twitter: an open opportunity or a perilous public?

32
Twitter: an open opportunity or a perilous public? #OER17

Upload: dublin-city-university

Post on 16-Apr-2017

184 views

Category:

Education


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Twitter: an open opportunity or a perilous public?

#OER17 Muireann O’Keeffe

Page 2: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Hello!

2

Dr Muireann O’KeeffeAcademic developer DCU, Ireland

EdD 2016Thesis: Exploring Twitter for professional learninghttp://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1521971/

Twitter: @muireannOK

Page 3: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Rhetoric V Research

Keep up-to-date

Builds connections

Top Tool for

Learning

Collaboration & learning

Supports sharing of practice

Page 4: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

1.I advocated Twitter as a learning tool with HE staff

2.I have responsibility to lead by example, demonstrate critical awareness of technology I engage with (Selwyn & Facer, 2013)

3.Exploration of Twitter for informal professional learning (Gerstein, 2011; Holmes et al., 2013; Lupton, 2014) Image from www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/hand

Designed by Freepik. Free license with attribution

Page 5: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Case study approach

▪ Exploratory research ▪ Real experiences/holistic view▪ Veletsianos (2010) “not yet fully understood” ▪ Lupton (2013) qualitative research necessary ▪ Authentic narratives and voices▪ Conclusions can be questions for further

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

▪ Participants: 7 HE professionals▪ Lecturers, learning technologists, academic

developers

Image from https://www.pexels.com/photo/people-coffee-meeting-team-7096/ CC0

Page 6: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Visitor - Resident continuum

Visi

tor/

Non-

parti

cipa

nt

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)

Page 7: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Findings: Activities Visitors

Information gatheringAbsence of social presence

Visitors/ Residentsinformation gatheringSome social presence

ResidentsSocial presenceConnecting and interacting w/ other professionals

Page 8: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

VisitorsI would agonise over tweets for

too long

Because people I subscribe to are kind of fairly high

up

Colleagues who know a lot more….

I don’t have the bravery (confidence)

I’m not confident about it being

massively open

I’m hyper sensitive of

people judging my comments

Page 9: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Visitor participants: inhibiting factors

Capacity to participate (Visitors)

Lack of Confidence

More knowledgeable

others (knowledge congruence)

Confidence in identity Not ready

Unknown audiences

Caution

Vulnerability

Time

Page 10: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

ResidentsThere is a

tendency for group think

It’s all about having the correct etiquette and just

being a nice person

I suppose people would be perhaps cautious that they

may say something silly, misrepresent

the institution, misrepresent themselves

You have the freedom to say ‘actually this is

what I believe’ and maybe I don’t know

‘I’m happy to be proved wrong

I think confidence is a huge issue

It’s a subject I feel very confident in

Page 11: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Resident participants: enabling factors

Capacity to participate

Confidence

Knowledge

Identity

Playfulness

Capacity to debate

EtiquetteInformation

management

Time

Page 12: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Findings

VisitorsBarriers

ResidentsEnablers

Page 13: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Visitors: marginalised professionals?

13

Wenger (1998): Learning occurs in relationships between people and that mutually negotiated activities contribute to identity construction

CoP dimensions:

mutual engagemen

t

joint enterprise

shared repertoire

Page 14: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

““the purpose is not to learn from talk as

a substitute for legitimate peripheral participation; it is to learn to talk as a

key to legitimate peripheral participation”

(Lave & Wenger, 1991, pp. 108-9).

Page 15: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

15

1. Political: what power issues exist for professionals when trying participate in open online spaces?

2. Affective – what does it feel like to navigate and participate in the online open space of Twitter?

3. Social: how can professionals broker connections, develop professional relationships in online open spaces?

Is Twitter an open inclusive learning space for professionals?

Page 16: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Status & knowledge hierarchies

Twitter communities: a sense of belonging?

▪ Online spaces for learners endorsed as affinity spaces (boyd, 2011; Hayes & Gee, 2010; Ito, et al., 2013; Stewart, 2014)

▪ But others warn against simplified and unchallenged findings that extol the virtues of learning in online spaces (Selwyn & Facer, 2013)

▪ Visitors: lack of sense of belonging▪ Paul, Denise: others more knowledgeable▪ Knowledge and status hierarchy

▪ Hughes (2010): affinity through knowledge-related identity was fundamental to learning

Page 17: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Status & knowledge Hierarchies

Twitter communities: a sense of belonging?

▪ Paul: felt equal to other educators in formal face-to-face contexts

▪ Denise: comfortable in engaging in face-to-face discussion

▪ Paul on Twitter: others were more knowledgeable, higher status

▪ Denise: other know more

▪ Did other factors marginalise their participation and belonging online and prevent finding affinity with others?

▪ Resident participants, Maurice and Ben, both male and had secured permanent roles

Page 18: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

“▪ “participating online feels different if

you are a woman” ▪ (Neary & Beetham, 2015, p. 98)

▪ “these platforms were designed with specific people in mind, and those people were rarely people of color, minorities, women, or marginalized

folks” ▪ (Singh, 2015)

Page 19: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

How did participants feel in online open spaces?

▪ Participants had an emotional response to participation on Twitter

▪ Confidence

“Much learning at work occurs through doing things and being proactive in seeking learning opportunities, and this

requires confidence” (Eraut 2004)

Page 20: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

How did participants feel in online open spaces?

Exposure & vulnerability ▪ Denise: decision not to put herself at risk- Critical incident in practice▪ Carol: “I would agonise over tweets”

Vulnerability in online spaces, unknown audiences (boyd, 2014)Trust: important in CoP’s – Wenger (1998)

▪ Singh (2015) urges educators be sensitive about openness as for some it can signify harm

▪ “These do not feel like safe spaces when you are developing your identity, your subject specialism, and

your voice….” (Beetham, 2016, blog post)

Page 21: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Duty of Care? Vulnerability of participation in open online space.

As educators how are we protecting those we educate in online spaces? Are we helping them bridge that gap? (Stewart, 2016)

But…. those who engage peripherally on Twitter, without participation in networks, might not benefit from networks of care (Stewart, 2016).

Image from https://pixabay.com/en/railway-platform-mind-gap-1758208/ CC0

Page 22: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Developing social and cultural competency

Visitors (Denise, Paul, Carol): strong reluctance to participation

Learning to participate in communities is perceived to be important in establishing voice (Wenger, 1998)Louise: peripheral participation helped establish voice on Twitter, showing changing modes of participation paralleled with an identity trajectory. Shortcomings of peripheral participation: ▪ Marginalisation▪ Lack of opportunity to integrate ▪ Lack of risk taking ▪ Lack of online cultural competence, digital

skills/literacies

Page 23: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

““inevitable stumblings and violations

become opportunities for learning rather than cause dismissal, neglect

or exclusion” (Wenger, p101).

▪ Understanding and benefiting from Twitter: experiment and use

Twitter ▪ (McPherson, Budge, & Lemon,

2015; McCluskey & Readman, 2014).

Page 24: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

““Increasingly, the web is a space of politics, a social space, a professional space, a space of community. And, for better or worse, more and more of our learning is happening there. For many of us, it is becoming increasingly

difficult to distinguish between our real selves and our virtual selves, and in fact, these distinctions are being altogether

unsettled.”

(Stommel, cited by Alexander, 3rd April, 2017)

24

Page 25: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Finally…… ▪ Professionals use Twitter in varied ways, not all positively disposed to participation

▪ Twitter provides opportunities but contribute to complex behaviours

▪ The open online world presents particular emotional challenges (Neary & Beetham, 2015) and is a messy experience (Budge, Lemon, & McPherson, 2016).

▪ Selwyn (2011): those in advantageous positions tend to take-up and take advantage of the new technologies

▪ Support needed: more than technical, digital identity development (confidence & identity), cultural competences development.

▪ Multiple issues identified need critical thought and further discussion among academic developers and those supporting education in digital era

▪ Critical discussion is required to discover what it means to work in the digital age of education (Beetham, 2015)

Page 26: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Further questions

▪ How can academic developers model online social networking practices and behaviours? If so, what do these practices and behaviours look like?

▪ More broadly, how do we create safe places for networked forms of learning and how can we best support this?

▪ Should support be framed by policies, by guidelines, by procedures, or by developing critical thinking regarding SNS and Twitter?

▪ Digital identity is important, but it is formed in conjunction with the practices and responsibilities of HE professionals. How can academic developers help support professional identity and thus support digital identity?

Page 28: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Thank you

28

Contact:▪ openuplearning.wordpress.com

[email protected]

▪ @muireannOK

Page 29: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

References ▪ Beetham, H. (2015). Revisiting digital capability for 2015. Retrieved March 2016, from Jisc digital capability codesign challenge blog: https://digitalcapability.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2015/06/11/revisiting-digital- capability-for-2015/

▪ boyd, d. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papcharissi, A networked self (pp. 39-58). New York: Routledge.

▪ 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.

▪ Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247-273.

▪ 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

▪ 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

Page 30: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

References

30

▪ Hughes, G. (2010). Identity and belonging in social learning groups: the importance of distinguishing social, operational and knowledge‐related identity congruence. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 47-63.

▪ 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.

▪ Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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

▪ McPherson, M., Budge, K., & Lemon, N. (2015). New practices in doing academic development: Twitter as an informal learning space. International Journal for Academic Development, 20(2), 126-136.

▪ Neary, M., & Beetham, H. (2015). The Nature of Academic Space. In J. Lea, Enhancing learning and teaching in higher education: engaging with the dimensions of practice (pp. 83-102). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

▪ Selwyn, N, N., & Facer, K. (2013). Introduction the need for a politics of education and technology. In N. N. Selwyn, & K. Facer, The Politics of Education and Technology Conflicts, Controversies, and Connections (pp. 1-17). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

▪ Selwyn, N. (2012). Education in a Digital World: Global Perspectives on Technology and Education. New York: Routledge.

▪ Singh, S. (2015). The Fallacy of “Open”. Retrieved May 20, 2016, from savasavasava: https://savasavasava.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/the-fallacy-of-open/

▪ Stewart, B. (2014). Networks of Care and Vulnerability. Retrieved May 10, 2015, from the theoryblog: http://theory.cribchronicles.com/2014/11/04/networks-of- care-and-vulnerability/

▪ Stewart, B. (2016). Academic Twitter: The intersection of orality & literacy in scholarship. Retrieved from London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE): https://youtu.be/e4RSaG2iVKk

▪ Stommel J. (2017) cited by Alexander, 3rd April, http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/critical-digital-pedagogy-definition/

▪ 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).

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

Page 31: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Attribution for Slides More info on this template at

www.slidescarnival.com/help-use-presentation-templateThis template is free to use under Creative Commons Attribution license. You can keep the Credits slide or mention SlidesCarnival and other resources used in a slide footer.

31

slidescarnival.com

Page 32: Twitter: An open opportunity or a perilous public?

Credits Special thanks to all the people who made and released these awesome resources for free.

32

▪ Presentation template by SlidesCarnival▪ Photographs by Unsplash▪ Learn more about slidedocs at duarte.com/slidedocs