Deviating From the Traditional Instructional Tools: Integrating Twitter in a Sociology of Deviance Course | S’éloigner des outils pédagogiques traditionnels : intégrer Twitter dans un cours sur la sociologie de la deviance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the use of social media in post-secondary education expands, so does the research literature examining its effectiveness in engaging students. Studies have examined the use of Twitter as an assessment and engagement tool, and since this is a broad and growing research area, better understanding whether Twitter can promote these outcomes in an upper-level university course is valuable. This paper explores these themes based on a student survey (N=37) conducted in a Sociology Deviance course. It also reviews how students responded to the use of Twitter as a “community-classroom” engagement and assessment tool. Findings reveal that Twitter did contribute to some students’ sense of community. We offer suggestions for how instructors can successfully integrate Twitter activities into their course assessment to make them more engaging and to improve connectedness.L’utilisation des médias sociaux dans l’éducation postsecondaire prend de l’ampleur, entraînant l’augmentation de la documentation de recherche qui examine leur efficacité à motiver les élèves. Des études se sont penchées sur l’utilisation de Twitter comme outil d’évaluation et de participation. Comme il s’agit d’un domaine de recherche vaste et en croissance, il est important de mieux comprendre si Twitter peut favoriser ces résultats dans le cadre d’un cours universitaire de haut niveau. Cet article explore ces thèmes en s’appuyant sur un sondage réalisé auprès des étudiants (N=37) dans un cours de sociologie de la déviance. Il examine également comment les étudiants ont réagi à l’usage de Twitter comme outil de participation à une « classe-collectivité » et comme outil d’évaluation. Les conclusions révèlent que Twitter a contribué au sentiment d’appartenance à la collectivité de certains étudiants. Nous offrons des suggestions sur la façon dont les instructeurs peuvent intégrer avec succès des activités liées à Twitter dans leurs évaluations de cours afin de rendre ceux-ci plus motivants et d’améliorer la connectivité.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".