and resources, and as a place to experience emotional support from colleagues. Subthemes related to professional development included feelings related to diverse perspectives and experiences, reflective thinking and choice. Technological benefits included flow of information, instant access, concise communication and ease of use. Participants also expressed drawbacks including managing the flow of information which can seem overwhelming at times, misperceptions of Twitter as a learning tool, lack of time in their personal lives, and technological ‘‘glitches’’ or institutional policies sometimes limited participation. Finally, a few teachers expressed sometimes noted that the flurry of discussion sometimes resulted in difficulties feeling heard by others. Online forums such as Twitter chats can provide a supportive learning community and professional development for educators who may not have access to such supports during the typical workday [13]. Social networks sites can provide a platform for practitioners to access tangible resources, while sharing personal and professional experiences. Twitter may provide practitioners with on-demand resources and opportunities to engage in reflective thinking and be a part of an online community of practice that spans a global network of professionals. As a learnercentered tool, social networks sites may be a cost effective way for school leaders to support life-long learning for teachers. Through careful collaboration between teachers and policy-makers, educators can create organizational policies that promote more inclusive professional development forums, including PLNs.

Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the teachers who took the time to participate in this research project. The author would also like to thank the doctoral committee that guided and meticulously reviewed the process and findings of this research, and the friends and family that supported the hours of work which contributed to the success of this project.

Declaration of interest The author reports no declarations of interest.

Limitations and directions for future research This study was limited to the U.S. public school teachers who participate in a Twitter forum focused on education and practice. Future research could include examining online communities of practice in other educational and healthcare professionals, including speech-language pathologists (or related professionals such as logopedists, speech, and language therapists) occupational therapists, physical therapists, and special education teachers. Further, social network sites reach a global network of groups with similar interests, and include people who ‘‘lurk’’ rather than actively engage in conversations. Therefore, future research may include how social network sites may support the role of lurkers as learners and audience members in the social network. As social network sites are accessible through a variety of mobile technologies, additional studies may include how other groups

References 1. US Department of Education. No Child Left Behind. [Internet]. Available from: http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml [last accessed 9 Dec 2014]. 2. US Department of Education. Individuals with Disabilities in Education. [Internet]. Available from: http://idea.ed.gov/explore/ view/p/%2Croot%2Cstatute%2C [last accessed 9 Dec 2014]. 3. Schmucki L, Sivin-Kachala J. [Internet]. Final report: school principals and social networking in education: practices, policies, and realities in 2010. Available from: http://www.edweb.net/ fimages/op/PrincipalsandSocialNetworkingReport.pdf [last accessed 16 Nov 2014]. 4. Morewood AL, Ankrum JW, Bean RM. Educators’ perceptions of the influence of professional development on their knowledge of content, pedagogy, and curriculum. College Read Assoc Yearbook 2010;31:201–19.

Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 10:22 26 September 2015

1558

K. Davis

5. McGiboney M. [Internet]. Twitter: the sweet smell of success. Available from: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/ twitters-tweet-smell-of-success/ [last accessed 6 Nov 2014]. 6. Zepeda S. Professional development: what works? Larchmont (NY): Eye on Education; 2008. 7. Wei RC, Darling-Hammond L, Adamson F. [Internet]. Professional development in the United States: trends and challenges. Dallas (TX): National Staff Development Council. Available from: http:// www.learningforward.org/stateproflearning.cfm [last accessed 6 Nov 2014]. 8. Espuny C, Gonza´lez J, Lleixa´ M, Gisbert M. University students’ attitudes towards and expectations of the educational use of social networks. Rev Univ Soc Conoc (RUSC) 2011;8:6–199. 9. Viel-Ruma K, Houchins D, Jolivette K, Benson G. Efficacy beliefs of special educators: the relationships among collective efficacy, teacher self-efficacy, and job satisfaction. Teach Educ Spec Educ 2010;33:205–33. 10. Trachtman R. Inquiry and accountability in professional development schools. J Educ Res 2007;100:197–203. 11. American Speech-Language Hearing Association [Internet]. Rockville, MD. Schools survey caseload report. July 2014. Available from: http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/2014-SLPSchools-Survey-Caseload-Report.pdf [last accessed 15 Nov 2014]. 12. Baxter S, Brookes C, Bianchi K, et al. Speech and language therapists and teachers working together: exploring the issues. Child Lang Teach Ther 2009;25:215–34. 13. Davis K. Exploring virtual PLCs: professional development for the busy practitioner. 32 SIG 16 Perspectives on School-Based Issues 2013;14:28–32. 14. Barton E, Moore H, Squires J. Preparing speech-language pathologists to work in early childhood. Topics Early Child Spec Educ 2012;32:4–13. 15. Edgar D, Rosa-Lugo L. The critical shortage of Speech–Language Pathologists in the public school setting: features of the work environment that affect recruitment and retention. Lang Speech Hear Serv Schools 2007;38:31–46. 16. Kear K. Online and social networking communities: a best practice guide for educators. New York (NY): Routledge; 2011. 17. Wenger E. Knowledge management as a doughnut: shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice. Ivey Business J 2004;Jan–Feb:1–8. 18. Wenger E, White N, Smith J. Digital habitats: stewarding technology for communities. Portland (OR): CPSquare; 2009. 19. Stevens Ken. Collaborative professional education for e-teaching in networked schools. Proc World Acad Sci Eng Technol 2008;28: 425–9. 20. Couros A. Developing personal learning networks for open and social learning. In: Veletsianos G, ed. Emerging technologies in distance education. Edmonton, AB: Althabasca University Press; 2010:109–28. 21. Pettenati MC, Cigognini ME. Social networking theories and tools to support connectivist learning activities. Int J Web Based Learn Teach Technol 2007;2:42–60. 22. Gehrke R, McCoy K. Considering the context: differences between the environments of beginning special educators who stay and those who leave. Rural Spec Educ Quart 2007;26:32–40. 23. Mulwaney L. Laugh so you don’t cry: teachers combating isolation in schools through humor and social support. Ethnography Educ 2008;3:195–209. 24. Hur JW, Brush T. Teacher participation in online communities: why do teachers want to participate in self-generated online communities of K-12 teachers? J Res Technol Educ 2009;41:279–303. 25. Dunlap J, Lowenthal P. Tweeting the night away: using Twitter to enhance social presence. J Inform Syst Educ 2009;20:129–35. 26. Ebner M. Introducing live microblogging: how single presentations can be enhanced by the mass? J Res Innov Teach 2009;2:91–100. [Internet]. Available from: http://www.nu.edu/OurPrograms/ ResearchCouncil/The-Journal-of-Research-in-InnovativeTeaching.html [last accessed 9 Dec 2014]. 27. Siemens G. Knowing knowledge. Raleigh (NC): Lulu Enterprises; 2006. 28. Carter B-A. Teacher-learners’ voices: not the same old song. Int J Innov Lang Learn Teach 2008;2:33–46.

Disabil Rehabil, 2015; 37(17): 1551–1558

29. Lord G, Lomicka L. Foreign language teacher preparation and asynchronous CMC: promoting reflective teaching. J Technol Teach Educ 2007;15:513–32. 30. Levenberg A, Caspi A. Comparing perceived formal and informal learning in face-to-face versus online environments. Interdiscipl J E-Learn Learn Objects 2010;6:323–33. 31. Payne EK, Berry DC. Connecting with your students in the year 2011: text messaging in the classroom. Athletic Train Educ J 2011;6: 175–8. 32. Pew Internet Research Project. 2014. [Internet] Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-factsheet/ [last accessed 6 Dec 2014]. 33. Pew Internet Research Project. Twitter use 2012. [Internet] Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/05/31/twitter-use2012/ [last accessed 6 Dec 2014]. 34. Pew Research Center. Millennials – confident, connected, open to change. [Internet] 2010. Available from: http://pewsocialtrends.org/ files/2010/10/millennials-confident-connected-open-to-change.pdf [last accessed 6 Dec 2014]. 35. Bennett S, Matton K, Kervin L. The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence. Br J Educ Technol 2008;39:775–86. 36. Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2009. 37. Edchat. (2014). [Internet]. Available from: http://edchat.pbworks. com/w/page/219908/FrontPage [last accessed 7 Dec 2014]. 38. Miles M, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1994. 39. Davis K. Learning in 140 characters: teachers’ perceptions of Twitter for professional development [dissertation]. Ann Arbor (MI): Proquest LLC, University of Phoenix; 2012. 40. Hew K, Hara N. Empirical study of motivators and barriers of teacher online knowledge sharing. Educ Technol Res Dev 2007;55: 573–95. 41. Huston T, Weaver C. Peer coaching: professional development for experienced faculty. Innov Higher Educ 2008;33:5–20. 42. Belland B. Using the theory of habitus to move beyond the study of barriers to technology integration. Comput Educ 2009;52:353–64.

Appendix (1) Personal and demographic information (8 items) (2) Edchat experiences (10 items) (a) How long have your been participating in Edchat discussions? Why do you participate? (b) How would you describe the nature of your interactions in Edchat discussions? (c) How would you describe your relationships with other Edchat participants? (d) How are Edchat discussions decided? (e) Please provide an example of ideas from Edchat you have brought into your class. (f) What has surprised you the most in using Edchat for discussions? (g) What has confused you the most in using Edchat for discussions? (h) What has been a high point for you in using Edchat for discussions? (i) What has been a low point for you in using Edchat for discussions? (3) Professional opinion (10 items) (a) What is the difference between Edchat in and sharing ideas in the workplace? (b) How has using Edchat changed your attitudes or percepetions of teaching? Can you provide an example? (c) Other than tangible resources, how do you value Edchat for professional development tool? If not, why not? (d) What are some of the benefits participating in Edchat? (e) What are some of the drawbacks? What are some things you would like to change? (f) What technical aspects of Twitter help or hinder your participation? (g) Please feel free to provide any other comments or opinions related to your experiences.

Teachers' perceptions of Twitter for professional development.

The aim of this study was to determine how school teachers in the United States (US) perceived using Twitter as a means for professional development, ...
488KB Sizes 0 Downloads 10 Views