Skip to main content


Log in

Using Twitter as a pedagogical tool in two classrooms: a comparative case study between an education and a communication class

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript


Extant literature on social media in education highlights the importance of improving social media-supported learning environments. This study adds to the literature by examining students’ perception and participation for three types of Twitter-based instrumental activities—backchanneling, exploring hashtags, and topics discussion—in two unique undergraduate classrooms (education vs. communication) over the period of a 14-week semester. By employing a comparative case study research design, this study revealed insights into how students may respond to the same Twitter classroom integration activities to a varying degree according to their differences in pre-class perceptions and behavioral patterns. We found that both classes manifested an overall positive attitude toward the integration of Twitter in class along with active participation. However, the communication students manifested a more favorable pre-perception of Twitter and showed a higher participation pattern in class. We also provide pedagogical implications and recommendations for instructors intending to apply or replicate the three instructional activities employed in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others


  • Allsopp, D. H., Alvarez McHatton, P., & Cranston-Gingras, A. (2009). Examining perceptions of systematic integration of instructional technology in a teacher education program. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(4), 337–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auger, G. A. (2013). Fostering democracy through social media: Evaluating diametrically opposed nonprofit advocacy organizations’ use of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Public Relations Review, 39(4), 369–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Awad, N. I., & Cocchio, C. (2015). Use of twitter at a major national pharmacy conference. American Journal of Health System Pharmacy, 72(1), 65–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, N. G., & Griswold, J. (2016). Use of popular tools remains constant as use of Instagram expands quaickly among the 2016 Fortune 500. Retrieved from

  • Blankenship, J. C., & Gibson, R. (2016). Learning alone, together: Closed-cohort structure in an online journalism and mass communication graduate program. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 71(4), 425–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blessing, S. B., Blessing, J. S., & Fleck, B. K. B. (2012). Using Twitter to reinforce classroom concepts. Teaching of Psychology, 39(4), 268–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borau, K., Ullrich, C., Feng, J., & Shen, R. (2009). Microblogging for language learning: Using twitter to train communicative and cultural competence. In Advances in web based learningICWL 2009 (pp. 78–87).

  • Brito, M. (2011). Smart business, social business: A playbook for social media in your organization. London: Pearson Education.

    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(4), 414–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, D., Kern, R., & Smith, B. (2016). Technology in language use, language teaching, and language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 64–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T. B., & Nelson, C. L. (2012). Classroom community, pedagogical effectiveness, and learning outcomes associated with Twitter use in undergraduate marketing courses. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 20(2), 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, E. C., Fudge, J., Hubbard, G. T., & Filak, V. F. (2013). The mass comm type: Student personality traits, motivations, and the choice between news and strategic communication majors. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 68(2), 104–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, J. J. (2011). The classroom as a virtual community: An experience with student backchannel discourse. Business Education Innovation Journal, 3(2), 56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Waard, I., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M. S., Hogue, R., Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A., & Rodriguez, O. C. (2011). Using mLearning and MOOCs to understand chaos, emergence, and complexity in education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 94–115. Retrieved from

  • Diaz-Ortiz, C., & Stone, B. (2011). Twitter for good: Change the world one tweet at a time. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2009). Tweeting the night away: Using Twitter to enhance social presence. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 129–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elavsky, C. M., Mislan, C., & Elavsky, S. (2011). When talking less is more: Exploring outcomes of Twitter usage in the large-lecture hall. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(3), 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, F., Luo, T., & Zhang, K. (2012). Tweeting for learning: A critical analysis of research on microblogging in education published in 2008–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(5), 783–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, S., Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2016, November 11). Social media update 2016. Retried from

  • Holotescu, C., & Grosseck, G. (2009). Using microblogging in education. Case study: Paper presented at the 6th Conference on e-Learning Applications, Cairo, Egypt. Retrieved from

  • Hsu, Y. C., & Ching, Y. H. (2012). Mobile microblogging: Using Twitter and mobile devices in an online course to promote learning in authentic contexts. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(4), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., & Tseng, B. (2007). Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. In Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on web mining and social network analysis, WebKDD/SNA-KDD’07 (pp. 56–65). New York, NY: ACM.

  • Keller, J. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to Connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 19–38. Retrieved from

  • Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 74–93. Retrieved from

  • Lewis, B. K. (2010). Social media and strategic communication: Attitudes and perceptions among college students. Public Relations Journal, 4(3). Retrieved from

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2012). A tale of tweets: Analyzing microblogging among language learners. System, 40(1), 48–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, T. (2015). Instructional guidance in microblogging-supported learning: Insights from a multiple case study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(3), 173–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, T. (2016). Enabling microblogging-based peer feedback in face-to-face classrooms. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(2), 156–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, T., & Franklin, T. (2015). Tweeting and blogging: Moving towards education 2.0. International Journal on E-Learning, 14(2), 235–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, T., Franklin, T., Moore, D., & Crompton, T. (2017). Applying a modified technology acceptance model to qualitatively analyze the factors affecting microblogging integration. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Luo, T., & Gao, F. (2012). Enhancing classroom learning experience by providing structures to microblogging-based activities. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 11, 199–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorkle, D., & Payan, J. (2017). Using Twitter in the marketing and advertising classroom to develop skills for social media marketing and personal branding. Journal of Advertising Education, 21(1), 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNely, B. (2009). Backchannel persistence and collaborative meaning-making. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM international conference on design of communication (pp. 297–304). ACM.

  • McWilliams, J., Hickey, D. T., Hines, M. B., Conner, J. M., & Bishop, S. C. (2011). Using collaborative writing tools for literary analysis: Twitter, fan fiction and the crucible in the secondary English classroom. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 3(3), 238–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nastasi, B. K., & Schensul, S. L. (2005). Contributions of qualitative research to the validity of intervention research. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojeda-Zapata, J. (2008). Twitter means business: How microblogging can help or hurt your company. Silicon Valley: Happy About.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauschenwein, J., & Sfiri, A. (2010). Adult learner’s motivation for the use of microblogging during online training courses. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 5(1), 22–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perifanou, M. A. (2009). Language micro-gaming: Fun and informal microblogging activities for language learning. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 49, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinnappan, S., & Zutshi, S. (2011). Using microblogging to facilitate community of inquiry: An Australian tertiary experience. Paper presented at the 28th Australasian society for computers in learning in tertiary education conference. Retrieved from

  • Smith, J. (2009). Dominate your market with Twitter: Tweet your way to business success. Oxford: Infinite Ideas Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, D. (2017). How many users does twitter have? Retrieved from

  • Stirland, S. (2008). The Obama campaign: A great campaign, or the greatest? Retrieved from

  • Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2017). Using Twitter for education: Beneficial or simply a waste of time? Computers and Education, 106, 97–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vannatta, R., Beyerbach, B., & Walsh, C. (2001). From teaching technology to using technology to enhance student learning: Preservice teachers’ changing perceptions of technology infusion. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 105–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2016). Scholars in an increasingly open and digital world: How do education professors and students use Twitter? The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. (2002). When technology meets beliefs: Preservice teachers? Perception of the teacher’s role in the classroom with computers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 150–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tian Luo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. The study done in the education class was approved by Office of Research Compliance from Ohio University and done in the communication was approved by Office of Research from Bradley University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, T., Xie, Q. Using Twitter as a pedagogical tool in two classrooms: a comparative case study between an education and a communication class. J Comput High Educ 31, 81–104 (2019).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: