Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Wolfgang Reinhardt1
1
University of Paderborn, Institute of Computer Science
Abstract:
Twitter has gained a lot of attention in the last three years. It is used in various use
cases from discussing at conferences, taking personal notes or live coverage of
prominent events. Communities in Twitter are forming through the usage of a common
tag that is part of the message. This paper presents an application for monitoring and
visualising the dynamics in such communities, especially dynamics in the written
communication of the community and presents approaches to make this application
part of a mashup of services in a Personal Learning Environment.
1 Introduction
Nowadays learning takes place more and more within the World Wide Web. Technologies,
concepts and applications commonly known as Web 2.0 allow broad user interaction, user
generated content, and mobile learning. Never before learning has been more mobile,
pervading and informal than today [5]. Communities of Practice [15] as well as Communities
of Interest [16] are using the Web for communication, coordination and monitoring of their
activities. The recent popularity of Social Network Sites (SNSs) like Facebook1, mySpace2, or
studiVZ3 has lead to massive networking of users and organisations. SNSs provide untold
possibilities for user interaction and have been promoted as central to the Web 2.0. Usual
functionalities of SNSs include: a user profile page, a list of friends, private messaging,
groups, media uploading and commenting [7]. With blogs, microblogs, image community
platforms (e.g. Flickr4), or social bookmarking sites (e.g. Delicious5) object-centered sociality
[2] became a mass phenomena. Users not only connect to each other, they connect through
shared objects [7].
Social networks are representing social structures made of nodes that are tied by some
type of interdependency. Social networks emerge whenever people are communicating with
each other, working together, exchanging data, entering friend- or relationships and in many
more cases. Social network analysis (SNA) has emerged as a key technique in modern
sociology. SNA uses different metrics in order to make claims about the social structure of the
network, central nodes or the closeness of nodes. If the nodes in such a network do not
represent people but artefacts (like pictures, blog entries or videos) we talk about artefact
1
http://www.facebook.com/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
2
http://www.myspace.com (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
3
http://www.studivz.net/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
4
http://www.flickr.com/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
5
http://delicious.com/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
1(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 783
Conference ICL2009 September 23 -25, 2009 Villach, Austria
networks, wherein the same metrics can be applied. Assuming we could connect social
networks with artefacts networks, preserving the context and semantic relations between users
and artefacts, we could obtain Artefact-Actor-Networks (AANs) [3]. AANs provide
comprising information about the linking between users and artefacts and thus supply deeper
understanding of how communities use artefacts for object-centered sociality. Furthermore it
is from research interest to analyse the dynamics of both social and artefact networks, in order
to understand how communities emerge, evolve and break up.
In this paper the following research question is addressed: “How can we track and
visualise the dynamics of written communication within a community?” The main focus is the
centre of attention of the investigated community. We developed an application to persist and
analyse communication from the microblogging service Twitter6 and present a prototypical
visualisation of the dynamics in communities.
2.1 Microblogging
Templeton [8] characterizes microblogging as “a small-scale form of blogging, generally
made up of short, succinct messages, used by both consumers and businesses to share news,
post status updates and carry on conversations” and Owyang [9] describes the difference
between blogs and microblogs as follows: “[...] long form blog posts like this seem so much
slower and plodding compared to how quickly information can come and go in Twitter. [...]
Information within Microblogging communities [...] encourage rapid word of mouth – of both
positive and negative content”. In a nutshell, microblogging offers a platform for the fast
exchange of thoughts, ideas and artefacts.
Twitter is the most commonly used service for microblogging and gained a lot of
attention in the last three years (e.g. during the inauguration of President Obama). With
Twitter the user is allowed to send messages with a maximum of 140 characters. These
messages, so-called tweets, can be public or private, can be directed to one or more Twitter
users (identified by the @ sign) and can deal with certain topics (identified by the # sign). By
using a hashtag in tweets it is easy to aggregate all tweets dealing with the same topic (e.g. a
conference, brand, course or political party). Java et al. [6] discern four main types for using
microblogging services: I) Daily Chatter, II) Conversations, III) Sharing information and IV)
Reporting news. Templeton [8] uses three categories to itemise the possible usage types of
microblogging: a) Microsharing, b) Micromessaging and c) Micrologging. There are manifold
reasons why and use-cases for a service “we didn’t know we needed until we had it” [11], that
is supposed to be “time-suck” [12] and addictive.
6
http://twitter.com/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
2(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 784
Conference ICL2009 September 23 -25, 2009 Villach, Austria
and typically does not lead to certification. Informal learning may be intentional but in most
cases it is non-intentional (or “incidental”/ random)”. Experience shows that the majority of
real learning is informal [18]. In the focus of PLEs is the learner that selects, arranges,
presents, analyses and shares web resources, learning objects and tools in a way that fits his
personal learning style [1,21]. The personal part of PLEs can be the selection of specific
content (news feeds, blogs, scientific papers as well as pictures or chats) or the design or
composition of the learning environment.
PLEs are a rather technical than didactical approach to learning and the different
approaches to PLEs distinguishes themselves mostly in the way of the respective
implementation. On the one hand it is possible to extend existing Learning Management
Systems (LMS) so that users can create their individual space and cooperate with other users
(e.g. through shared calendars or private chats). On the other hand PLEs can serve as
individual portals that integrate external services via widgets or portlets. Microblogging and
especially Twitter or its open-source counterpart Laconica7 can be easily integrated to PLEs
grace of their open API. Twitter provides widgets than can be easily integrated in PLEs like
iGoogle8 or Elgg9 and thus support communicating, networking and sharing. Other relevant
parts of the individual’s learning process, especially the reflection of communication
processes and the analysis of the content are rarely supported by existing approaches.
7
http://laconi.ca (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
8
http://www.google.de/ig (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
9
http://elgg.org/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
3(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 785
Conference ICL2009 September 23 -25, 2009 Villach, Austria
Figure 1: Users that used the tag #edumedia09 Figure 2: Dynamic word cloud from
#edumedia09 (showing the contents
from 2009-05-05)
The second tab in subarea II shows the users, which used the specific tag (cf. figure 1). User
names in bold font indicate that the analysis application monitors these Twitter users. The
user list is sorted with respect to the number of tweets the users sent using the monitored
hashtag. From this view it becomes obvious that the users mebner, Networking_Lady and
e_trude were the most frequent users of the tag edumedia09. The third tab of subarea II
visualises the most important terms from the tweets sent. Therefore we are using a simple
word cloud that shows the more important words larger than the less important. By use of the
slider under the extracted terms one can go back in time to see the data from the past. With the
play button it is possible to automatically browse through the daily summaries of the tweets
sent. Figure 2 shows the dynamic word cloud extracted from the tweets containing the hashtag
edumedia09 from 2009-05-05.
Another requirement for the visualisation was to provide an easy view on the dynamics of
the personnel network of the community. As we were facing problems in getting data and
visualising large networks, we decided to visualise the respective shares in communication for
each user of the community. We used a stacked area chart for visualisation, where each
member of the community has its own colour for the whole time period. The x-axis is
separated in weeks and the y-axis shows the relative share of messages for the user. As shown
in figure 3, at the beginning of the shown period only a few users (namely wollepb and
10
http://www.adobe.com/products/flex/ (last viewed on 2009-08-19)
4(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 786
Conference ICL2009 September 23 -25, 2009 Villach, Austria
mebner) were using the hashtag edumedia09. After the start of the conference on 2009-05-04
the user mebner still had a reasonable part in the communication, whereas the user wollepb
nearly stopped using the tag. On the other hand another user (Networking_Lady) started to use
the tag very frequently and accounted for a relevant part of the communication even after the
end of the conference.
References:
5(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 787
Conference ICL2009 September 23 -25, 2009 Villach, Austria
[1] Schaffert, S,; Kalz, M.: Persönliche Lernumgebungen: Grundlagen, Möglichkeiten und
Herausforderungen eines neuen Konzepts [Personal Learning Environments: Principles, options
and challenges of a new concept]. In Handbuch E-Learning, 5(5.16), 2009.
[2] Knorr-Cetina, K.: Sociality with Objects: Social Relations in Postsocial Knowledge Societies. In
Theory, Culture & Society, 14(4), pages 1-30, 1997.
[3] Reinhardt, W.; Moi, M.; Varlemann, T.: Artefact-Actor-Networks as tie between social networks
and artefact networks. Submitted for CollaborateCom 2009.
[4] Ebner, M.; Maurer, H.: Can Microblogs and Weblogs change traditional scientific writing? In
Proceedings of E-Learn 2008, pages 768-776, 2008.
[5] Ebner, M.: Introducing Live Microblogging: How Single Presentations Can Be Enhanced by the
Mass. In Journal of research in innovative teaching, 2(1), pages 108 – 119, 2009.
[6] Java, A.; Finin, T.; Song, X. and Tseng, B: Why we twitter: Understanding microblogging usage
and communities. Proceedings of the Joint 9th WEBKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop, 2007.
[7] Ahmadi, N.; Jazayeri, M.; Lelli, F.; and Nescic, S.: A survey of social software engineering. In 23rd
IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering – Workshops 2008,
pages 1–12, 2008.
[8] Templeton, M.: Microblogging Defined. Available at http://microblink.com/2008/11/11/
microblogging-defined/, last viewed on 2008-12-02, November 2008.
[9] Owyang, J.: Retweet: The Infectious Power of Word of Mouth. Available at http://www.web-
strategist.com/blog/2008/11/23/retweet-the-infectious-power-of-the-word-of-mouth/, last viewed
2008-11-24, November 2008.
[10] McGiboney, M.: Keep on Tweet’n. Available at http://www.nielsen-online.com/blog/2009/03/20/
keep-on-tweetn/, last viewed on 2009-05-24, March 2009.
[11] Stone, B.: Interview at Colbert Nation. Available at http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-
report-videos/223487/april-02-2009/biz-stone, last viewed 2009-05-24, April 2009.
[12] Barrett, T.: Twitter - A Teaching and Learning Tool, Available at http://tbarrett.edublogs.org/2008/
03/29/twitter-a-teaching-and-learning-tool, last viewed on 2009-05-22, March 2008.
[13] Ullrich, C. et al.: Why Web 2.0 is Good for Learning and for Research: Principles and Prototypes.
In Proceeding of the 17th international conference on WWW, 2008.
[14] The Twitter Experiment – Bringing Twitter to the Classroom at UT Dallas. Available at
http://kesmit3.blogspot.com/2009/04/twitter-experiment-bringing-twitter-to.html, last viewed on
2009-05-24, April 2009.
[15] Wenger, E.: Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge University
Press, 1998.
[16] Department of Defence: Community of Interest (COI). Available at http://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/ns/
ces/techguide/community_of_interest_coi.html. last viewed on 2009-05-24.
[17] Prensky, M.: Digital natives, Digital immigrants. On the Horizon, NCB University Press, 9 (5),
pages 1-6, 2001.
[18] Cross, J.: Informal Learning – Rediscovering the Pathways that inspire innovation and
performance. Pfeiffer, 2006.
[19] Holford, J.; Patulny, R. and Sturgis, P.: Indicators of Non-formal & Informal Educational
Contributions to Active Citizenship, In Proceedings of the CRELL conference Working towards
Indicators on Active Citizenship. Availbale at http://crell.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ActiveCitizenship/
Conference/05_Surrey_final.pdf, last viewed on 2009-05-24, 2005.
[20] Reinhardt, W.: Communication is the key – Support Durable Knowledge Sharing in Software
Engineering by Microblogging. In Proceedings of Conference on Software Engineering 2009,
Workshop Software Engineering within Social software Environments, 2009
[21] Nelkner, T.; Reinhardt, W.; Attwell, G.: Concept of a Tool Wrapper Infrastructure for Supporting
st
Services in a PLE. In: 1 International Workshop on Learning in Enterprise 2.0 and Beyond, 2008.
Author:
Wolfgang Reinhardt, Dipl.-Inform.
University of Paderborn, Institute of Computer Science
Fürstenallee 11, 33102 Paderborn, Germany
wolle@upb.de
6(6)
ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 788