After several months of personal journey towards accepting that the coronavirus pandemic is real (see Jandrić 2020a, b), in early March, it dawned on me that the pandemic does not need only so-called essential workers. Self-quarantined after returning from abroad weeks before the Croatian government locked down the country, I immediately wrote an editorial for Postdigital Science and Education and argued that 'While doctors, nurses, politicians, food suppliers, and many other brave people self-sacrifice to support our daily survival, this editorial argues that academics have a unique opportunity, and a moral duty, to immediately start conducting in-depth studies of current events.' (Jandrić 2020c: 234) I had no idea how to even approach these studies, yet I had a strong feeling that something needed to be done urgently. So, I just did what I know best and issued calls for 3 different types of Covid-19-related material to be published in Postdigital Science and Education: short testimonies, longer commentary articles, and full-length original articles. I had no idea how much material I would receive, what this material would look like, and what I would do with this material. I just had a deep gut feeling that we are witnessing a unique time in human history, a once-in-a-lifetime event, that needs to be recorded as it unfolds. For better or for worse, I decided to follow that feeling. This general vision, without a clear idea of what I was doing, paved a bumpy road for the development of this collection. On 17 March 2020, I shared the Call for Testimonies on Postdigital Science and Education social network sites and I emailed it to the journal's mailing list. Based on my previous experience with similar calls, I expected to receive 10 to 15 contributions and produce a standard-length collective article aiming at postdigital dialogue (Jandrić et al. 2019) about the pandemic. Yet my call went 'viral', at least for academic standards, and a couple of weeks later, I had more than 50,000 words written by more than 80 authors. So how do I make sense of all that material? My dear friend and Associate Editor of Postdigital Science and Education, Sarah Hayes, came to my rescue. We first tried to make sense of the contributions using critical discourse

No abstract

No abstract

Effective professional learning for teachers is fundamental for any school system aiming to make transformative and sustainable change to teacher practice. This paper investigates the efficacy of Twitter as a medium for teachers to participate in professional learning by analysing the tweets of 30 influential users of the popular medium. We find that Twitter primarily acts as a valuable conduit for accessing new and relevant educational resources on the internet and also as a viable means of social support for like-minded educators. The cost effective nature of the microblogging platform ensures that it can act as a medium for sustained professional development, while leaving the individual participants to control and take ownership of the learning. These features align with the current literature associated with the characteristics of effective professional learning.

Objectives: To assess the magnitude, interest, purpose and validity of vaccination-related information on Facebook and to determine whether information varies by site viewpoint. Methods: The 10 largest vaccination-focused Facebook â pages, groups and places in each category were identified and classified by viewpoint (i.e. anti-, pro-, neutral) and purpose. Number of members, posts per week, likes, comments and shares per post were recorded. Posts were assessed for concordance with CDC and FDA recommendations.Results: Of 30 sites, 43% (n = 13) were anti-vaccination, 7% (n = 2) neutral and 50% (n = 15) pro-vaccination. Most sites were most popular with American users. Median members were similar between anti-vaccination (2703 members, range 337-33 631 members) and pro-vaccination sites (2142 members, range 456-61 565 members, P = 0.262); however, anti-vaccination sites accumulated more posts per week by authors (median 15 vs. 3, P = 0.031) and members (median 33 vs. 1, P < 0.001). Pro-vaccination sites more commonly had commercial purpose (53% [n = 8] vs. 8% [n = 1], P = 0.02). Anti-vaccination sites more commonly gave medical advice (54% [n = 7] vs. 0%, P = 0.004). Overall, 48% (n = 22) of author posts were concordant with regulatory recommendations; concordance was more common on pro-vaccination sites (78% [n = 21] vs. 5% [n = 1], P = 0.0002). Conclusion: Vaccination-related information is prevalent on Facebook regardless of viewpoint; however, anti-vaccination information generates more interest. Anti-vaccination sites were likely to provide medical advice and disagree with regulatory bodies.Keywords: consumer health information; health information needs; information seeking behaviour; social media; social networking Key Messages• Epidemiological information suggests risk of adverse population health outcomes due to decreased vaccination rates.• Patients are likely to seek health-related information and shared health experiences online; there is moderate interest in vaccination-related information on Facebook.• Vaccination-related information on Facebook may not be consistent with recommendations from the CDC or FDA.• Health care providers should understand the health information seeking behaviour of patients along with the validity and types of vaccination information being disseminated to patients via Facebook to respond appropriately to patient concerns.