Educational leadership research, Twitter and the curation of followership

Abstract

For an applied field, the role of research expertise is of considerable importance. With an increasing number of school leaders turning to social media for their professional learning–as part of a broader digital turn in knowledge generation, distribution, and consumption–the argument of this paper is that the notion of research expertise in educational leadership is shifting. Traditional modes of acquiring and sustaining research capital (e.g., publications, citations, research income) have been replaced by social presence, profile building, and the curation of followership. Building on work claiming there is a 'cult of the guru' in educational leadership, this paper draws on an appropriation of Hall's Kardashian index (K-index) for 50 researchers, an analysis of Twitter user networks using NodelXL, and relational theorizing to investigate the ways in which research expertise is being mobilized / recast by educational leadership researchers on Twitter. Establishing an empirical foundation for ongoing dialogue and debate it is argued that the recasting of research expertise to those curating followership, and potentially divorced from research performance, is of timely significance for the ongoing credibility of the field both internally and within the broader academy.

Defining and exploring pracademia: identity, community, and engagement

“…A recent concern in the field is that when research fails to address the larger questions facing practitioners, these gaps become filled with popularizers lacking academic credibility and competent research skills (Posner, 2009). The increased use of online and social media to disseminate research and information, can be seen as leading to the rise of academic celebrities and influencers considered experts due to followership (Eacott, 2017, 2020), as well as the uncritical acceptance and proliferation of popular but unevidenced educational interventions that de-professionalize education from the inside (Baker, 2021). Perhaps, then, pracademia might offer the field what Nesbit et al (2011) describe as “relevance without compromising methodological rigour and theoretical depth” (qtd in Vrentas et al , 2018, p. 95).…”

Education focused pracademics on twitter: building democratic fora

“…Yet, by and large, interactions between teachers and academics about the topic of professional development and improving teacher practice remain the exception, rather than the rule. The dominant narrative of professional learning is based around fads (Dinham, 2017), gurus (Hattie, 2017;Hattie and Hamilton, 2018;Eacott, 2017Eacott, , 2020, and commercialisation (Hogan et al, 2018;Williamson and Hogan, 2020). These three forces assert strong influences over teachers by directing the learning of the profession.…”

“…Yet, the nature of that research agenda is increasingly becoming one that is more publicly visible. Eacott (2020, p. 1) suggests that the nature of research expertise is shifting from a lens of “publish or perish” system to one of “get visible or vanish”. In other words, academics are encouraged (and often required) to cultivate an online presence and followership alongside traditional metrics of academic success.…”

“…In other words, academics are encouraged (and often required) to cultivate an online presence and followership alongside traditional metrics of academic success. Eacott goes on to state that what is most often popular on social media among “gurus” (Eacott, 2017) is not a new contribution to the field but rather is older material – the “newness” is relative to the knowledge of the audience (2020, p. 8). This means that much of the discussion on social media around education can become self-limiting, aimed at the masses in a form of megaphone or broadcast social media use, which is then retweeted or shared among many disparate users.…”

A methodological approach to the analysis of PISA microblogs: social media during the release of the PISA 2015 results

“…The profiles of the academic and OECD cluster groups included an audience comprised of a large base of followers, increasing their visibility on Twitter. More influential individuals or organisations often have larger numbers of followers, this being a heuristic for determining the credibility and legitimacy of a post (Park and Kaye 2019;Eacott, 2020). Both the OECD and academic actors had large follower numbers, with Sahlberg having the largest number of followers across the cluster groups.…”