Exploring students’ Twitter use in the online classroom across 4 years
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online asynchronous courses require close attention to course design to ensure there are strategies in place to foster social presence to build stronger senses of community and to motivate students to engage (content, peers and instructors). Judicious use of social media may serve this purpose. Since its inception, social media, Twitter in particular, has been employed in higher education courses for teaching and learning experiences with a notable impact on student engagement and social presence. This research examines students’ use of Twitter for assessment and interaction in the online asynchronous classroom from 2014 to 2018, to determine if there has been an increase in the length, amount or content within Tweets, and if students report stronger engagement and interaction following the use of Twitter for assessment. While results indicate such a connection exists, students were more focused on completing course requirements than creating connections or interacting with others, and were bothered by the constraints of the Tweet length.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it