Social networking sites (SNS) provide a ready-made environment to acquire and share new information, while collaborating in social networks of diverse groups of people. This study focuses on the creation and distribution of social capital within SNS, such as Twitter. Social capital has been repeatedly proposed as a valuable theoretical concept to analyze SNS. Moreover, previous research has greatly contributed to our understanding of how individuals communicate via Twitter. Yet, past studies remained inconclusive about the precise role of social capital in SNS. Additionally, little is known about whether and how teachers use SNS (e.g. Twitter) to share and collect information. The present study addresses these shortcomings by providing empirical evidence from two hashtag conversations, namely #edchat and #edchatde. Both aim at teachers and cover the latest trends and developments in the field of (new) media in teaching and learning processes. We collected longitudinal ego-network data from 22.05. – 06.11.2014, yielding more than 144,000 Tweets from about 52,000 Twitter users. Building upon the work of Tsai and Goshal (1998), who acknowledged social network analysis as a valuable tool to assess (aspects of) of social capital, we determined egos’ betweenness and closeness centrality measures. Moreover, we also determined their hub and authority scores (Kleinberg, Kumar, Raghavan, Rajagopalan, & Tomkins, 1999), as well as brokerage roles (De Nooy, Mrvar, & Batagelj, 2011). Finally, we also assessed the existence and relevance of structural holes (e.g. Burt, 2009) in the emerging network structures of the hashtag conversations. The results show that there are overarching similarities among the Twitter conversations on how social capital is created and distributed. However, we also revealed decisive differences with respect to brokerage roles, as well as hub and authority scores. Based on these findings we will formulate recommendations for future studies, as well as discuss preliminary implications for practitioners.

1. Social Capital in Twitter
Conversations among Teachers
A Longitudinal Ego-Network Approach
Martin Rehm, Michael Kerres (University Duisburg-Essen)
Ad Notten (United Nations University – UNU-MERIT)
Sunbelt 2015, Brighton, UK

2. teachers need to develop and implement new & innovative
approaches to learning (e.g. Finsterwald, 2013)
professional development extends beyond traditional teacher
education (Richter, 2011)
failure of most professional development efforts
→ importance of (informal) teacher networks (e.g. Hofman, 2012)

3. social capital is a useful notion to explain the benefits
teachers can accrue from networking (e.g. Fox, 2015)
“relational resources embedded in the cross-cutting personal
ties that are useful for the personal development of
individuals” (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998, p. 464)
Social Capital

4. BUT
● Role of social capital in the context of (informal) learning?
● Previous studies have been conducted among students
● Teachers have largely been neglected from the analysis of
(informal) learning and social capital within SNS

5. Research Question
Does Informal Learning among
Teachers on Twitter contribute to
their Social Capital?

6. weekly live-chats
the latest trends and developments in
education, as well as the integration of
(new) media into the lesson plans and
broader curricula
Data collected: 22.05. – 06.11.2014
• #edchat
– Users: 102.640
– Tweets: 262.461
• #edchatDE
– Users: 3.847
– Tweets: 23.222

7. Method
Users metrics
– multi-relational network (Tweets, Mentions, Replies to)
Social Network Analysis
– degree, betweenness, closeness
– hub & authority scores (Kleinberg,et al., 1999)
– brokerage roles (De Nooy, Mrvar, & Batagelj, 2011)
– structural holes (e.g. Burt, 2009)

8. #edchatDE
whole network
“Mentions” network “Replies to” network

9. #edchat
“whole” network
“Replies to” network“Mentions” network

10. „Whole Network“
#edchat#edchatDE

11. „Top 50“ network (based on overall degree)
#edchatDE #edchat

12. Longitudinal (exemplary)
#edchatDE #edchat

13. Brokerage Roles – Top 50 (De Nooy, Mrvar, & Batagelj, 2011)

14. Hubs & Authorities (Kleinberg, Kumar, Raghavan, Rajagopalan, &
Tomkins, 1999)
#edchatDE #edchat

15. Outlook & Future Steps
Other dimensions of social capital
– Cognitive dimension
●
Semantic network – 2-Mode network
●
Questionnaire
– Relational dimensions
●
Questionnaire
Interplay of the three dimensions

16. Social Capital in Twitter
Conversations among Teachers
A Longitudinal Ego-Network Approach
Martin Rehm, Michael Kerres (University Duisburg-Essen)
Ad Notten (United Nations University – UNU-MERIT)
Sunbelt 2015, Brighton, UK