{"id":8334,"date":"2019-03-29T13:16:11","date_gmt":"2019-03-29T13:16:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/\/\/"},"modified":"2019-08-30T20:19:51","modified_gmt":"2019-08-30T20:19:51","slug":"so-i-feel-like-we-were-just-theoretical-whereas-they-actually-do-it-navigating-twitter-chats-for-teacher-education","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/volume-19\/issue-2-19\/social-studies\/so-i-feel-like-we-were-just-theoretical-whereas-they-actually-do-it-navigating-twitter-chats-for-teacher-education","title":{"rendered":"“So I Feel Like We Were Just Theoretical, Whereas They Actually Do It”: Navigating Twitter Chats for Teacher Education"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the last decade digital technologies have allowed for the development of online spaces that have provided educators with opportunities to engage in virtual chats focused on educational related topics on social media platforms such as Twitter (Benko, Guise, Earl, & Gill, 2016; Reilly, 2017; Xing & Gao, 2018). As Krutka and Carpenter (2016) noted, \u201cSocial media services like Twitter have been credited with providing a means by which people can coalesce around issues, interests, and events in ways that can impact the social studies and even democratic activities\u201d (p. 39). For example, the Twitter chat known as #sschat, has been developed specifically for social studies educators to better their craft (see https:\/\/sschat.org\/about-us\/<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Additionally, scholars such as Swan and Hofer (2008) have examined the nature and utility of technology use within teacher education programs and K-12 classrooms. Scholars and educators tend emphasize the importance of social media in education without interrogating or deconstructing these spaces (Kerr & Schmiechel, 2018) before encouraging preservice teachers (PSTs) to take part in these environments.<\/p>\n

Therefore, this study joins ongoing efforts to research the use and impact of digital technologies to support educators in the development of their craft by examining the discipline-specific Twitter chat known as #sschat. We build on Krutka and Carpenter\u2019s (2016) contention, as well as Hicks, Lee, Berson, Bolick, and Diem\u2019s (2014) \u201cGuidelines for Using Technology to Prepare Social Studies Teachers,\u201d in which they acknowledged the benefit of digital technologies to support social studies teachers in the development of their craft.<\/p>\n

Subsequently, we sought in this study to answer the following questions:<\/p>\n

What does it look like for PSTs to participate in an online, discipline-specific Twitter chat?<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. How do they describe their experiences?<\/li>\n
  2. How do they participate in the chat?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    This paper begins with a description and discussion of the Twitter chat known as #sschat. Communities of Practice (COPs) are then examined, as they relate to participating and engaging in #sschat (although not everyone who tweets is a member of a COP). Findings from the study are then presented to show the benefits and limitations of Twitter chats as they relate to the development of social studies PSTs. Last are listed some suggestions for teacher educators interested in having their PSTs engage in Twitter chats.<\/p>\n

    Review of Related Literature<\/h2>\n

    Twitter Chats and the Development of #sschat<\/h3>\n

    Twitter began in 2006 \u201cas a medium for users to respond to the simple prompt, what are you doing<\/em>?\u201d (Krutka, 2017, p. 2191) and was not intended for educational purposes. However, Krutka said, \u201cBy 2009 educators were using the hashtag #edchat as a means to affiliate around educational issues both asynchronously and synchronously\u201d (p. 2191). He further noted, \u201cSynchronous tweeting events called Twitter chats have become regular professional development activities for many educators using a wide variety of hashtags\u201d (p. 2191). Twitter chats are now available for almost any educational topic or content area (see International Society for Technology in Education, 2018)<\/p>\n

    The Twitter chat\/network known as #sschat was started by two people, Ron Peck and Greg Kuloweic, who had already been participating in #edchats. They believed that a discipline-specific chat would help them to improve their craft, and subsequently, the first #sschat discussion took place in July 2010 (Krutka, 2017). The chat has since taken place every Monday night from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.<\/p>\n

    The Anatomy of #sschat<\/h3>\n

    Each Monday night, different coleaders, such as teachers, teacher educators, and guest speakers, moderate #sschat. The chats usually focus on a specific topic, such as \u201cBringing Elections to the Classroom,\u201d \u201cWomen\u2019s History and Gender Studies,\u201d and the \u201cElection of 2016,\u201d to name a few.<\/p>\n

    The moderator poses questions to the group; these questions are sometimes provided in advance, but are usually not shared until the chat begins. The first question is typically focused on asking who is present for the chat, so the speaker can understand who is participating on that particular night. After asking the first question, the moderator uses the abbreviation Q1 to signify the first question of the chat. The person who provides an answer identifies that he or she is answering that specific question by placing A1 before the response. Additionally, all participants must place the hashtag #sschat after each Tweet, or their Tweets will not show up in the chat. For example, the first question and answer of the night may look like the following:<\/p>\n

    Ql: Ready to start this chat, who all is participating tonight? #sschat<\/p>\n

    A1: This is Jim from Tallahassee, I am an eighth-grade social studies teacher. #sschat<\/p>\n

    The participants follow this format until everyone has introduced themselves. After everyone introduces themselves, the moderator starts asking content specific questions about resources, ideas, strategies, and methods (see Figure 1 for an actual example of chat). The second round of questions may look like the following:<\/p>\n

    Q2: What are some strategies you all use to teach your students how to discuss controversial issues? #sschat<\/p>\n

    A2: I like to start low-risk by developing a class discussion around the Lorax. #sschat<\/p>\n

    \"Figure<\/a>
    Figure 1.<\/strong> Screenshot from an #sschat session.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

     <\/p>\n

    The chat continues with this format until the hour is over, but sometimes discussions continue privately after the chat concludes. All discussions from these chats are archived and publicly accessible online at the website created specifically for #sschat (see https:\/\/sschat.org\/archives\/<\/a>).<\/p>\n

    Additionally, the hashtag #sschat is sometimes used to ask questions about social studies topics outside the chat. For example, a person needing a resource or an idea about how to teach a certain topic may tweet out a question during the day, and people will usually respond to the question. In many ways, #sschat has developed into a brand, as it now has a Facebook page, a website, as well as an in-person meeting that takes place each year at the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) conference (Krutka, 2017).<\/p>\n

    Communities of Practice<\/h3>\n

    The Twitter group under the hashtag #sschat has allowed for the development of, and arguably is, a COP (Burns, Howard, & Kimmel, 2016; Hoadley, 2012; Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). Wenger et al. (2002) said, \u201cCommunities of Practice are groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge or expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis\u201d (p. 4).<\/p>\n

    The goal of #sschat is for social studies educators to deepen their knowledge and expertise through this weekly chat. For example, the #sschats\u2019 website includes the following description of #sschat:<\/p>\n

    #Sschat is more than just a hashtag. It\u2019s an open group of dedicated network of educators and enthusiasts who aim to improve their personal, and our collective, teaching of social studies subject matter. We aim to help social studies teachers by helping to facilitate democratic collaboration where educators can challenge & support each other to grow in their craft and, consequently, offer richer learning experiences for students. Activities within our network includes the use of #sschat and affiliated hashtags on Twitter, discussions on our Facebook page, and participation in the annual NCSS unconference, but we are always looking to grow our network into new spaces. (para. 1)<\/p>\n

    While the definition of a COP and #sschat are not identical, they have arguably striking similarities, and as #sschat has demonstrated, technology has allowed for the development of very specific COPs (Woo, 2015). Joining a COP is a complex process for all involved. When a newcomer attempts to join or become a member of a COP, this process is characterized by the term legitimate peripheral participation (Fuller, Hodkinson, Hodkinson, & Unwin, 2005; Kim & Cavas, 2013; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Woo, 2015; Woodgate-Jones, 2012). According to Lave and Wenger (1991),<\/p>\n

    Legitimate peripheral participation provides a way to speak about the relations between newcomers and old-timers, and about activities, identities, artefacts, and communities of knowledge and practice. It concerns the process by which newcomers become part of a community of practice. (p. 29)<\/p>\n

    Arguably, the word community<\/em> most always has a positive connotation. However, COPs are not always welcoming to new or outside members (Johnston, 2016; also see Kerr & Schmiechel, 2018). Therefore, it cannot be assumed that joining a COP is always a positive experience, especially for the newcomer.<\/p>\n

    Woodgate-Jones (2012) noted, \u201cThe pressure to conform (and therefore emulate the more experienced teachers) discourages the legitimate peripheral participants in these instances to share their own ideas\u201d (p. 156). Therefore, in many instances the newcomers may try to emulate or replicate what the other members are saying or doing, instead of providing an authentic contribution to the community. Essentially, in the minds of many newcomers, to become a member means to act and behave like the other legitimate members; therefore, newcomers may struggle with developing their own identity in this new space.<\/p>\n

    This process then problematizes the benefit of Twitter chats for PSTs, especially if that participation is brief, because PSTs may not have had the opportunity to become a full member and subsequently develop their own identity in this community. They may instead focus their efforts on becoming like the other members of the COP.<\/p>\n

    Because of the complexity of joining a COP, Lave and Wenger (1991) have been criticized with oversimplifying this process by which a newcomer enters into a COP. For example, Johnston (2016) argued,<\/p>\n

    The deleterious effects of failing to belong to the community cannot be overestimated, but tend to be underplayed in Lave and Wenger\u2019s theoretical analyses, where belonging seems to be associated with an almost inevitable process of becoming a core member of the community of practice. (p. 545)<\/p>\n

    Therefore, examining PSTs\u2019 participation in #sschat provides a twofold benefit. First, looking at this community provides insight into the process of joining an online, virtual COP and to the affordances of such spaces for the field of social studies and beyond in relation to the development of PSTs. The research questions of this study were designed to provide insight into the benefits of this type of COP for PSTs and to provide guidelines for immersing PSTs in Twitter chats to further support their development into practicing professional educators.<\/p>\n

    Methodology<\/h2>\n

    Participants<\/h3>\n

    The forum #sschat is a Twitter chat and a professional space focused on improving the craft of social studies educators; responses are archived and publicly accessible. Social studies PSTs enrolled in a graduate program in a research-intensive university in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States were asked to participate in this study. The students in this program were enrolled in the same methods class, field experience, and educational technology class.<\/p>\n

    While all three of these courses were separate courses, the same instructor taught both the methods course and the technology course. Additionally, the technology course, although separate, was interconnected with the PSTs\u2019 field experience and methods class and the same students took all three courses together.<\/p>\n

    This study focused on participation in #sschat in the fall 2016 semester, which is when the PSTs were in the early field placement instead of actively teaching a class as they do during their student teaching experience. Additionally, convenience sampling was used, and this study included a small sample size. All of these factors could be limitations to this study.<\/p>\n

    In the educational technology class, entitled Inquiry Based Learning with Digital Technologies, the PSTs were required to participate in #sschat to provide the PSTs with insight about the types of online professional opportunities that are available to educators. Specifically, this class is designed to provide the students with an entrepreneurial eye toward digital technology use in the classroom. For example, the course was described as follows:<\/p>\n

    This research course seeks to blend theory and practice to investigate what it means to teach and learn in both formal and informal learning environments with the range of modes, media, literacies, and content available. Using the very tools available to students both in and outside of the classroom (as well as emerging technologies), we will research and evaluate various technologies and digital humanities projects by critically exploring the potential instructional value-added technology implementation. Class meetings will typically involve collaborative work in small teams, class discussions, hands-on work with participatory media, and brief lectures. You will also join, participate, and report back your experiences in a series online professional learning communities (#Sschat and TPS [Teaching with Primary Sources] network). An experimental aspect to this course will be your participation in an ongoing transdisciplinary project focusing on teaching with 3D objects and visualizing the past to teach about cultural heritage and local history. Finally, students will apply research on learning to investigate their pedagogy, integrate technology into their practice and closely study the potential impact on student learning. (Hicks, 2016)<\/p>\n

    The social studies PSTs were required to participate in three to five #sschat Twitter chats and document their experiences in online blog reflections. They had to at least participate in three #sschats and had a choice of how many they participated in beyond three, as they had the choice to join other networks in addition to #sschat. All participants went with the minimum number of  three.<\/p>\n

    The PSTs could choose any topic they wanted to for this assignment. For example, a range of topics were discussed from August 2016 to December 2016, such as \u201cHonoring Indigenous Histories\u201d; \u201cTeaching with News Literacy in the Digital Age\u201d; \u201cTeaching with Comics and Art\u201d; \u201cElection 2016\u201d; \u201cCreating and Maintaining a Safe and Productive Classroom Environment\u201d; \u201cListening and Speaking Skills in Social Studies\u201d; \u201cTeaching with Primary Source Documents\u201d; \u201cLocal History\u201d; \u201c#Civility2016: Creating a More Civil Classroom This Election Season\u201d; \u201cTeaching Old Content New Tricks\u201d; \u201cFinding Ways to Engage Students with Existing Content\u201d; \u201cDocument Evaluation and Claim Testing (Big History Project)\u201d; \u201cDigging Deeper During the Election\u201d; \u201cCapitalizing on Teachable Moments\u201d; \u201cNurturing Empathy and Civic Engagement in Students\u201d; \u201cElementary Social Studies\u201d; \u201cElection 2016: Looking Back and Forward\u201d; \u201cSlavery and the White House\u201d; \u201cNCSS Unconference (#NCSSUnCon) tweets\u201d; \u201cMedia Literacy and Teaching Social Studies in the Digital Age\u201d; \u201cTeaching Slavery with Primary and Secondary Sources\u201d; and \u201cTeaching with Testimony: Enhancing Empathy and Critical Thinking\u201d (see https:\/\/sschat.org\/archives\/<\/a>).<\/p>\n

    In spring 2017, an email was sent to PSTs who participated in #sschat in fall 2016 requesting a 30-45-minute semistructured interview focused on their experiences after participating in #sschat (see the appendix<\/a> for a list of interview questions). Although seven PSTs in this class participated in #sschat and documented their experience in blogs, only five agreed to participate in interviews (see Table 1). Any identifying information was blinded, and pseudonyms were assigned to ensure participant anonymity.<\/p>\n

    Table 1<\/strong>
    \nPSTs Who Participated in #sschat vs. Those Who Agreed to an Interview<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

    \nName <\/strong><\/td>\n    		Participated in #sschat<\/strong><\/td>\nAgreed to an Interview<\/strong><\/td>\nNumber of Chats<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Katy<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Amy<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Martha<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Sarah<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Jim<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Melissa<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Jenna<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    Data Sources<\/h3>\n

    This qualitative study examined several sources of data, including<\/p>\n