Tweet, and We Shall Find: Using Digital Methods to Locate Participants in Educational Hashtags
Although researchers have discovered a great deal about who uses Twitter for educational purposes, what they post about, when they post and why they participate, there has so far been little work to explore where participants in educational Twitter contexts are located. In this paper, we establish a methodological foundation that can support the exploration of geographical issues in educational Twitter research. We surveyed 46 participants in one educational Twitter hashtag, #michED, to determine where they lived; we then compared these responses to results from three digital methods for geolocating Twitter users (human coding, machine coding and GPS coding) to explore these methods’ affordances and constraints. Human coding of Twitter profiles allowed us to analyze more participants with higher levels of accuracy but also has disadvantages compared to other digital—and traditional—methods. We discuss the additional insights obtained through geolocating #michED participants as well as considerations for using geolocation and other digital methods in educational research.
KeywordsDigital methods Geolocation Educational hashtags Hashtag Social media Twitter
We would like to thank Ben Rimes, Mary Wever and everyone else who helped us reach out to the #michED community.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Spencer P. Greenhalgh declares that he has no conflict of interest. K. Bret Staudt Willet declares that he has no conflict of interest. Joshua M. Rosenberg declares that he has no conflict of interest. Matthew J. Koehler declares that he has no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Baker, L. M. (2008). Unobtrusive research. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 905–906). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2014). How and why educators use Twitter: A survey of the field. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46, 414–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.925701.
- Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2015). Engagement through microblogging: Educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41, 707–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.939294.
- Carpenter, J. P., Tani, T., Morrison, S., & Keane, J. (2018). Exploring the education Twitter hashtag landscape. In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference 2018 (pp. 2230–3325). Waynesville: Association for the Advancement of computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
- Cheng, Z., Caverlee, J., & Lee, K. (2010). You are where you tweet: A content-based approach to geo-locating Twitter users. In X. J. Huang, G. Jones, N. Koudas, X. Wu, & K. Collins-Thompson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19 th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 759–768). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
- Fiesler, C., & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of Twitter research ethics. Social Media + Society, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118763366.
- Gentry, J. (2015). twitteR: R based Twitter client (Version 1.1.9) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=twitteR
- Gleason, B. (2013). #Occupy Wall Street: Exploring informal learning about a social movement on Twitter. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 966–982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479372.
- Graham, M., Hale, S. A., & Gaffney, D. (2014). Where in the world are you? Geolocation and language identification in Twitter. The Professional Geographer, 66, 568–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2014.907699.
- Hawksey, M. (2014). Need a better Twitter Archiving Google Sheet? TAGS v6.0 is here! [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://mashe.hawksey.info/2014/10/need-a-better-twitter-archiving-google-sheet-tags-v6-0-is-here/
- Jurgens, D., Finnethy, T., McCorriston, J., Xu, Y. T., & Ruths, D. (2015). Geolocation prediction in Twitter using social networks: A critical analysis and review of current practice. In Proceedings of the twenty-ninth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence and the twenty-seventh innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference. Palo Alto: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
- Krutka, D. G., Asino, T. I., & Haselwood, S. (2018). Editorial: Eight lessons on networked teacher activism from #OklaEd and the #OklaEdWalkout. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2) Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org.
- Lee, R. M., Fielding, N., & Blank, G. (2008). The internet as a research medium: An editorial introduction to The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods. In N. Fielding, R. M. Lee, & G. Blank (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 2–22). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee (Version 2.0). Chicago: Association of Internet Researchers.Google Scholar
- Marres, N. (2016). Foreword. In H. Snee, C. Hine, Y. Morey, S. Roberts, & H. Watson (Eds.), Digital methods for social science: An interdisciplinary guide to research innovation (pp. viii–viix). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Greenhow, C. (2016). The work of educational psychologists in a digitally networked world. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed., pp. 29–40). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Munzert, S., Rubba, C., Meißner, P., & Nyhuis, D. (2015). Automated data collection with R: A practical guide to web scraping and text mining. West Sussex: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Rosenberg, J. M., Greenhalgh, S. P., Koehler, M. J., Akcaoglu, M., & Hamilton, E. (2016). An investigation of State Educational Twitter Hashtags (SETHs) as affinity spaces. E-Learning and Digital Media, 13, 24–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753016672351.
- Rosenberg, J. M., Akcaoglu, M., Staudt Willet, K. B., Greenhalgh, S. P., & Koehler, M. J. (2017). A tale of two Twitters: Synchronous and asynchronous use of the same hashtag. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2017 (pp. 283–286). Waynesville: Association for the Advancement of computing in education (AACE).Google Scholar
- Rudis, B. (2016). nominatim: Tools for working with the “Nominatim” API. (Version 0.2.2.9000) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://github.com/hrbrmstr/nominatim
- Salganik, M. J. (2018). Bit by bit: Social research in the digital age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Shaffer, D. W. (2017). Quantitative ethnography. Madison: Cathcart Press.Google Scholar
- Sloan, L. (2017). Social science ‘lite'? Deriving demographic proxies from Twitter. In L. Sloan & A. Quan-Haase (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social media research methods (pp. 90–104). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Snee, H., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S., & Watson, H. (2016). Digital methods as mainstream methodology: An introduction. In H. Snee, C. Hine, Y. Morey, S. Roberts, & H. Watson (Eds.), Digital methods for social science: An interdisciplinary guide to research innovation (pp. 1–11). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Takhteyev, Y., Gruzd, A., & Wellman, B. (2012). Geography of Twitter networks. Social Networks, 34, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2011.05.006.
- Veletsianos, G. (2017b). Toward a generalizable understanding of Twitter and social media use across MOOCs: Who participates on MOOC hashtags and in what ways? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9131-7.
- Welser, H. T., Smith, M., Fisher, D., & Gleave, E. (2008). Distilling digital traces: Computational social science approaches to studying the internet. In N. Fielding, R. M. Lee, & G. Blank, The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 116–141). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Wesely, P. M. (2013). Investigating the community of practice of world language educators on Twitter. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113489032.