TWITTER FOR PROFESSIONAL LEARNING: MYTHS AND REALITIESMuireann O’KeeffeInstitute of Education, University College London Dublin City University

DCU Digital Learning Research Symposium November 2016

Motivation for this research

I advocated Twitter as a learning tool with HE staff

Rhetoric V’s research

Rhetoric V’s research Top Tool

for Learning

Collaboration & learning

Supports sharing of practice

Builds connections

Keep up-to-date

Rhetoric V’s research Limited research: Twitter for informal professional learning (Gerstein, 2011; Holmes et al., 2013; Lupton, 2014)

Need for investigation into informal opportunities for professional learning (Slowey et al., 2014; National Forum, 2015; Martensson & Roxa, 2015).

Research questions 1. What are the activities of HE

professionals using the social networking site Twitter?

2. How are activities on Twitter supporting the learning of these HE professionals?

3. What are the barriers and enablers experienced by these HE professionals in engaging with Twitter for professional learning?

Twitter Data

} Interview Data

Reflective Memos}

Concepts & theories

Learning is a social phenomenon

Social constructivism

Socio-cultural theory

Conceptual underpinningsAn approach to social learning: CoP model (Wenger, 1998)

CoP dimensions:

mutual engagement

joint enterprise

shared repertoire

Learning informally online• Networked learning, connected learning, connectivism• Common assumptions: learning is self-determined,

participatory, authentic and relevant to needs (Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Hayes & Gee, 2005; Ito, et al., 2013; Siemens, 2006).

• Online as a space/place (White & Le Cornu, 2011; Gee, 2005)

Visitors and Residents typology: Wenger’s (1998) modes of participation • Visitors : peripheral /non-participation• Residents : participation

Case study approach• Exploratory research • Holistic view of situation• Conclusions can be questions for

further research(Buchanan, 2012; Denscombe, 2010; Yin, 2014)

• Participants: 7 HE professionals• (Lecturers, learning technologists,

academic developers)

• Cross-case analysis

Visitor - Resident continuum Vi

sito

r/ No

n-pa

rtici

pant

Den

ise

Paul

Car

ol

Visi

tor/

resi

dent

Loui

se

Mat

t

Resi

dent

/ Pa

rtici

pant

Ben

Mau

rice

(White & Le Cornu, 2011)

Findings: Activities (RQ1)

Visitors• Information

gathering• Absence of

social presence

Residents• Social presence• Connecting and

interacting w/ other professionals

Findings (RQ 2 & RQ 3)

Myth

Twitter is an inherently social network

Twitter is easily mastered to enable professional

learning

RealityParticipants

demonstrated different types of social

particiaption online (Legitimate peripheral

participation / participation)

Barriers to online participation are not

issues of digital competency, but rather

more complex

Twitter can provide opportunities for

professional learning ……but creates

implications

Key themes

Capacity to participate socially on

Twitter

Confidence

Vulnerability

Belonging

Capacity to participate online Visitors Traits Resident traits

• Lack of Time• Vulnerability • Caution • Not ready• Professional confidence • More knowledgeable others• Hierarchy

• Easy to use in timely ways• Professional confidence • Establishing a social presence• Playfulness• Take risks• Understanding the rules of

engagement • Engaging in critical discussions • Flat structure of Twitter

Factors supporting participation

}

Contributions…• Professionals use SNS in varied ways, not all positively

disposed to participation• SNS provide opportunities but create complexities• Support needed: more than technical, Digital identity

development (confidence & identity)

Implications for practice • Public SNS are not simple solutions for professional

learning• Need to think about the complexities and problems they

present… • Multiple issues identified need critical thought and further

discussion among academic developers and those supporting education in digital era

References • Buchanan, D. (2012). Case studies in organisational research. In G. Symon, & C. Cassell, The Practice of Qualitative Organizational

Research: Core Methods and Current Challenges (pp. 351-370). London: Sage.• Denscombe, M. (2010). The good research guide: for small-scale research projects (4th ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press. • Garrison, D., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the twenty first century. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. • Gee, J. P. (2005). Semiotic social spaces and affinity spaces: From the age of mythology to today's schools. In D. Barton, & K. Tusting,

Beyond Communities of practice: Language, power, and social context (pp. 214 – 232). New York: Cambridge University Press. • Gerstein, J. (2011). The Use of Twitter for Professional Growth and Development. International Journal on E-Learning, 10(3), 273-276. • Hayes, E., & Gee, J. (2010). Popular culture as a public pedagogy. Retrieved Sept 29, 2015, from jamespaulgee.com:

http://jamespaulgee.com/admin/Images/pdfs/Popular%20Culture%20and%2 0Public%20Pedagogy.pdf • Ito, M., Gutierrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K.,Watkins, C. (2013). Connected learning: an agenda for research

and design. Irvine, CA, USA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. • Holmes, K., Preston, G., Shaw, K., & Buchanan, R. (2013, August). ‘Follow’ Me: Networked Professional Learning for Teachers.

Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(12). Retrieved April 20, 2015, from EduResearch Matters: http://www.aare.edu.au/blog/?p=564

• Lupton, D. (2014). ‘Feeling Better Connected’: Academics’ Use of Social Media. News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra. Canberra: University of Canberra.

• Martensson, K., & Roxa, T. (2015). Academic development in a world of informal learning about teaching and student learning. International Journal for Academic Development, 20(2), 109-112.

• National Forum. (2015). Mapping Professional Development Pathway for those who Teach in Irish Higher Education: Where are we now and where do we want to go? National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Dublin: National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.

• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • White, D., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).

Siemens, 2006)• Slowey, M., Kozina, E., & Tan, E. (2014). Voices of academics in Irish Higher education. Perspectives on professional development.

Dublin: AISHE. • Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5 ed.). California: Sage Publications.