Building a Community of Connected ELT Professionals on Twitter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although English language teaching professionals are committed to ongoing continuous professional development, economic and workload factors may impede their ability to attend a traditional 2-day annual conference. Teachers have turned to social media as an alternative approach to self-directed professional development. In particular, Twitter has become the choice of many educators with its potential for networking and collaboration. There are scheduled Twitter chats held regularly on a variety of topics of interest to language teaching professionals, including #CdnELTchat. In addition, connected educators have built a community of practice on the Twitter platform and provide inspiration and support to their colleagues online. In this article, four connected educators who have found their community on Twitter share their stories of how they got started on Twitter, how they connected with each other, and what they value about the open Twitter platform.
 Bien que les professionnels de l’enseignement de l’anglais s’engagent à poursuivre un perfectionnement professionnel continu, des facteurs économiques ou des charges de travail peuvent les empêcher d’assister à une conférence annuelle traditionnelle de 2 jours. Les enseignantes et enseignants trouvent dans les réseaux sociaux une solution de rechange qui leur permet de veiller à leur propre perfectionnement professionnel. Twitter, notamment, est le nouveau choix de nombreux éducateurs et éducatrices en raison des possibilités de réseautage et de collaboration qu’il présente. Des sessions de clavardage ont régulièrement lieu sur une variété de sujets présentant un intérêt pour les professionnels de l’enseignement des langues, et ce, notamment sur #CdnELTchat. Qui plus est, les éducatrices et éducateurs connectés ont construit une communauté de praticiens sur la plateforme Twitter et fournissent une inspiration et un soutien à leurs collègues en ligne. Dans cet article, quatre éducatrices connectées qui ont découvert leur communauté sur Twitter décrivent comment elles ont commencé à se servir de Twitter, comment elles se sont connectées les unes aux autres, et ce qu’elles apprécient le plus sur la plateforme ouverte de Twitter.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.012 |
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".