 the free response question, it was noted Twitter "helps make a course less formal," and that without the LMS Twitter would be valuable. Otherwise, "it becomes more of the same and nothing new." One respondent expressed Twitter "has added a place for non-IDT 507 chat to take place. [The LMS] is specifically for class discussion, and is lacking that space." While another noted, "It was an extra step to follow and participate for the class, along with keeping up with the discussions on [the LMS]." Finally, when answering the question of whether or not the use of Twitter would impact a student's choice to enroll in a particular section, 73 percent were indifferent and 23 percent preferred a course where Twitter was not used. The sole respondent who preferred Twitter's use had a frequency rating of very active.
Based on this study, the integration of Twitter into the LMS might be a factor in helping the overall adoption of Twitter as a social networking component of the class. Overall it would appear students prefer discussion boards to a social networking site, but the reasons for this are yet unknown. The fact that Twitter was not a graded assignment, that it was an extraneous location for class participation, and that there was no consequence for non-participation likely resulted in the failure of adoption, but this cannot be proven without further research.
There are serious implications for the future of combining social networking with class participation. First, there was much enthusiasm and participation noted by professors who use Twitter that was not echoed when a particular graduate student population was surveyed, this should be investigated. Speculated reasoning for this includes that if students are not already used to using Twitter it may appear as an extra chore or homework assignment for which they receive no reward. Second, should Twitter, or any social networking site for that matter, be pushed if students are satisfied with discussion boards? Possibly over the next few years, as LMSs develop and incorporate the ability to contribute to social networking sites from within, use will increase. However, for now, it would seem discussion boards are the place keep in-class participation. In the mean time, possible future areas for research on this topic include: demographics of students using Twitter in class, the program of study in relationship to the participation of Twitter, the effect of Twitter on hybrid education and an analysis of how instructors are using Twitter in courses.
There are several places for the next steps of research in this field, and it will be exciting to see what is forthcoming as this relatively new technology continues to evolve.
Logan Rath, MLS is the Digital Services Librarian at the College at Brockport, State University of New York. He conducted this research as part of the graduate program in Information Design and Technology at SUNY Institute of Technology. You can follow Logan on Twitter.
 O'Reilly, T. and Milstein, S. (2009). The twitter book. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
 Mason, R., and Rennie, F. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: Resources for higher education. New York: Routledge.
 DeVoe, K.M. (2009). Busts of information: Microblogging. The Reference Librarian, 50, 212-214. doi:10.1080/02763870902762086
 DeVoe, K.M. (2009b). Constructing who we are online: One word, one friend at a time. The Reference Librarian, 50, 419-421. doi:10.1080/02763870903130127
 Buckland, M. K. (1991). Information and information systems. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
 Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (2002). The social life of information. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
 Moreville, P. (2005). Ambient findability. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
 Jansen, B.J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., Chowdury, A. (2009). Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60 (11), 2169-2188. doi:10.1002/asi.21149
To leave a comment you must sign in.
Create a Web Account: