c Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters License · their list of connections and those made...

This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/acceptedfor publication in the following source:

Kelly, Nick & Antonio, Amy(2016)Teacher peer support in social network sites.Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, pp. 138-149.

This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/95473/

c© Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters

This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under aCreative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use andthat permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu-ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then referto the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog-nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe thatthis work infringes copyright please provide details by email to [email protected]

License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No DerivativeWorks 2.5

Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record(i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub-mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) canbe identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear-ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007

https://eprints.qut.edu.au/view/person/Kelly,_Nick.html

https://eprints.qut.edu.au/95473/

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007

of 38

Teacher peer support in social network sites

Nick Kelly

Australian Digital Futures Institute, University of Southern Queensland; and Queensland

University of Technology, Australia

[email protected]

Amy Antonio

Australian Digital Futures Institute, University of Southern Queensland, Australia

[email protected]

This paper describes the types of support that teachers are accessing through the Social

Network Site (SNS) 'Facebook'. It describes six ways in which teachers support one

another within online groups. It presents evidence from a study of a large, open group

of teachers online over a twelve week period, repeated with multiple groups a year later

over a one week period. The findings suggest that large open groups in SNSs can be a

useful source of pragmatic advice for teachers but that these groups are rarely a place

for reflection on or feedback about teaching practice.

Keywords: social network; teacher; teacher education; beginning teacher; Facebook;

natural language processing; online professional development

1. Introduction

Teachers learn from one another in many ways, from the formality of structured mentoring

through to casual conversations in the hallway (Clarke, Triggs, & Nielsen, 2014; Richter,

Kunter, Klusmann, Lüdtke, & Baumert, 2011). In recent decades the Internet has extended

the circumstances in which this collegial contact can occur, opening up a range of avenues for

support and development (Dede, 2006). Social Networking Sites (SNSs) in particular have

emerged as a significant way in which teachers access support online. Teachers can be

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

of 38

observed supporting one another in commercial SNSs (e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn and

EdModo) as well as on private sites offered to teachers by government education departments

and universities (e.g. Scootle Community in Australia and eTwinning in Europe). It is now

common for teachers to be members of many different SNSs and members of many different

groups (cliques with clear bounds within the environment) within each SNS. The support that

teachers receive from their fellow professionals is known to be a significant contributor to job

satisfaction, professional development and teacher retention (DeAngelis, Wall, & Che, 2013;

Edwards, 2011; Ingersoll & Strong, 2011; McCormack, Gore, & Thomas, 2006). It follows

that if teachers are receiving support through SNSs then it is of great interest to understand

the interactions occurring within these groups.

This paper is concerned with the question: How do teachers access support within

large open groups within SNSs? SNSs are defined as “web-based services that allow

individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2)

articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse

their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (boyd & Ellison, 2007).

Anecdotally, many teachers are using SNSs to receive support. While there is evidence in the

literature of online communities for teacher support (Lin, Lin, & Huang, 2008; Matzat, 2013;

Yeh, 2010), there is limited empirical evidence about the kinds of support that teachers are

finding within these communities and SNSs in particular. Such evidence would be valuable in

that it can potentially advise teacher education, policy and design of SNSs for teachers. In

addressing the question of support in SNSs we focus on the platform Facebook, due to its

popularity within English-speaking nations and its widespread use by teachers (Junco, 2013).

The question is addressed by distinguishing types of online teacher support and then

studying open groups in SNSs to observe the presence of this support. The framework of

House (1981) is used to describe the different forms of social support that teachers find

of 38

within online communities, based on existing research. This foundation forms the basis for

establishing categories that are particular to online teacher support following the work of

Clarke et al. (2014).

The paper uses these categories of online teacher support to conduct a two-phase

study of teachers finding support within Facebook groups. In the first phase, a large, open

group within Facebook is studied to determine the support present in interactions between

teachers over a 12-week period. In the second phase, these results are tested for repeatability

by conducting a study of an additional five groups over a one-week period. The results

suggest that teachers are using open groups in SNSs to find collegial and pragmatic support

online but that they are rarely engaging in discussion relating to teaching practice. When

teachers request any kind of support in large open groups it is typically forthcoming;

however, they appear to be reticent to ask, which has implications for teacher education,

particularly training around relational agency (Edwards, 2005) in online environments –

learning how to draw on other teachers as a resource.

2. Background

2.1 Distinguishing ways that teachers support one another online

Having the support of others within their profession is critical for a teacher’s development.

This is especially true for pre-service and early career teachers (Ingersoll & Strong, 2011;

Long et al., 2012; McCormack et al., 2006), but continues to be important as teachers

progress in the profession. Learning through open groups in SNSs constitutes a form of

informal support, where there is no specified curriculum or structure (Grant & Zeichner,

1981; Richter et al., 2011).

of 38

2.1.1 General forms of social support

Teachers helping one another online is a form of social support, where social relationships

lead to positive outcomes for individuals within the professional realm (Cobb, 1976; House,

1981). Teacher social support can be summarised as interpersonal relations with elements of

“affect, aid and affirmation” (Kahn & Antonucci, 1980) and problematized as the question of

“who gives what to whom regarding which problems?” (House, 1981, emphasis in original).

Types of social support can be distinguished as (after House, 1981):

Emotional support in the form of esteem, affect, trust, concern and listening;

Appraisal support in the form of affirmation, feedback and social comparison;

Informational support in the form of advice, suggestion, directives and information;

and

Instrumental support in the form of aid in kind, money, labour and time.

These four forms of social support provide a framework for studying the positive

professional outcomes from peer relationships between teachers, and many studies discuss

these kinds of support. A study by Greenglass, Fiksenbaum, and Burke (1996) looked

explicitly at the impacts of emotional, informational and instrumental support on Canadian

teachers’ emotional exhaustion (N=833). They found that of three types of supportive

relationship (co-workers, supervisor, friends and family), co-workers were the most

important buffer of emotional exhaustion. Informational support was another buffer of

emotional exhaustion, whether it came from a supervisor or a co-worker. Instrumental

support in general can help a teacher feel that they have a greater sense of control over their

work situation. Whether these findings apply to online social support has not yet been

confirmed in the literature. A mixed methods study of twelve first year beginning teachers in

the USA interacting in an online network revealed that “an online support community is an

effective means of providing social, emotional, practical, and professional support to

of 38

beginning teachers” (DeWert, Babinski, & Jones, 2003). In particular, the study suggests that

peer-to-peer online support can alleviate isolation and loneliness in the profession (through

emotional support), and that online forums can facilitate joint reflection on practice.

A study of secondary teachers in the UK (N=628) found that burnout and job

dissatisfaction were reduced by emotional support from peers (Kinman, Wray, & Strange,

2011). An exploratory study of secondary teachers in Hong Kong (N=75) looked at the

support provided by online forums. Their findings showed that teachers find emotional

support in these online spaces, and suggest that anonymity within the community enabled

participants to feel comfortable in requesting support (Leung, Chiang, Chui, Lee, & Mak,

2011). Paulus and Scherff (2008) conducted a qualitative case study (N=15) of pre-service

teachers using computer-mediated communication (an online forum) to access support during

their practical experience. They found that, in addition to providing a space for structured

reflection, there was emotional support to be found, and “knowing that someone is there to

listen to their concerns may help [teachers to get through their first year]” (Paulus & Scherff,

2008).

Finally, there is evidence that formal mentoring relationships can, when mentors are

well prepared, provide all aspects of social support (Barrera, Braley, & Slate, 2010; Clark &

Byrnes, 2012; Hobson, Ashby, Malderez, & Tomlinson, 2009). In a review of the literature

on mentoring, Hobson et al. (2009) found evidence that mentees receive emotional and

psychological support, increasing confidence, morale and job satisfaction. However, these

benefits are only realised where the mentoring is “fit for purpose and addresses, and is

responsive to, the needs of the mentee/learner” (Hobson et al., 2009, p. 212), i.e. where the

conditions for effective mentoring are met.

These studies provide evidence of the four types of social support that teachers

provide for one another. They demonstrate that collegial support, either through formal

of 38

relationships (e.g. mentor-mentee) or informal relationships (e.g. in the staff room, in online

forums), is currently occurring in both the real world and online.

2.1.2 Forms of teacher online social support

Based on the description of various roles for co-operating teachers provided by Clarke et al.

(2014), we propose that a more fine-grained (six categories in place of the aforementioned

four) typology of online teacher support is appropriate for studying online communities of

teachers (Table 1). In a comprehensive literature review, Clarke et al. (2014) identify eleven

roles that co-operating teachers—those who supervise and support student teachers during

practical experience—take on to support pre-service teachers. Of these eleven roles only six

apply to the context of teachers supporting one another online. Four roles were not applicable

because they were specific to pre-service and early career teachers;1 and one role was not

applicable because it was specific to co-location within a classroom and the in-school

context2. The six remaining roles are (Table 1): (i) providers of feedback; (ii) modelers of

practice; (iii) supporters of reflection; (iv) conveners of relationships; (v) agents of

socialisation; and (vi) advocates of the practical. Each of these roles can be further described

with reference to the literature.

Firstly, teachers are providers of feedback for their peers. They give feedback about

the what and how of practice (the technical skills) as well as the why of practice (deeper

reflection). Both types of feedback are important; however, the literature suggests that

teachers have a tendency to focus on the technical aspects of teaching rather than encouraging

reflection (Grimmett & Ratzlaff, 1986; Kahan, Sinclair, Saucier Jr, & Nguyen Caiozzi, 2003).

1 Four roles are: (i) gatekeeper of the profession; (ii) purveyors of context; (iii) gleaner of knowledge;

(iv) abider of change (Clarke et al., 2014)

2 Role is: (v) teacher of children (Clarke et al., 2014)

of 38

In the online context, removed from the in-school context, practice must first be shared by a

teacher before feedback can be provided.

Secondly, teachers are modelers of practice for their peers in that they look to one

another for images of how to teach (Calderhead & Robson, 1991). In an online setting, the

descriptions that teachers provide of their own and others’ practice provide opportunities for

a teacher to glimpse into other classrooms and learn from such observations. The role of one

teacher modelling the practice of another facilitates learning through mimicry (the

apprenticeship model), by which teachers put into practice what they have learnt from

watching other teachers. Observation of experienced teachers is one of the ways in which the

“apprenticeship of observation” (the tendency for new teachers to teach as they have been

taught rather than how they have been taught to teach) can be overcome (Grossman, 1991;

Loughran, 1995), aiding in the development of reflective practice.

Thirdly, the literature emphasises the importance of the role that teachers play as

supporters of reflection. Transformative reflection on practice is critical to teachers’

development within the profession (Griffiths, 2000). Through reflection on their actions,

teachers are able to transform a state of doubt or ambiguity about a situation into a coherent

understanding (Schön, 1983). Teachers can be seen to prompt reflection in other teachers in

five ways: (i) offering suggestions and observations from personal experience; (ii) providing

supportive commentary; (iii) providing advice and insight; (iv) recommending instructional

and participatory strategies; and (v) validating thoughtful lesson preparation (Stegman, 2007,

p. 77). Each of these prompts for reflection can potentially occur within online communities.

However, there is a challenge in creating the conditions in which online reflection will occur,

as joint reflection requires both privacy and a depth of trust in connections, and these

conditions are often tenuous within a SNS (Clarà, Kelly, Mauri, & Danaher, 2015).

of 38

Fourthly, teachers are conveners of relationships, in the sense that they can initiate

and maintain a relationship with another teacher as well as facilitate new connections

between unconnected teachers. These relationships can allow teachers to develop new

understandings through scaffolding or by providing a cultural or collectivist understanding

(Edwards, 2005). This concept can be further explained by drawing on Edwards’ notion of

relational agency. Teachers can benefit from developing the ability of knowing how to know

who to draw upon when they need to develop some aspect of their teaching. Teachers online

can be conveners of relations by initiating direct relationships, by initiating connections and

by helping others to develop relational agency.

Fifthly, teachers act as agents of socialization by contributing to the maintenance of

customs, ideologies, dispositions and habits of the profession (Clarke et al., 2014). This

influence can be positive and contribute to the maintenance of a cohesive identity within the

profession, although this is not always the case. According to Hoy and Rees (1977), teachers

can alternatively reinforce values of “conformity, impersonality, tradition, subordination, and

bureaucratic loyalty” (p. 25). Through peer relationships (including those online) teachers co-

create the cultural norms of the profession.

Finally, teachers are advocates of the practical for one another, which refers to the

role of teachers in assisting with day-to-day problems as they occur and finding pragmatic

ways to work (Clarke et al., 2014). For example, as advocates of the practical, teachers may

provide support through descriptions of aspects of daily practice (Edwards & Protheroe,

2004) and through the sharing of resources (Hew & Hara, 2007). Being an advocate of the

practical involves to-the-point responses to problems encountered in the day to day of

teaching. This kind of peer support appears to be a good fit with the ‘dive in dive out’ norms

of the online world. However, a focus on the practical is distinct from the aforementioned

needs of teachers for joint reflection on practice. Reflection is the process by which

of 38

coherence is given to a “situation that is initially incoherent and unclear” (Clarà, 2014). In

contrast, advocates of the practical do not engage with the situation but rather with distinct

elements of the situation within which teaching practice occurs (e.g. requests for specific

resources).

The argument for adopting this typology is made in three ways: that the coverage of

the categories is similar; that the categories are drawn from the literature on teacher support;

and that the six categories allow for distinction between situational and declarative

knowledge of teaching practice.

Firstly, the six categories described provide coverage of the entire range of social

support categories. The recognised forms of social support are not lost in shifting to the forms

of online teacher support. However, it is recognised that some of the prior distinctions are lost

in the novel typology, e.g. appraisal from informational support. The suggestion is that the

following two arguments justify this loss of distinction.

Secondly, the categories of online teacher support have been drawn from the work of

Clarke et al. (2014). It is significant that these categories arose from a systematic review of

the literature of ways in which (pre-service) teachers receive support from co-operating

teachers. The categories have names and definitions that, due to their etiology, map onto the

way that researchers have been talking about teacher education over recent decades. For

instance, the term “providing feedback” has a clear meaning for teacher educators, which has

a deeper distinction than, say, providing either “informational support” or “instrumental

support”.

Finally, the distinction between declarative and situational knowledge in teaching is

of great significance for discussions pertaining to teacher support (Clarà, 2014). Much of the

knowledge that teachers need in their day-to-day practice is situational: knowing how to

integrate content with pedagogy (Shulman, 1986). In analysing the online support that

of 38

teachers provide for one another it is useful to be able to distinguish between these types of

knowledge. It is valuable for online communities to help their members develop situational

knowledge through reflection on practice, and thus important to research whether such

support is being provided (Clarà et al., 2015). The six categories proposed enable a

distinction between these types of knowledge; whether, for example, support is provided

through information that is “advocating the practical” (declarative) or through the sharing of

information that is “modelling practice” (situational).

Table 1 Forms of online teacher support and related forms of social support

Forms of Online Teacher Support (after

Clarke et al., 2014)

General Forms of Social Support (House

1981)

Providers of feedback Appraisal; Informational

Modelers of practice Informational

Supporters of reflection Informational

Agents of relationships Emotional

Agents of socialisation Emotional

Advocates of the practical Instrumental; Informational

2.2 Teacher use of SNSs and Facebook for support

2.2.1. The motivation to study teacher use of SNSs

Teachers’ widespread use of SNSs is a relatively recent phenomenon. It was noted as recently

as 2010 that the “interconnectedness and ground-up, user-generated world of Web 2.0 has yet

to reach into the realm of teacher professional learning” (Lieberman & Pointer Mace, 2010,

p. 78). However, by 2012, a US national study showed that 43% of teachers were using Web

2.0 tools (primarily Facebook) to communicate with other teachers (Kennedy &

Archambault, 2012). A smaller and more recent study suggests a similar number, with 46.7%

of beginning teachers (n=62) reporting that they used Facebook to maintain communication

with their cohort from university (Kelly, Reushle, Chakrabarty, & Kinnane, 2014).

The participants’ responses in the above study provide further motivation for studying

the types of support accessed by teachers within Facebook. When asked to “Please describe

of 38

the ways in which you have been supported during your first year of teaching service...” two

respondents gave unprompted indications of their reliance on Facebook (unpublished data

from the study reported in Kelly et al., 2014):

(1) Support through the school through a mentoring program and Beginning

Teachers conference. Support from colleagues through our online Facebook

community that I set-up during university and still run during the first year of

teaching.

(2) Very little support as I needed registration to be a kindy teacher. All uni[versity]

subjects were aimed at primary and staff had little/no knowledge about the new

kindy regs for kindy teachers. Most support has been from the other kindy

teachers I met through uni[versity] and the Facebook group we started

There is thus evidence to suggest that collegial support for teachers, which traditionally

occurred in a face-to-face setting, is increasingly being augmented with online support. SNSs,

and Facebook in particular, appears to be one of the ways in which this type of collegial

support is being accessed.

2.2.2. Studies of teacher support through SNSs

There are some examples in the literature of prior studies that have looked at the ways in

which SNSs are being utilised by teachers. Rutherford (2010) sought to determine if

discussions on a Facebook group (Ontario teachers- resource and idea sharing group) could

be considered as professional development for teachers. Staudt, St. Clair, and Martinez

(2013) similarly analysed the Dreeben School of Education Teacher Network’s organisational

Facebook page to determine whether or not it enabled professional development

of 38

opportunities for beginning teachers. They found that members posted comments and

announcements to the Facebook page, but were hesitant to post queries regarding

professional needs. Goodyear, Casey, and Kirk (2014) sought to understand how teachers

leverage sites such as Facebook and Twitter for professional learning purposes. They

explored 2125 interactions through Facebook and Twitter between five physical education

teachers. They found that as teachers grew in confidence (from second year onwards) they

began to tweet about their own practices, which gave them an identity as someone who was

pedagogically competent and innovative. This study focused primarily on the affirmation of

competence that teachers receive when they share their ideas and receive positive comments

(or “likes”), rather than on how SNSs are used to provide support. Hart and Steinbrecher

(2011), in contrast, used a mixed methods approach to examine the Facebook features that are

utilised by pre-service educators for both personal and professional reasons. They found that

Facebook is now being utilised for professional purposes and that the nature of these

interactions serves three major purposes: collaboration and generation of ideas for instruction,

connecting, updating and supporting one another, and seeking professional advice.

2.2.3. Theoretical understandings of teacher support through SNSs

There are many types of SNS and many types of group within these sites, yet they all share

the same design features in terms of being an online space with mechanisms to restrict

membership, to engage in dialogue using written language and to share media and external

references (boyd & Ellison, 2007). Two ways in which groups can vary significantly are

privacy and size. Firstly, groups within Facebook are either private (‘closed’), in the sense

that membership and interaction is moderated, or open to the public (‘open’), such that any

member of the SNS is able to join the group and interact within it. Secondly, groups can

range in size, in terms of the number of members in a given group. Recent work has

suggested that these two variables (privacy and size) have a mixed impact upon teacher

of 38

communities (Clarà et al., 2015; Lin et al., 2008). Having large and open online communities

is positive in that there are more members to provide support and information is freely

shared. However, there is a cost in that trust, stability and privacy are vital to a willingness to

share information and knowledge at the level of depth required for reflection on teaching

practice (Clarà et al., 2015). As communities grow there is an expectation that collegial

support will be lost, with a constantly shifting base of members eroding trust within the

community.

Lin et al. (2008) identify problems that prevent participants in massive communities

from interacting with one another, which stems from an ambiguity around roles, a lack of

understanding of the context of communication (due to many asynchronous contributions), a

lack of clear focus (due to the same) and a fear of criticism. They also discuss the lack of

psychological obligation, in that participation in a SNS requires time and energy and

engagement only occurs where there is an expectation of return in terms of direct or indirect

benefits.

This study of the norms of reciprocity or balanced exchange of social and material

resources forms the basis of social exchange theory (SET) (Blau, 1964), which holds that

reciprocity is critical to a social network’s maintenance and resource flows, and a lack of

reciprocity can become a dilemma in online communities (Kavanaugh, Reese, Carroll, &

Rosson, 2005). This model is based on the premise that individuals enter into and remain part

of relationships to meet certain needs, for as long as the parties continue to benefit. Sites such

as Facebook take advantage of this deeply ingrained impulse to reciprocate “by making the

gesture-and-return cycle visible and salient” (Grimmelmann, 2009, p. 1156). The model of

SET has formed the basis for implementing teacher mentor-mentee relationships, and is

appropriate to understanding communities of mutual teacher support (Ingersoll & Strong,

2011; Zey, 1984).

of 38

In the absence of material exchange individuals build and sustain social relationships

with others by sharing their knowledge with an expectation of future returns (Jin, Park, &

Kim, 2010). If members of a group believe they will receive extrinsic benefits (knowledge

sharing) or intrinsic benefits (self-satisfaction or social recognition) then they are likely to

develop a more positive attitude to knowledge sharing. In accordance with SET, individuals

are guided by rational self-interest, and knowledge sharing will thus occur when its outcomes

exceed its costs.

2.2.4.Quantitative studies of support in SNSs

Two quantitative studies explore the relationship between participation in Facebook groups

and support more generally. Greene, Choudhry, Kilabuk, and Shrank (2011) analysed the 15

most recent posts from 15 Facebook groups pertaining to diabetes. Wall posts were assigned

to categories and it was found that while 68% of posts described users’ personal experience

with diabetes, explicit product promotion was found in more than a quarter (27%) of all

posts. While open Facebook groups can be used for support, they simultaneously serve as

promotional spaces.

Gerolimos (2011) similarly examined users’ comments posted on the Facebook pages

of 20 American libraries. The results of this study showed that of the 3,513 posts that were

analysed, 3,191 did not receive any comments. Infrequent spikes were, however, triggered by

a comment or question. Asking a question was found to be more likely to encourage

participation when compared to disseminating frivolous materials about events and/or

activities. In teacher groups it is hypothesised that a similar kind of relationship may exist:

that genuine requests for help in the form of posts elicit more responses/feedback in the form

of comments than posts relating to self-promotion, which are less likely to engender

significant activity in response.

of 38

2.4. Summary

Teachers are using Facebook and similar online communities to receive many kinds of social

support. The informal social support between teachers that is occurring on a large-scale basis

within open Facebook groups has largely been unexamined in the literature. This study was

thus conducted to address the question: How are teachers supporting one another in large,

open Facebook groups?

There is a need for teacher educators to understand the support currently occurring

within SNSs. Findings have the potential to inform future policy around teacher education

and professional development, through questions such as: How might SNSs be better used by

teachers in need of support? How might teacher education prepare teachers for accessing this

support?

3. Methods

The study involves two phases of data collection and analysis. Firstly to study a selected

group of teachers using Facebook for support online and, secondly, to test for repeatability of

these findings:

Phase 1: A large, open Facebook group of teachers was selected and studied for

activity within a 12-week period from 18th

August to 10th

November 2014 using

mixed methods to establish the types of support present in the community.

Phase 2: The results from Phase 1 are tested for repeatability by conducting the same

analysis over a reduced time period for the same group a year later (November 2015),

and for four additional groups meeting similar criteria.

Some terms to describe groups can be introduced for the purpose of characterising the

groups being studied (after boyd & Ellison, 2007):

of 38

The size of a group can be described as small (having <200 members), large

(having > 200 but < 2000) or massive (having > 2000).

The regionality of the group can be local (restricted to a small area, e.g. a

suburb), regional (for a city, state, nation or continent) or unspecified

(unrestricted)3.

The privacy of the group can be open (open to all members) or closed (private,

with membership either restricted to a small group or moderated).

3.1 Phase 1: Analysing a Facebook group

An open group of Facebook teachers was selected for study based upon certain criteria. The

group was to be open to the public as the aim of the study was to determine what was

happening within open groups within SNSs. A comparison with closed groups was outside

the scope of the study due to the ethical problems presented by studying these groups. The

group was to be large with an aim of studying what is occurring in groups of this size. Based

upon these criteria, an experienced teacher educator recommended a specific Facebook

group. This process of purposive group selection is recognised as a limitation of the research

that is addressed in part by Phase 2 of the research. This group had an unspecified regionality.

3.1.1 Ethical considerations

The study of online groups such as Facebook is still an ethically contested area (Reilly &

Trevisan, 2015; Ward & Wasserman, 2010; Whiteman, 2012). In this study we focussed on

studying open groups of teachers, largely due to the contentious ethical position involved in

studying closed online groups within Facebook. In studying a large or massive closed group

of teachers it is infeasible to gain consent from all members of the closed group. It is however

3 Note that regionality was designated in this study based upon the stated name of the group. The

location of users is in no way imposed in the group. For example, a group labelled “Minnesota

teachers” could potentially have members from other regions but would have a tendency to attract

teachers from Minnesota

of 38

methodologically problematic to only include data from those giving consent (e.g. a

conversation thread cannot be followed with only half of the discourse). The authors thus

made a decision at the outset of the study that it was against human research ethics policy to

gather qualitative data from closed Facebook groups without consent.

The University of Southern Queensland granted ethical approval for this study

(H14REA099). Participants in all the Facebook groups studied were aware they were posting

into public forums at the time of posting. Group names and member names are reported

anonymously in accordance with ethical approval.

3.1.2 Coding scheme

Group interactions were coded using the six roles that teachers take on to support one another

online. The six categories, described in Section 2.1.2 and shown in Table 2, were: (i)

providers of feedback; (ii) modelers of practice; (iii) supporters of reflection; (iv) conveners

of relations; (v) agents of socialisation; and (vi) advocates of the practical. The unit of

analysis is referred to as an utterance by a user, involving text, image, video, sound or

hyperlinks. Utterances can be posts that initiate a thread of discussion (and are typically

longer) or a comment that responds to a post or another comment (typically shorter, e.g. one

sentence in length, although at times longer).

Through the process of coding and resolving disagreements between the two coders,

two additional distinctions around these categories were clarified that serve to further

establish the six categories in Table 2. Providing feedback required that the utterance be

responding to a description of practice and providing feedback on that practice. This excluded

utterances where feedback was merely ‘advocating the practical’ such as adding their

approval of a teaching resource. Modelling practice required that the utterance include a

description of the context of teaching practice. This excluded utterances that might simply

of 38

advocate mentioning something regarding practice devoid of context (e.g. “I love the flipped

classroom, you should try it”) in which case it was coded as ‘advocate of the practical’.

Table 2 Coding Book

Type of support/ category Description Example

Providers of feedback

(prv-fdbk)

Teachers give feedback about the what,

why and how of practice.

“…definitely didn't go overboard; your

ideas are so creative and very inspiring!

love love the idea of the sand pit and

having their own chance of finding

'gold' as a reward….”

Modelers of practice

(mod-prac)

Teachers look to one another for

images of how to teach, through

descriptions teachers provide of their

own and others’ practice.

“…We have ipads in our classrooms

and some of the apps are the same as

Google or at least similar. We use them

for basic things like dictionary apps for

English work, drawing pad to work out

maths questions etc. Ebooks are great

too as well as apps that allow us to

mirror the iPad onto the IWB for whole

class lessons…”

Supporters of reflection

(sup-refl)

Teachers prompt reflection in other

teachers by offering suggestions,

providing supportive commentary,

providing advice, recommending

strategies and validating lesson

preparation.

“Interesting. Not sure how I feel about

it. Maybe if these kids are distracted

and need movement that much, a new

teaching approach could be tried…”

Convener of relationships

(conv-rel)

Teachers initiate and maintain

relationships with other teachers and

facilitate new connections.

“Thank you so much for all of your

ideas… I have found the book "The

Day the Crayons Quit" and I think it

will be great for Early Stage 1. Does

anyone know of this book and if so

have any good mathematics lesson

ideas that have come from it…”

Agents of socialisation

(agnt-soc)

Teachers contribute to the maintenance

of customs, ideologies, dispositions and

habits of the profession.

“We are off again! The blossoming

Jacaranda trees and increasing heat is

not only a sign Christmas is

approaching, but it also marks the

beginning of School Reporting Season.

Yea ha!...”

Advocates of the practical

(adv-prac)

Teachers assist each other with day-to-

day problems and find pragmatic ways

to work.

“I have combined sound and musical

instruments to 'show' sound and the

vibrations. Get a tambourine and some

sand and a drum stick. Place the sand

on the tambourine and hit with the stick

from underneath. You can see the

movement of the sand in patterns.”

The process for analysis involved coding and counting of posts and comments by two

independent raters for a quantitative summary of the types of activity within the group over

of 38

the 12-week period. This was supplemented by a qualitative description of the support

observed in users’ posts and comments within the groups.

As a result of being an open, online group, little is known about the participants

themselves. However, given the title of the group (withheld) and the nature of the discussions

taking place, it is surmised that the group consisted predominantly of practicing teachers,

with a focus on primary school teaching. Despite an unspecified regionality in the group

description, the comments suggest that many members of the group are from Australia. All

conversations in the group were in English.

Coding and counting was carried out for all posts and comments in the 12-week

period. An inter-rater reliability analysis using the Kappa statistic was performed on all

comments and posts that were coded by both raters to determine consistency amongst raters

and found to be Kappa = 0.71 (po=0.78, pe=0.23), indicating substantial agreement (Landis &

Koch, 1977). Following established reliability, all discrepancies were discussed for 100%

agreement.

3.2 Phase 2: Establishing repeatability

The analysis described in Phase 1 was repeated to address the question of whether the results

gathered were repeatable across time for the same group, and repeatable across different open

groups of teachers that matched similar criteria for selection. Seven open Facebook groups

were identified as meeting the criteria from Phase 1 and data from these groups were

gathered for a one-week period from 1st November 2015. Two groups were excluded due to

data indicating that the groups were no longer active, with fewer than ten posts or comments

within the one week period). Five groups were thus included in Phase 2 of the study, one of

which was the same group included in Phase 1. Two of the additional groups were specific to

a region, Group 2 and Group 4, whilst other groups were not.

of 38

3.2.1. Methodological limitations of Facebook

The groups in Phase 2 were chosen based upon an exhaustive search within Facebook, for all

open groups that were returned using the search term “teacher” that met the criteria of being

open and large or massive groups of teachers. However, one of the challenges of conducting

research within Facebook is that, due to being a commercial platform with restrictions on the

data that is given away, it is not possible to conduct a truly exhaustive search. This is because

what is exhaustive for the user is not exhaustive for the entire platform. It is only possible to

do an exhaustive search of all groups that, within the vast graph constituting the entire

platform of Facebook, are sufficiently ‘close’ to the user doing the searching. When

conducting a search within Facebook, the results generated are biased towards what

Facebook knows of the person doing the searching. Facebook uses an algorithm that includes

variables such as the user’s physical location (in this case Queensland, Australia) and their

‘friends’ and ‘likes’ (declared connections within the SNS) when generating results for the

search. In this paper the groups for establishing context came from an exhaustive search by

the authors using the search term “teacher”. It is likely that the same search by another user

(e.g. one living in the United States) would provide different results.

Further, results in Facebook change over time – even the historic data for a prior time

period changes post-facto. Data for Phase 1 of the study was extracted in late 2014. If another

researcher were to extract data for this same 12-week period, a number of factors mean that

the data would not be consistent – history in Facebook is not set in stone. Changes to group

membership (which trigger changes to the data in the group), site membership (people asking

for their data to be removed) and moderation (posts being flagged for removal) can all lead to

changes in the data4.

4 Whilst there are challenges for research that arise from the relational nature of Facebook, it is

interesting to note that many of Weber’s bases for rejection of objectivity in the social sciences

of 38

4. Results

4.1. Phase 1: Types of support within a Facebook group of teachers

Table 3 shows that when teachers in the group studied (Group 1) were providing support to

one another, it was predominantly in the roles of advocates of the practical (66%), conveners

of relations (21%) and agents of socialization (8%), Table 3. There were few instances of

teachers modelling practice (3%), providing feedback (2%) or supporting reflection (<1%) in

the group.

If solely posts are considered (initial utterances to which the comments are

responding) then the majority came under the category ‘convener of relations’ (67%),

followed by ‘agents of socialisation’ (24%). If solely comments are considered (responses to

posts) then the majority were categorised as ‘advocates of the practical’ (86%).

There were 128 posts and comments coded as ‘N/A’ on the basis that they did not fit

into these six categories, making up 36% of all utterances. Of these, the posts and comments

tended to be of a different nature. The posts that were coded ‘N/A’ were typically commercial

in nature, advertising a website or product. The comments that were coded ‘N/A’ were

typically following social norms. A prevalent example is the one-word comment ‘following’,

which is a SNS norm for a user to indicate that they are following a conversation even if they

are not posting. Another prevalent example was simply to say ‘thanks’ or ‘me too’ to another

comment, both of which were coded as ‘N/A’ rather than as a form of support.

Table 3 Summary of types of support present within the group

Description P+C P C

(i.e. that knowledge of a cultural reality is always relative to a particular point of view at a point in

time) appear to have been given concrete form when conducting research in the Facebook

environment (Weber, 1949).

of 38

Modelers of practice 6 2.68% 0 0.00% 6 3.68%

Providers of feedback 4 1.79% 0 0.00% 4 2.45%

Supports of reflection 1 0.45% 0 0.00% 1 0.61%

Convener of relations 46 20.54% 39 67.24% 7 4.29%

Agents of socialization 19 8.48% 14 24.14% 5 3.07%

Advocates of the practical 148 66.07% 5 8.62% 140 85.89%

Total 224 100.00% 58 100.00% 163 100.00%

N/A 128

P=posts, C=comments

A common sequence within the data was a post that was ‘convening relations’

followed by comments that were ‘advocating the practical’. Of the 38 posts within the time

period that were followed by a comment, 22 of them followed this sequence (58%). Such

interactions were typically a question asked by a teacher of the community, followed by

pragmatic responses with a focus on actions that would help the original poster. Twenty

posts, just over a third, received no comment in reply. Some of these were instances in which

support was sought and not received. One explanation for this is that these posts were

perceived as being off-topic or poorly worded requests.

Table 4 shows an interaction from the data that typifies this pattern. The initial

question was a request for help. The post makes clear both the situation of the poster (a

primary school teacher with a year 6 class, perhaps lacking in experience) and the help they

are requesting (advice for a mathematics starter lesson). The comments to the post are

responses from other teachers who were willing to share practical advice about what has

worked for them.

Table 4 Example of ‘convening relations’ followed by ‘advocating the practical’

Type Utterance Coding

Post

Does anyone have a fun 5/10 minute math starter for year 6? (nothing

Halloween related though, Catholic School) Cnv-rln

Comment What sort of math? Try a scoot? Adv-prac

of 38

Comment

around the world' one kid stands up behind another in a circle/ at desks

and you ask a maths question. if they get it right, they move to the next

person, if they get it wrong they switch places with the person sitting etc Adv-prac

Comment

I teach a 6 math class and they enjoy the game 'bang', sort of made up!

Write random numbers all over the whiteboard, e.g, 13, 210 etc. Two

teams, two players from each team stand in front of the board. Call out

random math algorithms such as 20 divide Adv-prac

Comment

Time how fast they can.....count, recite tables, says months of the year.

OR. In 30 seconds how many numbers can you add, subtract from 100,

classify odd even, double. Endless ideas. Just need a pack of uno cards

or regular cards using just the numbers Adv-prac

Comment

Wizard maths duel. Wands at the ready...first one to answer the question

stays in progress around the room Adv-prac

Comment

times table duel where two students stand up and duel each other over

number facts. The winner stays and another 'contestant' stands to answer

the next 'fact'. Adv-prac

Comment

Thanks everyone. They are currently doing Time, but moving onto

Chance/ Data N/A

Comment

Google Maths Starters - transum starters is great . There is a new

challenge every day on a calendar including weekends! Suitable for

Year 6. My students are addicted. Adv-prac

Comment Thanks Lisa! N/A

Comment Give the brain teasers Adv-prac

Comment Seconding the Math Starters site! Looks great! Adv-prac

The data suggest that the clarity and specificity of the question in the initial post were

important for receiving significant responses from other teachers. For example, some

questions were overly specific to the point that perhaps nobody within the community could

respond:

Has anyone made or found a good positioning activity. I was looking at making one

around a Treasure Island theme and they would have to answer questions about

certain coordinates of objects etc. but I thought I would check here first [smile

emoticon] Suitable for years 3 and 4.

In this example, there was only one response from the entire community despite the clarity of

the question. Indeed, the one response that was posted was merely a suggestion that the

poster look up a generic teacher resource site – it was not a link to any specific resource. In

almost all cases, teachers were careful to specify information about year level and subject

of 38

matter when making requests; however, most were sufficiently general to elicit responses.

Some examples of this were:

Hi, does anyone have any suggestions for a Handwriting lesson for year 6 (stage 3

NSW)? TIA

Hi all I am a Senior Maths and chemistry teacher. I was wondering where I can

purchase text books. I need some guidance. Thanks [Name]

Does anyone have any good ideas for picture books which involve a lot of

mathematical content? My first thoughts were The Very Hungry Caterpillar. Although

all of the activities I keep thinking of are based on other KLAs rather then maths. Any

ideas are welcome both for this book or any other recommendations

The responses to these questions were largely coded as either ‘advocates of the practical’ or

‘N/A’. Occasionally teachers responded to posts with comments that attempted to create a

one-to-one connection. For example one poster mentioned (in amongst a question) that they

were studying a Masters of Education in Guidance and Counselling. One of the commenters

picked up on this and commented:

Can I ask how you are finding the course? Will you work in Primary or Secondary? I

have a B Ed and work in primary and would love to move into this area. Would love

any info.

of 38

There was no public response to this question, suggesting that this commenter may have

received either no response or a personal response (i.e. the two teachers began having a

conversation not visible to the public).

There were few examples of teachers discussing practice within the group. One

particular interaction, shown in Table 5, shows the kind of discussion of practice that did take

place. This extract suggests that once one teacher discusses practice, others will perhaps be

more willing to open up about their own practice – it creates the sense of trust required for

description of practice to occur. In this discussion, one teacher asks for advice about giving a

Year 5 lesson on “the gold rush”. The responses begin as expected in the main sequence, with

teachers advocating for practical suggestions. However, one teacher shares in detail how they

have developed this unit of study in the classroom, providing a glimpse into the classroom

that is rarely observed in the data. Other teachers respond in kind, to the point that there are

three teachers providing a model of practice from this one post.

Table 5 Teachers modelling practice in response to post

Type Utterance Coding

Post

Hi all, i was just wondering if anyone has any ideas for lessons based

around the Gold rush (year 5)? i have a few ideas but it would be nice to get

a different point of view.

Thanks in advance [smile emoticon]

Cnv-rln

Comment

They can create a wanted poster for a bushranger?! I created mining

licences for each child. We also had a mock stockade in drama acted out the

scene!

Adv-prac

Comment

I set up a shop in the classroom with various students being in charge of

various things, such as a banker, a fruit & veg shop, a newsagency to buy

paper to write home with, a dress maker, baker, etc. The kids loved it. We

also build a diorama of the Eureka Stockade.

Adv-prac

Comment

Those are both such great ideas! I really appreciate your ideas and

advice [name] love the license idea, would get students so enthused! Thank

you [name] I had a similar idea in mind but you have definitely given me

some great inspiration! Thank you so much ladies

N/A

of 38

Comment

We are in the middle of our yr 5 gold rush unit. Lots of timelines for gold

discoveries, researching eureka stockade, posing inquiry questions. Set up a

panning activity for fun. The focus is around the impact of the gold rush on

the colonies and indigenous Australians and how the lives of the free

settlers and Chinese changed when they came to Australia. Have a dress up

day where children dress as miners, troopers, free settlers, convicts etc

Mod-prac

Comment

The other things I did was give everyone a gold mining licence that they

had to carry on them at all times. At random times I would call out 'licence

check' and if they didn't have it on them, they would get fined. I also had a

tiny blow up pool in the classroom that I filled with sand from the sand pit,

collected a heap of stones and sprayed some of them gold. Hid them in the

sand, and if students finished work early, or behaved exceptionally well on

any given day they could go gold panning through the sand. I even bought

proper gold panning pans. I sooo went totally overboard that year with this

unit, but it was the best unit I've ever taught. Had so much fun with it, and

the kids were totally engaged and learnt so much.

Mod-prac

Comment they are great ideas [name] , love the dress up day! thank you heaps! N/A

Comment

i want to be in your classroom! definitely didn't go overboard your ideas

are so creative and very inspiring! love love the idea of the sand pit and

having their own chance of finding 'gold' as a reward. I can tell why the kids

kept their engagement throughout the unit, i am engaged just reading your

post! Thank you so much, you have been so helpful!

Prv-Fbck

Comment

I did my prac with a year 5 class last year and we did a role play around the

types of people who experienced the gold rush... The teacher I was with

made role play cards for each student that gave them information about the

person each they was playing. They had to role play different situations.

They played gold miners of different nationalities, aboriginal people, miners

wives, people that worked in different areas. There were more but I can't

remember. The kids loved it!

Mod-prac

For the most part, teachers were unwilling to engage in discussion of practice or to

support reflection on practice. The one example of an utterance that was coded as ‘supporting

reflection’ was a statement with an ellipsis rather than a direct appeal to the community

Interesting. Not sure how I feel about it. Maybe if these kids are distracted and need

movement that much, a new teaching approach could be tried…

4.2. Phase 2: Repeating the analysis

Coding for types of support was conducted for a one-week period in 2015 for the original

group (Group 1) and an additional four groups (Groups 2-5), Table 6. These results show that

the distribution between categories is similar to that found in Phase 1. ‘Advocating the

of 38

practical’ made up 57% of utterances showing support, compared to 66% in Phase 1.

‘Convening relations’ constituted 33%, slightly more than 21% in Phase 1. ‘Agent of

socialisation’ made up 6%, slightly less than the 8% in Phase 1. Modelling of practice was

similarly small (4% compared to 3% in Phase 1) whilst, surprisingly, there were no utterances

coded as ‘supporter of reflection’ or ‘provider of feedback’.

Looking at individual groups reveals more about what is occurring within the groups.

Group 1 is the same group studied in Phase 1 and, a year later, the distribution is quite similar

– the top three categories remain the same, in the same order. However, there is now an

absence of modelling practice, providing feedback and supporting reflection. The results

from Group 2 are similar to the results of Group 1 from a year previously (Table 3). Group 3

is an anomaly in that none of the utterances showed teacher support – this is due to all posts

being coded ‘N/A’. Group 4 has a higher than expected occurrence of convening relations

and modelling practice, while Group 5 had very few utterances coded as supportive. During

coding, the sequence of convening relations and advocating the practical, as seen in Phase 1,

was once more observed.

Table 7 shows the relative number of utterances that were coded as ‘N/A’. There were

a number of unexpected findings. Groups 1, 3 and 5 all had over 80% of utterances coded as

‘N/A’. In 2014, 34% of utterances for Group 1 were coded as N/A and in 2015 81% of

utterances were coded N/A, representing a large shift. The vast majority of these posts were

commercial in nature, with many advertising resources on third-party teacher resources sites

(e.g. teacherspayteachers.com, designedbyteachers.com.au). In Group 4, similar to Group 1 in

Phase 1, only 34% of utterances were coded as N/A.

There is a suggestion in the literature that more useful posts attract more comments

(Gerolimos, 2011). This can be expressed as a ratio of comments to posts, the fraction

comments/posts, where a large fraction indicates that each post is receiving more comments,

of 38

which we will refer to as responsiveness. Table 8 is sorted by responsiveness and shows an

inverse relationship between responsiveness and the number of utterances coded N/A. A

Spearman co-efficient of one (𝜌 = 1) suggests that these two variables are correlated.

Table 6 Distribution of types of support found within five online groups

Mod-prac Prv-fdbk Sup-refl Conv-rel Agnt-soc Adv-prac Total

Group 1* 0 0 0 4 26.67% 2 13.33% 9 60.00% 15

Group 2 1 3.33% 0 0 7 23.33% 2 6.67% 20 66.67% 30

Group 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Group 4 2 6.67% 0 0 13 43.33% 1 3.33% 14 46.67% 30

Group 5 0 0 0 2 50.00% 0 2 50.00% 4

Total 3 3.80% 0 0 26 32.91% 5 6.33% 45 56.96% 79 *

The group from Phase 1 is designated Group 1

Table 7 Utterances coded N/A for each group

Supportive N/A Total

Group 1 15 19.48% 62 80.52% 77

Group 2 30 46.88% 34 53.13% 64

Group 3 0 93 100.00% 93

Group 4 30 66.67% 15 33.33% 45

Group 5 4 2.90% 134 97.10% 138

Total 79 18.94% 338 81.06% 417

Table 8 Posts, comments and N/A coding by group

Group posts comments comments/posts %N/A

Group 3 779 42 0.053915276 100.00%

Group 5 1677 392 0.233750745 97.10%

Group 1 702 597 0.85042735 80.52%

Group 2 396 1557 3.931818182 53.13%

Group 4 506 2072 4.09486166 33.33%

5. Discussion

5.1 Types of support present

The results of the current study suggest that teachers are predominantly using large open

groups in Facebook for connecting with other teachers (convenors of relations), for

socialising (agents of socialization) and for seeking and/or providing practical advice about

of 38

teaching and teaching practices (advocates of the practical). These findings support those of

Hart and Steinbrecher (2011) who suggested that Facebook use by teachers serves three

major purposes: collaboration and generation of ideas for instruction; connecting, updating

and supporting one another; and seeking professional advice. Rutherford (2010) and Staudt et

al. (2013) both found that teachers readily posted comments and announcements but were

reluctant to post queries regarding professional needs. This was supported, at least in part, by

the results of Phase 1 of the current study, in that posters could generally be characterized as

either convenors of relations (67%) or agents of socialization (24%), with similar results in

Phase 2. A typical exchange involves one teacher asking the group for a favour (“does

anyone have suggestions for a resource about X”) that is responded to by multiple members

of the community making pragmatic suggestions. The majority of comments advocated the

practical components of teaching. This can be understood in the context of the findings by

Goodyear et al (2014), that teachers were more likely to post and tweet about their practice as

their confidence increased. While posts were often about developing relations and

socializing, those who elected to respond to posts frequently provided information with

pragmatic advice about practice (86% in Phase 1).

A significant finding is that the teachers in the groups studied did not typically engage

in modelling of teaching practice, reflection on practice or feedback about practice. A theory-

based explanation for this is that such discussion of practice requires trust, stability and

collegiality within a group (Clarà et al., 2015). Given the public nature of open groups and

the frequently shifting user base of large groups (largely through new members), none of

these three criteria are satisfied.

We hypothesise that any SNSs designed for teachers should focus upon satisfying

these three criteria if discussion of practice is desired and that closed groups are more likely

to exhibit evidence of these kinds of support. It is probable that, in a large, open group, the

of 38

cycle of gesture and return is not as visible and salient as it would be in closed, private

environment. Study of closed groups within SNSs is required to determine if this is the case.

A challenge for large open groups was observed to be the presence of commercially

driven (rather than community driven) members. One potential explanation for this is that the

more successful an open group becomes (in terms of the number of members and the quality

of support present) the more of a target that group will be for commercially driven members,

as it is now visible (easier to find due to its size) and attractive (due to the activity of its

members). This may explain the differences observed between Group 1 in 2014 and 2015,

where significantly more commercial activity was recorded. If so, this presents a paradox for

designers of SNSs for teachers. A benefit of open groups is their inclusivity – the fact that

anyone can join allows for unexpected serendipity to occur. Yet this lack of control of

membership permits exploitation of the community by commercial interests.

Another potential driver of commercial activity in the groups studied is changing

technology. Between the two phases of the study there was a growth in the popularity of

websites that provide tools for teachers to develop resources that they can then share with the

community, often for a financial reward. Websites like designed by teachers

(http://designedbyteachers.com.au/) and teachers pay teachers

(https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/) were observed in many posts. Having developed a

resource, a teacher is motivated to promote it within their communities. One hypothesis is

that the presence of this kind of website is potentially changing the culture of large open

groups of teachers within SNSs, where community members are tempted to promote their

own resources out of financial rather than altruistic motivations.

5.2 Learning to ask

An interpretation of the findings is that teachers in the open groups studied have a reluctance

http://designedbyteachers.com.au/

https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/

of 38

to ask one another for support. The format of SNSs is of posts, and comments in response to

those posts. In most cases, where a user asked for something of the community, the

community provided supportive responses. However, we found that in the groups studied the

members did not typically ask questions pertaining to teaching practice and only few

members of the group made posts to initiate discussion. The few answers that were coded as

providing feedback on practice or supporting reflection came about in response to posts that

shared something about teaching practice, of what was going on inside the classroom. If

members of the group were more inclined to ask questions of this nature, then we hypothesise

that more valuable support for teaching practice would occur. In SNSs there is a flow-on

benefit from supportive exchanges as members of the group that are “lurking” may also

benefit from the exchange of knowledge.

One possible explanation for this lack of posts is that there are other channels within

and outside of Facebook that teachers may prefer to open groups. Both personal messages

and closed groups provide a safer and more private way to discuss what is occurring in the

classroom. Without further study it is not possible to know to what extent this is currently

occurring.

Another potential explanation is that the members of the groups are perhaps simply

unwilling to ask questions. Online groups develop cultural norms. If other members are only

ever requesting pragmatic support then it takes a courageous member to commence

discussion of an in-depth question about educational philosophy. If this is the basis for the

results observed, then there is the potential for groups to become more supportive through the

presence of champions that promote a culture of asking challenging questions (Lave &

Wenger, 1991). There is also potential for teacher education programs to promote a

willingness to ask questions by developing pre-service teachers’ relational agency (Edwards,

of 38

2005, 2011). Teachers can be taught this skill of how to draw upon other teachers as a

resource to develop their teaching practice.

5.3. Indicators of supportive groups

The results from Phase 2 of the study form preliminary evidence for an understanding of the

patterns of group activity that indicate strong support. It is valuable for researchers and

teacher educators to be able to know if an online group of teachers is exhibiting supportive

behaviour without the need to code all utterances. The presence of a quantitative indictor

would be of use. The results in Table 8 show a strong inverse relationship between a group’s

responsiveness (comments divided by posts) and percentage of non-supportive comments

(coded as N/A), suggesting that the responsiveness of a group may be a rough indicator of the

support within a group. A hypothesis that follows is that groups with a higher responsiveness

are more likely to be providing useful support to the teachers within it. For example, in Group

3, no activity was coded as being supportive (100% N/A) and the responsiveness was 0.05. In

contrast, in Group 4 two-thirds of all activity was coded as supportive (33% N/A) and the

responsiveness was 4.09. The hypothesis suggests that the more replies that each request of

the group get (solely measured by quantity) the more supportive (in terms of both quality and

quantity) the group is as a whole. A potential explanation for this inverse correlation is that

posts that are commercial or self-serving tend not to attract replies, thus lowering the

responsiveness as well as diluting the supportiveness of the group. Posts that are engaging

and interesting, such as a well-worded question, tend to attract many responses. Groups with

a culture of having engaging posts and a lack of dilution seem to attract others in the group to

make requests.

The small sample size of the study severely limits the basis for this hypothesis, yet it

would be significant if it could be confirmed. For example, if the relationship is

generalizable, then researchers and teacher educators would have an indicator for estimating

of 38

the supportiveness of online groups. The hypothesis raises the question of whether online

groups might be made more responsive (and in turn supportive, with a potentially false

assumption of causality) through activities such as moderation to restrict commercial posts,

training of members for more engaging posts, and engineering of the group (e.g. through paid

members) to ensure many comments to each post that is made.

5.4. Limitations

In terms of coverage, the study is only concerned with teachers in large open groups within

Facebook. There is significant activity of teachers within closed groups. Closed groups of

teachers outnumber open groups in searches of the platform, and from the experiences of the

authors (anecdotal evidence) the support that is occurring in these groups is more likely to

show evidence of modelling of practice and supporting of reflection. Further study of closed

groups is called for when the ethical concerns can be satisfactorily addressed.

The generalizability of the study is limited in a number of ways. The study does not

address other SNSs outside of Facebook. Facebook is the most dominant SNS in the

occidental world and so the results are relevant for the teaching profession. There is no

evidence as yet to suggest that the findings would generalize to other SNSs, although the

similarity in both the users (teacher groups) and the functionality (of the technology) gives

reason to hypothesise that results may be similar in other SNSs.

There are further limitations on generalizability from the sampling. There are

limitations imposed by the Facebook platform (discussed in Section 3.2.1) that prevent

exhaustive search. The sampling in Phase 2 used search that is limited by the user context.

The use of criteria for group selection (open, large or massive) limit generalizability of results

to groups that are similarly large and open. However, even within groups that meet these

criteria, there are many variables not controlled for that may potentially affect results. For

of 38

example, groups that use different languages or that are focussed upon specific subject areas

or phases of teaching might potentially lead to different results.

The repetition of the analysis in Phase 2 of the study with similar findings in multiple

groups provides limited evidence that the findings may potentially be generalizable to certain

types of groups. However, the small sample size in this second phase with only one week of

data being coded is a further limitation of the findings.

5.5 Conclusions

The research question posed in this paper was “How do teachers access support within large

open groups within SNSs?” This question is significant, as whilst there is much anecdotal

evidence of teachers using Facebook for support, there is little empirical evidence of this in

the literature and a lack of documented evidence of the types of support occurring. The

results of this study show evidence of teachers supporting one another in pragmatic ways in

open SNS groups, sharing resources and responding to one another with pragmatic advice. In

contrast, the results show scant evidence of online support for reflection on practice, feedback

about practice or modelling of practice, all forms of support that the theory stresses as

important for teachers. The study did not address why this lack of reflective activity occurred.

The results support theoretical discussions that this may be due to the lack of trust, privacy

and stable relationships present within large, open, online groups. Whilst reflective activity is

important to teachers, there is clearly value in the pragmatic support that teachers seem to be

providing for each other, within these large, open online groups, as evinced by the continued

use of the groups by their members.

The results are significant for practice and research of teacher education and

continuing teacher professional development. There is value in teachers having a network of

fellow teachers to draw upon outside of their school grounds, and SNSs provide a potential

of 38

source of such a network. Yet there is little within the literature upon which to base advice for

teachers about how to navigate the potential support within SNSs. This study contributes the

finding that large, open groups seem best-suited to pragmatic advice on teaching, and that

where teachers are willing to ask questions they seem to receive useful answers. It contributes

the description of six categories that are proposed as the ways in which teachers support one

another online. It contributes a methodology and discussion of methodological limitations

related to studying online groups of teachers. Whilst much is still unknown – most pertinently

the nature of private groups – current study provides a foundation for further research into

this area of teacher support that is growing in relevance.

Acknowledgements

Removed for blind review

References

Barrera, A., Braley, R. T., & Slate, J. R. (2010). Beginning teacher success: An investigation

into the feedback from mentors of formal mentoring programs. Mentoring &

Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(1), 61-74.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life: Transaction Publishers.

boyd, d. m., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and

scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers' early conceptions

of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1-8.

Clarà, M. (2014). What Is Reflection? Looking for Clarity in an Ambiguous Notion. Journal

of Teacher Education, 0022487114552028.

Clarà, M., Kelly, N., Mauri, T., & Danaher, P. (2015). Can massive communities of teachers

facilitate collaborative reflection? Fractal design as a possible answer. Asia-Pacific

Journal of Teacher Education.

Clark, S. K., & Byrnes, D. (2012). Through the eyes of the novice teacher: perceptions of

mentoring support. Teacher Development, 16(1), 43-54.

Clarke, A., Triggs, V., & Nielsen, W. (2014). Cooperating Teacher Participation in Teacher

Education A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 84(2), 163-

202.

Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic medicine, 38(5),

300-314.

DeAngelis, K. J., Wall, A. F., & Che, J. (2013). The Impact of Preservice Preparation and

Early Career Support on Novice Teachers’ Career Intentions and Decisions. Journal

of Teacher Education.

of 38

Dede, C. (2006). Online Professional Development for Teachers–Emerging Models: Harvard

Education Press.

DeWert, M. H., Babinski, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003). Safe Passages Providing Online

Support to Beginning Teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 311-320.

Edwards, A. (2005). Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner.

International Journal of Educational Research, 43(3), 168-182.

Edwards, A. (2011). Building common knowledge at the boundaries between professional

practices: Relational agency and relational expertise in systems of distributed

expertise. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 33-39.

Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2004). Teaching by proxy: Understanding how mentors are

positioned in partnerships. Oxford Review of Education, 30(2), 183-197.

Gerolimos, M. (2011). Academic libraries on Facebook: An analysis of users' comments. D-

Lib Magazine, 17(11), 4.

Goodyear, V. A., Casey, A., & Kirk, D. (2014). Hiding behind the camera: social learning

within the Cooperative Learning Model to engage girls in physical education. Sport,

education and society, 19(6).

Grant, C. A., & Zeichner, K. M. (1981). Inservice support for first year teachers: The state of

the scene. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 14(2), 99-111.

Greene, J. A., Choudhry, N. K., Kilabuk, E., & Shrank, W. H. (2011). Online social

networking by patients with diabetes: a qualitative evaluation of communication with

Facebook. Journal of general internal medicine, 26(3), 287-292.

Greenglass, E., Fiksenbaum, L., & Burke, R. J. (1996). Components of social support,

buffering effects and burnout: Implications for psychological functioning. Anxiety,

Stress & Coping, 9(3), 185-197. doi:10.1080/10615809608249401

Griffiths, V. (2000). The reflective dimension in teacher education. International Journal of

Educational Research, 33(5), 539-555.

Grimmelmann, J. (2009). Facebook and the social dynamics of privacy. Iowa Law Review,

95(4), 1-52.

Grimmett, P. P., & Ratzlaff, H. C. (1986). Expectations for the cooperating teacher role.

Journal of Teacher Education, 37(6), 41-50.

Grossman, P. L. (1991). Overcoming the apprenticeship of observation in teacher education

coursework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(4), 345-357.

Hart, J. E., & Steinbrecher, T. (2011). OMG! Exploring and Learning from Teachers'

Personal and Professional Uses of Facebook. Action in Teacher Education, 33(4),

320-328.

Hew, K. F., & Hara, N. (2007). Empirical study of motivators and barriers of teacher online

knowledge sharing. Educational technology research and development, 55(6), 573-

595.

Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning

teachers: What we know and what we don't. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1),

207-216. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001

House, J. S. (1981). Work stress and social support.

Hoy, W. K., & Rees, R. (1977). The bureaucratic socialization of student teachers. Journal of

Teacher Education, 28(1), 23-26.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The Impact of Induction and Mentoring Programs for

Beginning Teachers A Critical Review of the Research. Review of Educational

Research, 81(2), 201-233.

Jin, B., Park, J. Y., & Kim, H.-S. (2010). What makes online community members commit?

A social exchange perspective. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29(6), 587-599.

of 38

Junco, R. (2013). Comparing actual and self-reported measures of Facebook use. Computers

in Human Behavior, 29(3), 626-631.

Kahan, D., Sinclair, C., Saucier Jr, L., & Nguyen Caiozzi, N. (2003). Feedback profiles of

cooperating teachers supervising the same student teacher. Physical Educator, 60(4),

180.

Kahn, R. L., & Antonucci, T. C. (1980). Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles, and

social support. Life-span development and behavior.

Kavanaugh, A. L., Reese, D. D., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2005). Weak ties in

networked communities. The Information Society, 21(2), 119-131.

Kelly, N., Reushle, S., Chakrabarty, S., & Kinnane, A. (2014). Beginning Teacher Support in

Australia: Towards an Online Community to Augment Current Support. Australian

Journal of Teacher Education, 39(4), 4.

Kennedy, K., & Archambault, L. (2012). Offering Preservice Teachers Field Experiences in

K-12 Online Learning: A National Survey of Teacher Education Programs. Journal of

Teacher Education, 63(3), 185-200. doi:10.1177/0022487111433651

Kinman, G., Wray, S., & Strange, C. (2011). Emotional labour, burnout and job satisfaction

in UK teachers: The role of workplace social support. Educational Psychology, 31(7),

843-856.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation:

Cambridge university press.

Leung, S. S., Chiang, V. C., Chui, Y. y., Lee, A. C., & Mak, Y. w. (2011). Feasibility and

potentials of online support for stress management among secondary school teachers.

Stress and Health, 27(3), e282-e286.

Lieberman, A., & Pointer Mace, D. (2010). Making Practice Public: Teacher Learning in the

21st Century. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 77-88.

doi:10.1177/0022487109347319

Lin, F.-r., Lin, S.-c., & Huang, T.-p. (2008). Knowledge sharing and creation in a teachers’

professional virtual community. Computers & Education, 50(3), 742-756.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.07.009

Long, J. S., McKenzie-Robblee, S., Schaefer, L., Steeves, P., Wnuk, S., Pinnegar, E., &

Clandinin, D. J. (2012). Literature review on induction and mentoring related to early

career teacher attrition and retention. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning,

20(1), 7-26.

Loughran, J. (1995). Practising what I preach: Modelling reflective practice to student

teachers. Research in Science Education, 25(4), 431-451.

Matzat, U. (2013). Do blended virtual learning communities enhance teachers' professional

development more than purely virtual ones? A large scale empirical comparison.

Computers & Education, 60(1), 40-51.

McCormack, A., Gore, J., & Thomas, K. (2006). Early career teacher professional learning.

Asia‐Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 95-113.

Paulus, T., & Scherff, L. (2008). "Can Anyone Offer any Words of Encouragement?" Online

Dialogue as a Support Mechanism for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Technology

and Teacher Education, 16(1), 113.

Reilly, P., & Trevisan, F. (2015). Researching protest on Facebook: developing an ethical

stance for the study of Northern Irish flag protest pages. Information, Communication

& Society, 1-17. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1104373

Richter, D., Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Lüdtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2011). Professional

development across the teaching career: Teachers’ uptake of formal and informal

learning opportunities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 116-126.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.07.009

of 38

Rutherford, C. (2010). Using online social media to support preservice student engagement.

MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), 703-711.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol.

5126): Basic books.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational

Researcher, 4-14.

Staudt, D., St. Clair, N., & Martinez, E. E. (2013). Using Facebook to support novice

teachers. The New Educator, 9(2), 152-163.

Stegman, S. F. (2007). An exploration of reflective dialogue between student teachers in

music and their cooperating teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(1),

65-82.

Ward, S. J., & Wasserman, H. (2010). Towards an open ethics: Implications of new media

platforms for global ethics discourse. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 25(4), 275-292.

Weber, M. (1949). The meaning of “ethical neutrality” in sociology and economics. The

methodology of the social sciences, 1-49.

Whiteman, N. (2012). Ethical stances in (Internet) research Undoing ethics (pp. 1-23):

Springer.

Yeh, Y.-C. (2010). Analyzing online behaviors, roles, and learning communities via online

discussions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 140-151.

Zey, M. G. (1984). The mentor connection: Strategic alliances in corporate life: Transaction

Publishers.

c Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters License · their list of connections and those made...

Documents

Transcript of c Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters License · their list of connections and those made...