Tools, Processes, Participation: Social Media for Learning, Teaching, and Social Change
PROCEEDING
Benjamin Gleason, Iowa State University, United States ; Marie Heath, Loyola University of Maryland, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, NV, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-37-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA
Abstract
Despite attempted pedagogical shifts toward situated learning, social constructivism, and social practice theory, we find pedagogy for social media to remain primarily situated in behaviorist or cognitivist assumptions of learning. Moreover, in an attempt to craft our own participatory pedagogies of social media, we found ourselves returning to metaphors and language rooted in ontological assumptions of objectivism. That is to say, we continually referred to social media as a tool with affordances to be leveraged for learning. In this paper we examine three understandings of social media - as we see them - in literature, pedagogy, and practice. We categorize these understandings through the psychological perspectives of behaviorist, cognitivist, and sociocultural learning theories. In so doing, we imagine new ways of both using social media for teaching and learning as well as possible language to better reflect our own ontological and epistemological assumptions of social media.
Citation
Gleason, B. & Heath, M. (2019). Tools, Processes, Participation: Social Media for Learning, Teaching, and Social Change. In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2712-2717). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/208034/.
© 2019 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
References
View References & Citations Map- Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human development, 49(4), 193-224.
- Bartolomé, L.J. (1984). Forced resettlement and the survival systems of the urban poor. Ethnology, 23(3), 177-192.
- Cammarota, J. (2017). Youth Participatory Action Research: A Pedagogy of Transformational Resistance for Critical Youth Studies. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies (JCEPS), 15(2).
- Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational technology research and development, 42(2), 21-29.
- Dyson, B., Vickers, K., Turtle, J., Cowan, S., & Tassone, A. (2015). Evaluating the use of Facebook to increase student engagement and understanding in lecture-based classes. Higher Education, 69(2), 303-313.
- Elull, J. (1964). The Technological Society. Vintage Books.
- Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1995). A dialogue: Culture, language, and race. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 377-403.
- Friesen, N., & Lowe, S. (2012). The questionable promise of social media for education: Connective learning and the commercial imperative. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(3), 183-194.
- Gleason, B. (2018). Adolescents Becoming Feminist on Twitter: New Literacies Practices, Commitments, and Identity Work. Journal of Adolescent& Adult Literacy, 62 (3).
- Greenhow, C., & Lewin, C. (2016). Social media and education: reconceptualizing the boundaries of formal and informal learning. Learning, media and technology, 41(1), 6-30.
- 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.
- Kimmons, R., Carpenter, J.P., Veletsianos, G., & Krutka, D.G. (2018). Mining social media divides: an analysis of K-12 US School uses of Twitter. Learning, Media and Technology, 1-19.
- Kline, S.J. (1985). What is technology? Bulletin of Science, Technology& Society, 5(3), 215-218.
- Kozma, R.B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational technology research and development, 42(2), 7-19.
- Lave, J., Wenger, E., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation (Vol. 521423740). Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
- Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, culture, and activity, 3(3), 149-164.
- Mason, L. (2018). A critical metaphor analysis of educational technology research in the social studies. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(3). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/volume-18/issue-3-18/social-studies/a-critical-metaphor-analysis-of-educationaltechnology-research-in-the-social-studies
- McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York.
- Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
- Postman, N. (2009). Teaching As a Subversive Activity: A No-Holds-Barred Assault on Outdated Teaching Methods-with Dramatic and Practical Proposals on How Education Can Be Made Relevant to Today's World. Delta.
- Reich, J., & Ito, M. (2017). From good intentions to real outcomes: Equity by design in learning technologies. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
- Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. (2005). Do technologies make us smarter? Intellectual amplification with, of and through technology. Intelligence and technology: The impact of tools on the nature and development of human abilities, 71-86.
- Selwyn, N. (2016) Minding our language: why education and technology is full of bullshit... And what might be done about it, Learning, Media and Technology, (41)3, 437-443.
- Stommel, J. (2014). Critical digital pedagogy: a definition. Hybrid Pedagogy. Http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/criticaldigitalpedagogydefinition/
- Turvey, M.T., & Shaw, R.E. (1995). Toward an ecological physics and a physical psychology. In The science of the mind: 2001 and beyond, edited by R.L. Solso and D.W. Massaro, pp. 144-169. New york: Oxford.
- Watters, A.V. (2017). The weaponization of education data. Hack Education. Http://hackeducation.com/2017/12/11/top-ed-tech DASHDASH
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References