Journals / Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2019 / Issue: 32

Use Of Socıal Medıa In Communıcatıon Between Unıversıty Management And Student: Phenomenon Rectors

Üniversite Yönetimi ve Öğrenci İletişiminde Sosyal Medya Kullanımı: Fenomen Rektörler

Murat Ertan Doğan(ALANYA HAMDULLAH EMİN PAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SANAT VE TASARIM FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-6668-5952
Gaye Topa Çiftçi(ALANYA HAMDULLAH EMİN PAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SANAT VE TASARIM FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0003-2013-0956
Pages
269–297
Publication Date
2019-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the findings obtained from the research, it was concluded that the use of Twitter as a communication tool of the rectors influenced their recognition, however, it raises the brand value of the universities they are affiliated with .

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the 2000s, higher education managers who realized the advantages and importance of social media use by recognizing the paradigm shift of digital communication started to use social media as a communication channel.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In Turkey, the rectors usually prefer communication via Twitter, which is widely used in addition to its ease, as it can be used in mobile technologies, which is one of the most appropriate environments for transmitting messages from social media platforms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the findings obtained from the research, it was concluded that the use of Twitter as a communication tool of the rectors influenced their recognition, however, it raises the brand value of the universities they are affiliated with .
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dijital iletişim · Yeni medya · Sosyal Medya

Abstract

In the 2000s, higher education managers who realized the advantages and importance of social media use by recognizing the paradigm shift of digital communication started to use social media as a communication channel. In Turkey, the rectors usually prefer communication via Twitter, which is widely used in addition to its ease, as it can be used in mobile technologies, which is one of the most appropriate environments for transmitting messages from social media platforms. The use of Twitter by the Rectors to communicate and interact with internal and external stakeholders has often found its place in both national and local press, and has led to the fact that the rectors who prefer this channel become phenomena. The purpose of this research is to examine the usage features of Twitter of the rectors who communicate via social media and become phenomena. The sample of this research was chosen with the purpose of sampling method. The model of the research is the case study of qualitative research types. Data were collected by document review method and were analyzed by using descriptive analysis method. Findings were examined under the titles of tweet types, the interactiveity of communication, the content of the tweets, the language used, the extent to which they responded to the students' wishes and expectations. According to the findings obtained from the research, it was concluded that the use of Twitter as a communication tool of the rectors influenced their recognition, however, it raises the brand value of the universities they are affiliated with . In addition, it was observed that the motivation of the students who responded to their requests, problems and complaints were affected positively and the sense of corporate belonging towards the university increased.

Özet

2000’li yıllarda, dijital iletişimin ortaya çıkardığı paradigma değişikliğini fark ederek sosyal medya kullanımının avantajlarını ve önemini kavrayan yükseköğretim yöneticileri sosyal medyayı bir iletişim kanalı olarak kullanmaya başlamışlardır. Türkiye’de rektörler, genelde, sosyal medya platformlarından iletişim kurmaya en uygun ortamlardan biri olan ve mobil teknolojilerden de erişim sağlanabildiği için, kolaylığına ek olarak yaygın bir şekilde kullanılan Twitter yoluyla iletişimi tercih etmektedir. Rektörlerin iç ve dış paydaşlarla iletişim ve etkileşim kurmak için Twitter’ı kullanmaları, sık sık gerek ulusal gerekse yerel basında kendine yer bularak, bu kanalı tercih eden rektörlerin fenomen haline gelmesine neden olmuştur. Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğrencilerle sosyal medya kanalıyla iletişim kurarak fenomen haline gelen rektörlerin Twitter kullanım özelliklerini incelemektir. Araştırmanın örneklemi amaçlı örneklem yöntemi ile seçilmiştir. Araştırma nitel olarak desenlenmiş bir durum çalışmasıdır. Veriler doküman incelemesi yöntemi ile toplanarak, betimsel analiz yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Bulgular tweet türleri, iletişimin interaktifliği, tweetlerin içerikleri, kullanılan dil, öğrenci istek ve beklentilerine ne ölçüde cevap verdiği başlıkları altında incelenmiştir. Araştırmadan elde edilen bulgulara göre, rektörlerin Twitter’ı bir iletişim aracı olarak kullanmalarının tanınırlıklarına etki etmekle birlikte, bağlı bulundukları üniversitelerin marka değerini yükseltmede etkili olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca istek, sorun ve şikayetlerine cevap alabilen öğrencilerin eğitim motivasyonlarının olumlu yönde etkilendiği ve üniversiteye yönelik kurumsal aidiyet duygularının arttığı gözlemlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Doğan, M. E., Çiftçi, G. T. (2019). Use Of Socıal Medıa In Communıcatıon Between Unıversıty Management And Student: Phenomenon Rectors. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, Issue: 32, 269–297. https://doi.org/10.31123/akil.534613

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (32)

  1. Agostino, D. ve Arnaboldi, M. (2016). Social media implementation in higher education institutions between mimicry and professionalism. XXVII RSA AiIG 2016, Bergamo (Italy). https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/83102295.pdf
  2. Barhorst, J. B., McLean, G., Brooks, J., ve Wilson, A. (2019). Everyday micro-influencers and their impact on corporate brand reputation. 21st ICIG Symposium, 2019-06-04 - 2019-06-06, Durham Business School.
  3. Barnes, N. G., ve Lescault, A. M. (2013). College presidents out-blog and out-tweet corporate CEO’s. UMass Center for Marketing Research. http://www.umassd.edu/cmr/socialmediaresearch/collegepresidentsoutblog/
  4. Blumberg, H. ve Hare, P. A. (1999). Sociometry Applied to Organizational Analysis: A Review. Action Methods, 52(1): s.65-97.
  5. Breakenridge, D. (2008). PR 2.0: New Media, New Tools, New Audiences. New Jersey: FT Press.
  6. Cantoni, L. ve Tardini, L. (2008). The Problem of Communication. P. C.
  7. Doğru, Y.B. ve Doğru, S. (2015). Bir Halkla İlişkiler Aracı Olarak Twitter: Rektörlerin Twitter Kullanım Analizi. 1. Ulusal Toplumsal ve Kurumsal Çatışmalar Çözümler Kongresi, Düzce Üniversitesi.18 Ocak 2018 tarihinde http://akademikpersonel.kocaeli.edu.tr/yusuf.dogru/bildiri/yusuf.dogru13.10.2015_16.41.11bildiri.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
  8. Eysenbach, G. ve Till, J.E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. British Medical Journal, 323(2): s. 1103–1105.
  9. Finin, T., Ding L., Zhou, L. J. ve Anupam, L. (2005). Social Networking on the semantic Web. The Learning Organization, 12(5): s.418-435.
  10. Hearn, A. ve Schoenhoff, S. (2016). From celebrity to influencer: tracing the diffusion of celebrity value across the data stream. P. David Marshall ve S. Redmond, (Ed.) A companion to celebrity. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. s.194–212.
  11. Hewson, C., Vogel, C. ve Laurent, D. (2015). Internet research methods. London: Sage. https://doi. org/10.1515/9783110271355-016.
  12. Hootsuite. (2018). 2018 Yılı Sosyal Medya Kullanım İstatistikleri. Erişim adresi https://blog.hootsuite.com/twitter-demographics/. İnterpress. (2017). Rektörlerin Yerel ve Ulusal Başında Çıkan Haber Sayıları. Görüşme tarihi: 18.12.2017
  13. Jones, B.S.(2009). Examining Information Behavior Through Social Networks AnInterdisciplinary Review. Journal of Documentation, 65(4): s.582-601.
  14. Kenan, A.ve Shiri,A.(2009). Sociability and Social Interaction on Social Networking Websites. Library Review, 58(6): s.428-446.
  15. Khamis, S., Ang, L. ve Welling, R. (2017). Self-branding, ‘micro-celebrity’ and the rise of Social Media Influencers. Celebrity Studies, 8(2): s.191-208, DOI: 10.1080/19392397.2016.1218292
  16. Kimchi, J., Polivka, B., ve Stevenson, J.S. (1991). Triangulation: Operational Definitions: Nursing Research. The Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6): s.364-386.
  17. Kimmons, R., Veletsianos, G., ve Woodward, S. (2016). Innov. High Educ. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3): s. 97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9375-6
  18. Lei, L., Yuato, L., ve Luo, Y. (2019). Production and Dissemination of Corporate Information in Social Media: A review. Journal of Accounting Literature, 42(6): s.29-43.
  19. Lietsala, K., Sirkkunen, E. (2008). Social Media: Introduction to the tools and processes of participatory economy. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
  20. Manovich, L. (2001). The Language of New Media. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  21. Moreno, Jacob Levy. (1934). Who Shall Survive?. New York, USA: Beacon Press.
  22. Page, R. (2012). The linguistics of self-branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags. Discourse& Communication, 6(2): s.181–201, DOI: 10.1177/1750481312437441
  23. Palmer, S. (2013). Characterisation of the use of Twitter by Australian universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35: s.333–344.
  24. Roebuck, D. B., Siha, S. ve Bell, R. L. (2013). Faculty Usage of Social Media and Mobile Devices: Analysis of Advantages and Concerns. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 9(1): s.171-192.
  25. Rutter, R., Roper, S. ve Lettice, F. (2016). Social Media Interaction, the University Brand and Recruitment Performance. Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, 69(8): s.3096-3104.
  26. Ryan, J. A. (2010). History of The Internet and The Digital Future. London: Reaktion Books.
  27. Safko, L., ve Brake, D. K. (2009). The Social Media Bible: Tactics, Tools, and Strategies for Business Success. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
  28. Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis: A handbook. London, UK: Sage Publications.
  29. Senfit, T.M. (2008). Camgirls: celebrity and community in the age of social networks. New York: Peter Lang.
  30. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  31. Yolcu, Ö. (2013). Twitter Usage of Universities in Turkey. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), 12(2): s.360-371.
  32. Kimmons, R., Veletsianos, G., ve Woodward, S. (2016). Innov. High Educ. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3): s. 97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9375-6