Email
Like
Liked ×
Save
Private Content
Embed
Loading embed code…
We have emailed the verification/download link to "".
Login to your email and click the link to download the file directly.

To request the link at a different email address, update it here. Close
Validation messages. Success message. Fail message.

Check your bulk/spam folders if you can't find our mail.
Loading

+ Follow

Twitter for academic writing

by Daniel Craig

9,108 views

Accessibility

View text version

Upload Details

Uploaded via SlideShare as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

File a copyright complaint

32 Embeds 7,986

http://www.danielcraig.com	7044
http://www.scoop.it	349
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.com	310
http://danielcraig.posterous.com	49
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.ch	34
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.co.uk	33
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	30
http://www.danielcraig.org	29
http://danielcraig.org	24
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.ca	20
http://abtasty.com	15
http://131.253.14.66	8
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.com.au	8
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.kr	4
http://www.suelyonjones.com	4
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.in	4
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.jp	3
http://www.techgig.com	2
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.com.es	2
http://www.danielcraig.com.	2
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.be	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.nl	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.fr	1
http://www.ranksit.com	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.cz	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.pt	1
url_unknown	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.gr	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.com.br	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.mx	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.de	1
http://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.co.nz	1

More...

Statistics

Likes: 0
Downloads: 1
Comments: 0
Embed Views: 7,986
Views on SlideShare: 1,122
Total Views: 9,108

Microblogging seemed to begin as a technology in search of a need. Few people initially saw the benefits offered by the various microblogging services. Before long, however, use cases emerged as naturally evolving systems form around microblogging services like Twitter. A community of users and developers took the basic platform of the service and shaped it to meet their needs. Standards began to form around practices for replying (@), forwarding (RT), keywords (#), and direct messaging (D). Twitter was like a ball of clay that people could form to meet their own needs in a multitude of ways. There was, and continues to be, skepticism over whether Twitter with its 140 character limit could really benefit education. Many language educators in particular had similar doubts, many mirroring the ongoing debate over Short Message Service (SMS). Concerns reflected the perceived inability to communicate effectively in so few characters, and the accompanying abbreviations, acronyms, and slang that seem to mark much of Twitter discourse. Others warn over the seeming lack of context and the inability to convey subtle meanings over such a text medium. Even many who support the use of Twitter do so primarily due to its benefits as a written medium and its corresponding benefit for authentic written interaction in an increasingly text-connected world. This ball of clay, however, continues to be molded by its users. Educators are shaping both technologies and methods around Twitter (and other microblogging solutions) to fit the needs of their classrooms. Many use Twitter for class communication, the extension of class beyond the classroom walls, and to general building and strengthen classroom communities. Twitter can be seen as way to provide information and links to resources for the whole class as well as a medium for providing individualized instruction. Social studies teachers have begun accounts for famous historical figures and “Tweeted” their lives as if they were living historical events now. Language Arts teachers have done the same with characters from the literature they are addressing in class. In addition, they are having learners write their own stories 140 characters at a time, either independently or collaboratively. A number of creative uses of the service seem to emerge each day from a variety of educators around the globe. Language educators in particular have taken part in both the effectiveness debate and the innovation in use of Twitter. Given the cross-disciplinary nature of language teaching, it is easy to see how the uses of Twitter intersect with those in the content areas. The same general instructional uses hold true for language instruction: community-building, class communication, resource sharing, and so forth. In addition, diverse learning objectives found in most language classes can be at least partially addressed through the guided use of Twitter, including linguistic, cultural, and social objectives.
Microblogging seemed to begin as a technology in search of a need. Few people initially saw the benefits offered by the various microblogging services. Before long, however, use cases emerged as naturally evolving systems form around microblogging services like Twitter. A community of users and developers took the basic platform of the service and shaped it to meet their needs. Standards began to form around practices for replying (@), forwarding (RT), keywords (#), and direct messaging (D). Twitter was like a ball of clay that people could form to meet their own needs in a multitude of ways. There was, and continues to be, skepticism over whether Twitter with its 140 character limit could really benefit education. Many language educators in particular had similar doubts, many mirroring the ongoing debate over Short Message Service (SMS). Concerns reflected the perceived inability to communicate effectively in so few characters, and the accompanying abbreviations, acronyms, and slang that seem to mark much of Twitter discourse. Others warn over the seeming lack of context and the inability to convey subtle meanings over such a text medium. Even many who support the use of Twitter do so primarily due to its benefits as a written medium and its corresponding benefit for authentic written interaction in an increasingly text-connected world. This ball of clay, however, continues to be molded by its users. Educators are shaping both technologies and methods around Twitter (and other microblogging solutions) to fit the needs of their classrooms. Many use Twitter for class communication, the extension of class beyond the classroom walls, and to general building and strengthen classroom communities. Twitter can be seen as way to provide information and links to resources for the whole class as well as a medium for providing individualized instruction. Social studies teachers have begun accounts for famous historical figures and “Tweeted” their lives as if they were living historical events now. Language Arts teachers have done the same with characters from the literature they are addressing in class. In addition, they are having learners write their own stories 140 characters at a time, either independently or collaboratively. A number of creative uses of the service seem to emerge each day from a variety of educators around the globe. Language educators in particular have taken part in both the effectiveness debate and the innovation in use of Twitter. Given the cross-disciplinary nature of language teaching, it is easy to see how the uses of Twitter intersect with those in the content areas. The same general instructional uses hold true for language instruction: community-building, class communication, resource sharing, and so forth. In addition, diverse learning objectives found in most language classes can be at least partially addressed through the guided use of Twitter, including linguistic, cultural, and social objectives.
Educators are shaping both technologies and methods around Twitter (and other microblogging solutions) to fit the needs of their classrooms. Many use Twitter for class communication, the extension of class beyond the classroom walls, and to general building and strengthen classroom communities. Twitter can be seen as way to provide information and links to resources for the whole class as well as a medium for providing individualized instruction. Social studies teachers have begun accounts for famous historical figures and “Tweeted” their lives as if they were living historical events now. Language Arts teachers have done the same with characters from the literature they are addressing in class. In addition, they are having learners write their own stories 140 characters at a time, either independently or collaboratively. A number of creative uses of the service seem to emerge each day from a variety of educators around the globe. Tom Barrett (n.d.) put together a list of 33 interesting ways to use Twitter in the classroom (http://www.ideastoinspire.co.uk/twitter.htm), which were compiled from suggestions from his followers on Twitter. The benefits of using Twitter can be categorized as linguistic, cultural, and social.
The Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985) figures heavily into linguistic justifications for the use of Twitter. Swain pictured Comprehensible Output as an extension to and companion for Comprehensible Input (Krashen, 1982). She posits that there are three functions of output in second language learning: noticing/triggering function, hypothesis-testing function, and metalinguistic function. The noticing/triggering function arises when the language learner attempts to produce language, externally or internally, and notices that their production does not convey their intended meaning adequately. This noticing of a gap in their interlanguage requires that they produce the language. For this reason, teachers must present opportunities for production. Twitter provides this opportunity in written form. It can be seen as particularly valuable for noticing as production is limited (140 characters) and focused. After noticing a gap in language, learners then utilize the hypothesis-testing function. In this function, learners create a hypothesis for how to form the language for which they have noticed a gap. This modified language is then produced in order to receive feedback. In essence, does it work as predicted or not. Twitter provides not only for an opportunity to write, but also for the opportunity for that writing to be seen and evaluated by others. Through the formation of “follower” networks in Twitter, learner can have dozens or even thousands of readers with the potential for receiving feedback from all. The metalinguistic function of output takes in any feedback received to determine whether the language produced as part of the hypothesis testing was effective. Exchanges that result from the utterance can form the learner’s understanding of which language constructions optimally meet their communication goals. Twitter enables learners to form robust networks of “followers” who can provide the feedback necessary for learners to gage the effectiveness of their writing. This medium also allows for one-on-one or one-to-many exchanges in order to negotiate meaning. The potential for interaction and not simply broadcasting is the real power of Twitter. Through these exchanges, learners can determine if the need has been met or if there is a need for further modification of output for optimal communication. Ideally, the use of Twitter for language learning would require that each of these functions were utilized and, thus, that not only learner performed their role, but that their “followers” performed their roles. Any attempt to design instruction using Twitter must take these requirements into account and provide clear pathways to fulfill them through appropriate scaffolding.
There is a need for language teachers to focus on the cultures in which a language is used (Kramsch, 1995). To truly separate language and culture is not possible as meaning is conveyed in culturally mediated spaces. Thus, the call for authentic contexts and tasks in language learning has been a focus of much language teaching in recent years (Gilmore, 2007). The World Wide Web has provided teachers and learners with innumerable resources from news outlets to historical documents and speeches to the latest television programs and movies. There is more content available online than one could process in many lifetimes. However, only with the recent focus on read/write technologies (Web 2.0) has there been relative ease in both producing content and receiving feedback regarding that content (O'Reilly, 2005). These interactive technologies now enable us to go beyond static Web pages and media. Now learners can easily contact others throughout the world to exchange insights. Twitter provides a platform for communication that people use for the very purpose of engagement. Contacting a user of Twitter is not as invasive as making a telephone call or even sending an email. There is little expectation of privacy with Twitter as the primary purpose of the service is to form and strengthen personal and professional networks. There is an expectation that strangers will follow and even contact you. In this way, Twitter provides a platform for cultural exchange and engagement. For this to be beneficial for learners, they must “follow” other users who fit into this cultural exchange agenda. These could be other professionals in their field, international friends, relevant representatives from entertainment and politics, or even organizations. Thus, there is a need to design not only tasks that require information gathering from and interaction with those in the target culture, but also a real need for course requirements and instruction focusing on network-building.
To fulfill cultural tasks included above, it is beneficial to encourage social behaviors through Twitter. Most language classes meet for relatively short periods a few times a week. Estimates of the time required to learn English indicate that learning English a few hours each week would require many years to reach advanced proficiency (Thomas & Collier, 2002). For this reason, teachers have long tried to extend learning outside of the classroom. Twitter is one mechanism that can do so. Twitter can be used to strengthen relationships in class networks and to interact with a larger, extended network. Twitter can be used as both a semi-synchronous and an asynchronous social communication channel. Depending on the Twitter client being used, users can receive messages nearly instantly or within the parameters set for the client’s refresh rate. At the same time, Twitter does not rely on co-presence, which means that messages will remain until they are ready to be processed and potentially answered. In addition, Twitter can be used as a social distribution channel for links to media such as text, images, audio, and video. These attributes make Twitter a flexible, powerful means for communication that goes beyond merely the text. Sharing ideas, punctuated with a variety of media can promote cohesion within the learner’s network as well as with their class. Social presence (Gunawardena, 1995) is a concept discussed throughout distance education literature. The idea is that by interacting with learners and encouraging them to interact with each other, teachers can provide a more engaging and compelling virtual learning environment. Much of this community-building happens in face-to-face classrooms; however, relationships can be strengthened through more frequent and less constrained interactions in online spaces such as Twitter. The challenge in designing language instruction with Twitter is to actively model and support social interaction. Modeling social interaction means that the teacher must engage learners within Twitter and encourage two-way communication. Supporting social interaction requires that teachers provide incentives for interacting with the teacher and other students within this virtual space. This could include grading requirements, assignments, and the establishment of regular, monitored group interactions within Twitter.
Twitter is a versatile tool that has much potential for language instruction. However, in addition to the design considerations mentioned above, there are some barriers to the use of Twitter that must be carefully dealt with. Some of the potential barriers are common issues regarding technology use in the classroom, such as student and teacher comfort with technology in general and lack of access to the best equipment. Other issues are unique to Twitter such as the new lexis and concepts related to use of the service and privacy concerns. Implementing a new technology is impacted by both teachers’ and students’ comfort level with the specific technology and technology overall. Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation (1962) holds that for any technology there is a adoption curve. In Twitter’s timeline, we are likely in the early majority stage of uptake (Innovator, Early Adopter, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggard) and in Korea I would even argue that we may be closer to Early Adopter. Given the relatively recent introduction of this technology, it is safe to assume that there are many users who will be unfamiliar and uncomfortable with it. Therefore, it is essential for instructional designers to build familiarization activities into instruction. Modeling, training, and time for uptake are necessary prior to optimal usage of the technology. The use of Twitter requires the use of new lexis that, though limited, can be very confusing to new users, particularly language learners. These include, but are not limited to tweet, follow, follower, favorite, list, @ (reply or mention), DM (direct message), RT (re-tweet), # (hash/pound). In addition to these terms that describe the main functions and concepts of Twitter, there are a growing number of ancillary technologies that extend Twitter functionality: Twitter clients, URL shorteners, archiving services, and photo and video sharing services to name a few. This new lexis requires attention to vocabulary and concept instruction for users that must be done before users are able to fully participate in Twitter. In addition to new lexis, Twitter requires consideration for and reconsideration of what privacy is. Twitter postings are generally available to the public. While users can choose to make their accounts private and available only to those who they give permission, this is not the default. Protected account are unlikely to acquire a substantial network, thus they limit users’ full participation in Twitter. Both teachers and students must weigh the virtues of “privacy” and adjust expectations accordingly. Many users consider privacy in Twitter to be privacy through obscurity, user accounts and contributions are lost in the sheer volume of activity on Twitter. Others participate in Twitter with the full expectation that their messages can be seen by the world and they adjust the content of those messages to fit this understanding. None the less, privacy and what kind of privacy we expect to have are considerable considerations in any implementation of Twitter and other Web 2.0 technologies.
Developmental Research goes by many names that represent the same basic tenets: to address complex problems in real contexts in with practitioners, to apply established and developing design principles to products to address these complex problems, and to study and refine learning environments and design principles (Reeves, 2000, p. 26). Similar values are applied in Developmental Research (Visser, Plomp, Amirault, & Kuiper, 2002; Richey, Klein, & Nelson, 2004), Design Experiments (Brown, 1992; Cobb, Confrey, diSessa, Lehrer, & Schauble, 2003), Formative Research (Reigeluth & Frick, 1999), and Design-based Research (The Design-Based Research Collective, 2003; Barab & Squire, 2004). For this study, a Design-based Research process was followed. According to the Design-Based Research Collective (2003), good design-based research has the following five characteristics. First, the central goals of designing learning environments and developing theories or "prototheories" of learning are intertwined. Second, development and research take place through continuous cycles of design, enactment, analysis, and redesign (Cobb, 2001; Collins, 1992). Third, research on designs must lead to sharable theories that help communicate relevant implications to practitioners and other educational designers (cf. Brophy, 2002). Fourth, research must account for how designs function in authentic settings. It must not only document success or failure but also focus on interactions that refine our understanding of the learning issues involved. Fifth, the development of such accounts relies on methods that can document and connect processes of enactment to outcomes of interest. (p. 5) The central focus here is on the iterative evaluation of a method and design theory.
Data collection, analysis, revision was carried out (and is ongoing) over three semesters in advanced writing classes with English Education majors at a Korean university from the spring of 2010 to the spring of 2011. Therefore, there Twitter was implemented three times and revised twice. Data collection included course documents, such as syllabi, assignments, and instruction related to the use of Twitter. These were living documents that changed based on the observed needs of the students and the changes required each semester. Surveys of students’ perceptions of Twitter and its usefulness in learning to write were collected from some groups. Personal communications through face-to-face encounters, email, and Twitter were analyzed. Lastly, archives of the class Twitter assignments were collected and analyzed in order to better understand how Twitter was being used and how it could be used better.
The foundation for instructional design in this course was based on constructivist principles (Vygotsky, 1978). We cannot assume that two people understand in the same way. Knowledge is a process of developing understanding of something in a very personal way through situated activity (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992). Learners create meaning from their experiences that are separate and different from the meanings developed by others, even those participating in the same experience. Understanding is based not just on current experiences but the aggregate of all experiences, thus each person brings with him/her a cache of experiences that are brought to bear in a particular situation (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Students were encouraged to build knowledge through interactions with the teacher, peers, and outsiders. Twitter provided a channel for some of these interactions. Learning should be situated in authentic contexts rather than simply contrived for classroom purposes. Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning includes the following characteristics detailing the role of experience in learning. Learning is best conceived as a process, not in terms of outcomesLearning is a continuous process grounded in experienceThe process of learning requires the resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed modes of adaptation to the world.Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the worldLearning involves transactions between the person and the environmentLearning is the process of creating knowledge The role of experience is further situated in social practice by Lave and Wenger (1991) in their concept of communities of practice. They establish the important of performing within groups of shared interests and practices for knowledge generation and modification. Twitter is a meta-community in which exists nearly innumerable communities that learners to join, interact with, and learn from. Lastly, the use of Twitter in writing instruction was heavily influenced by Swain’s (1985) Output Hypothesis, particularly at the outset. As Swain acknowledges, the role of input is central to language learning, but requiring output can lead to deeper and faster mastery of learning objectives. However, not merely any production is suitable, there must be opportunities for feedback, which drives the hypothesis testing loop. This is addresses events 6-9 in Gagne’s (1997) 9 instructional events: eliciting performance, providing feedback, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and transfer. Twitter provides a fitting platform to foster these processes through input, production, and potential for feedback. Given these theoretical foundations, design choices have to be made to conform to and promote these learning and instructional theories. The iterative implementations of Twitter in a series of writing courses were evaluated and revised in a continuous effort to reach these ideals in instruction.
The foundation for instructional design in this course was based on constructivist principles (Vygotsky, 1978). We cannot assume that two people understand in the same way. Knowledge is a process of developing understanding of something in a very personal way through situated activity (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992). Learners create meaning from their experiences that are separate and different from the meanings developed by others, even those participating in the same experience. Understanding is based not just on current experiences but the aggregate of all experiences, thus each person brings with him/her a cache of experiences that are brought to bear in a particular situation (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Students were encouraged to build knowledge through interactions with the teacher, peers, and outsiders. Twitter provided a channel for some of these interactions. Learning should be situated in authentic contexts rather than simply contrived for classroom purposes. Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning includes the following characteristics detailing the role of experience in learning. Learning is best conceived as a process, not in terms of outcomesLearning is a continuous process grounded in experienceThe process of learning requires the resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed modes of adaptation to the world.Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the worldLearning involves transactions between the person and the environmentLearning is the process of creating knowledge The role of experience is further situated in social practice by Lave and Wenger (1991) in their concept of communities of practice. They establish the important of performing within groups of shared interests and practices for knowledge generation and modification. Twitter is a meta-community in which exists nearly innumerable communities that learners to join, interact with, and learn from. Lastly, the use of Twitter in writing instruction was heavily influenced by Swain’s (1985) Output Hypothesis, particularly at the outset. As Swain acknowledges, the role of input is central to language learning, but requiring output can lead to deeper and faster mastery of learning objectives. However, not merely any production is suitable, there must be opportunities for feedback, which drives the hypothesis testing loop. This is addresses events 6-9 in Gagne’s (1997) 9 instructional events: eliciting performance, providing feedback, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and transfer. Twitter provides a fitting platform to foster these processes through input, production, and potential for feedback. Given these theoretical foundations, design choices have to be made to conform to and promote these learning and instructional theories. The iterative implementations of Twitter in a series of writing courses were evaluated and revised in a continuous effort to reach these ideals in instruction.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Twitter was implemented in three consecutive semesters in advance writing classes. The stated aims included writing practice, informal feedback, community building, and resource distribution. Each semester changes were make to instructional methods in order to add or improve each of these aspects. In this section, the instruction and activities in each of the three semesters will be described, including successes and failures and suggested changes to improve on practice.
Using a modified ADDIE model, the EAP Twitter Model focuses on the iterative process of instructional design. The key elements are below. ADDIE stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. The EAP Twitter Model moves through these phases with a particular focus on four key design elements: language, technology, and social interaction. Language refers to the language skills being developed in the writing course as well as the specific language needed to participate in Twitter. It is important to be aware of both of these types of language usage throughout the instructional design process. Technology refers to the technical aspects of using Twitter. This includes the general Twitter features like @ replies, re-tweets, and direct messages. It also includes the use of Twitter client functions, which are slightly different in each client. Some popular features include URL shortening, media uploads, and column feeds. The better learners can use these functions, the more enjoyable their use of Twitter will be. Social interaction refers to the process of building and maintaining a network of followers in Twitter and general interactions. There is some overlap with the proper use of available tools, but the focus here should be more on following the right kind of the people for your particular interests, encouraging others to follow you, and engaging your network. Through this process, successes and failures can be more effectively identified, and instruction can be adjusted.
The use of Twitter for education has real potential. The ability to form large networks of like-minded people enables learners to both produce authentic messages for the network and to receive feedback from the network. This makes writing an authentic task in an authentic context. It also provides a support network that can follow learners long after completion of the class.
REFERENCES:Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: a revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Education Objectives. New York: Longman.Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.Barab, S. A., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1-14.Barrett, T. (n.d.). 33 interesting ways to use Twitter in the classroom. Retrieved May 20, 2011, 2011, from http://www.ideastoinspire.co.uk/twitter.htmBloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co.Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design Experiments in Educational Research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technology. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation (pp. 222). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 40(02), 97-118.Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. INternational Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147-166.Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Kramsch, C. (1995). The cultural component of language teaching. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 8(2), 83 - 92.Krashen, S. D. (1982). Acquiring a second language. World Language English, 1(2), 97-101.Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. 2006(August 8). Retrieved from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.htmlReeves, T. C. (2000). Socially Responsible Educational Technology Research. Educational Technology, 40(4), 19-28.Reigeluth, C. M., & Frick, T. W. (1999). Formative Research: A Methodology for Improving Design Theories. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theories, Volume II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence-Erlbaum Associates.Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Nelson, W. A. (2004). Developmental Research: Studies of Instructional Design and Development. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations. Glencoe: Free Press.Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.Thomas, W., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students' long-term academic achievement. Retrieved from http://crede.berkeley.edu/research/llaa/1.1_final.htmlVisser, L., Plomp, T., Amirault, R. J., & Kuiper, W. (2002). Motivating Students at a Distance: The Case of an International Audience. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 94-110.Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Twitter for academic writing Presentation Transcript

Twitter for Academic Writing
Daniel Craig
Sangmyung University
dan@danielcraig.com
@seouldaddy
Backchannel
I encourage you to use Twitter to discuss this presentation and ask questions.
If you have any questions during the presentation, send a Twitter message with the keyword #ETAK2011.
I will answer those questions at the end of the presentation
What is Twitter?
Twitter is a microblog.
- Asynchronous like a traditional blog
- Semi-synchronous like chat/SMS
- Limited limit (140) like SMS
Twitter is social.
- Users can “follow” or have “followers”
- Join groups (# tags)
- View real-time updates from those they follow or groups
- Share links, pictures, audio, & video
Useful for Education?
Concerns
- Shallow communication
- Too little text (140 characters)
- Non-standard language
Benefits
- Access to authentic audience and input
- Increased interaction outside of class
- Community building
- Opportunities for writing
Some Uses
- Twitter can be many different things to many different people.
- Individualization of instruction
- Voice of historical and literal figures
- Independent & collaborative storytelling and reporting
- 33 interesting ways to use Twitter in the classroom (http://www.ideastoinspire.co.uk/twitter.htm)
Language Education
Linguistic, Cultural, & Social Objectives
Linguistic
- Useful for a focus on vocabulary, expressions, idioms, grammar topics, and a variety of other language objectives.
Cultural
- Access to native speakers of the L2 and insight into their routines, opinions, media, and general interests.
- Formation, growth, and nurturing of distributed social networks.
Social
- Formation, growth, and nurturing of distributed social networks.
Linguistic
Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985) - Noticing, hypothesis testing, and metalinguistic reflection are part of our acquisition of language.
Twitter supports this by:
- Providing opportunities for output
- Personal learning networks (PLN) can provide feedback on experimental language.
- Interaction promotes negotiation of meaning and reflection of successes/failures.
Any implementation of Twitter should provide clear pathways to utilize these functions.
Cultural
Need for language teachers to focus on cultures in which a language is used (Kramsch, 1995)
Need for authentic contexts and tasks (Gilmore, 2007)
Facilitated by Read/Write technologies
- Technologies that facilitate interaction online
- Blogs, Wikis, Social Networks, Microblogs, etc…
Twitter is a platform for engagement.
- Little expectation of privacy, expectation of engagement.
- Not uncommon to be contact by complete strangers.
Instructional design should include a focus on building and engaging networks.
Social
Students need more than a couple hours a week to reach advanced proficiency (Thomas & Collier, 2002)
- Twitter extends learning outside the classroom.
- Twitter can provide extracurricular language practice.
Sharing of ideas and media with class members
- Lead to greater social presence (Gunawardena, 1995)
- Relationships can be strengthened through more frequent and less constrained interactions in online spaces such as Twitter.
Teachers must engage learners online and encourage two-way communication, not only with the teacher but with classmates as well.
Barriers to Use
Diffusion of Innovation (Rogers, 1962)
- Innovator, Early Adopter, Early Majority, Late Majority, & Laggard
- Twitter is at Early Majority; In Korea, this is Early Adopter
- Teachers need provide modeling, training, & time for uptake.
New Lexis
- Twitter-specific language: @, DM, RT, #, and tweet.
- Ancillary technologies: Twitter clients, URL shorteners, archiving services, and photo/video sharing services.
- Abbreviations, acronyms, slang, idioms, and such
Privacy Considerations
- Changes in what is considered “private”
- Teachers must consider issues of privacy when designing and implementing instruction.
MethodsDesign-based Research
Design-based Research (the Design-Based Research Collective)
- Studying and refining learning environments and design principles (Reeves, 2000)
- Focus on iterative evaluation of methodology and design theory.
5 Characteristics
Focused both on design of learning environments and instructional theory.
Continuous cycles of design, enactment, analysis, and redesign.
Research must lead to sharable theories.
Research must account for how designs function in authentic settings.
Methods of documentation should be able to connect processes to outcomes.
MethodsData Collection
3 semesters of advanced writing courses in an English Education program
- 5 courses
- 3 implementations
- 2 revisions
Documentation
- course documents (syllabi, assignments, instruction)
- Surveys of students’ perceptions of Twitterand its use
- Personal communications: face-to-face, email, and Twitter
Design Theory
Constructivist Principles (Vygotsky, 1978)
- Knowledge develops in a very personal way through situated activity.
- Students were encouraged to build knowledge through interactions with the teacher, peers, and outsiders.
Experiential Learning (Kolb, 1984)
- Learning is best conceived as a process, not in terms of outcomes
- Learning is a continuous process grounded in experience
- The process of learning requires the resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed modes of adaptation to the world.
- Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the world
- Learning involves transactions between the person and the environment
- Learning is the process of creating knowledge
Design Theory II
Communities of Practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991)
- Situated in social practice
- Twitter is a meta-community in which exists nearly innumerable communities.
Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985)
- Role of output in acquisition: Noticing, hypothesis testing, and metalinguistic reflection are part of our acquisition of language.
Gagne’s 9 Instructional Events (1997)
- Events 6-9: eliciting performance, providing feedback, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and transfer.
Instructional Processes & Activities
Categories:
Instruction,
Production,
Feedback,
Community-building,
Resources Distribution
Instruction
Semester 1:
- Little direct instruction, no training, many problems using technology
- Reports of confusion with the interface and lexis
- Ad hoc instruction was conducted mid-semester
- Perception was, Twitter was difficult to use
Semester 2:
- Instituted “Twitter Paper”, direct instruction on use of technology, lexis, and writing resources
- Twitter clients were still not described in detail.
- Perception was still that Twitter was difficult to use.
Semester 3:
- Included demonstrations of 2 Web-based clients.
- Connections between lexicon and features made explicit.
- More use of phones and alternative clients, comfortable.
Production
Semester 1:
- No specific assignments, very few postings, little interaction.
- Postings were words or short phrases.
Semester 2:
- Assignments that complemented instruction.
- “Daily Tweets” regular postings, with some interaction.
- Only did the minimum, quality still low.
Semester 3:
- More complex and creative assignments necessary.
- More higher-order cognitive skills should be required
Feedback
Semester 1:
- Little produced, little feedback. Some feedback from teacher, little from students or the greater network.
Semester 2:
- Greater level of interaction, yet quite simplistic student-student.
- Increase teacher feedback and engagement led to more overall interaction.
- Few people in their networks.
Semester 3:
- Increase in social interactions, but little related to writing.
- Even more feedback from teacher, but more is still needed.
- Must increase use of Twitter networks.
Community-Building
Semester 1:
- No requirement for building a network, thus most students only added the teacher.
- Little interaction, thus little community.
Semester 2:
- Required to follow at least 50 people (inc, 30 classmates), few actually did so.
- More interaction with classmates, better sense of community.
- Complained about seeing too many posts from 50 people.
Semester 3:
- Knowledge of and comfort with Twitter led to many more interactions between students and extended network.
- Students asked class questions and met socially.
- Still difficult for students to follow 50 people.
Resource Distribution
Semester 1:
- Teacher contributed writing and content resources.
- Students did not contribute resources.
Semester 2:
- Teacher provided resources.
- Some exchange of links to writing and content resources by students.
Semester 3:
- Increased sharing of research, content, and writing resources.
- More of an emphasis on sharing is necessary, including the sharing of media for both class and social reasons.
EAP Twitter Model
Conclusion
The use of Twitter for education has real potential. The ability to form large networks of like-minded people enables learners to both produce authentic messages for the network and to receive feedback from the network. This makes writing an authentic task in an authentic context. It also provides a support network that can follow learners long after completion of the class.
Questions/Comments?
Thank you!
Any Questions?
Daniel Craig
Sangmyung University
http://danielcraig.posterous.com
dan@danielcraig.com
@seouldaddy
Backchannel

Twitter for academic writing

by Daniel Craig

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

32 Embeds 7,986

Statistics

Twitter for academic writing Presentation Transcript