The semester is now over and I am reflecting on my iPad course, as well as looking through some of my anonymous comments from students. I have yet to get my actual course evaluations but I did have students volunteer to complete an exit survey on their experience of learning with the iPad. I will share a few tidbits as I am hoping to get this written up and submitted for publication. I have a previous post about my initial thoughts on learning with the iPad, which you can find here. I also wrote up a post about an iPad specific assignment that I created for the course, which you can find here.
In the previous iPad blog post I shared that I was excited for my class to have the iPads for learning. I was also realistic in regards to knowing the literature and using new technology in the classroom. Some have argued that students today are more adept at using technology than their instructors. However, as Apostolos Koutropoulos points out in his Digital Natives: Ten Years After article, this is more myth than reality.
My final thoughts on the iPad in my Policy course are probably best viewed with an eye of skepticism. I am a technology geek and love using Tech in the classroom. Especially a Policy course since most social work students dread policy. I say skepticism only because the reactions to the ipad were fairly mixed. Most students indicated that the iPad was very helpful for learning because they were able to search for information in real-time. If a student had a question on a Policy that I couldn’t answer, we searched the Internet and had a discussion about what we found. Students loved the fact that they could work on their group projects remotely and at various times. Students also indicated they liked being able to access course information easily and contact me as their instructor through email or twitter. Yes I used Twitter in this class, which could be another blog post in and of itself.
On the other hand, some students indicated that the iPads were a huge distraction during class. Although many students initially were using their iPads to take notes, some indicated they often would get distracted playing games or going on Facebook. I too was frustrated with this aspect of the iPad, as I indicated in my previous post. I also noticed that students began to revert to their laptops and other technological tools towards the end of the semester. When I asked why, they indicated that it was easier to type on the Laptop and that the Laptop seemed to be more reliable. I think that because students also were given the iPad MINI that it was more difficult for them to type on the smaller screen.
My FINAL THOUGHTS on the iPad are that I really enjoyed having the iPads in the class most of the time. I think that as anyone adopts a new innovation that there will be a learning curve associated with it and that one should think critically about how to incorporate new learning tools in their classroom. This is something I have been researching, writing about, and discussing with many others for years now. The need to think about how to incorporate new tools rather than just adopting them because they seem innovative. I was lucky that I was able to get the iPads in my classroom. However, it was on such a short notice that I know I could have done a better job with assignments and class activities that utilize the iPad if I had more time to think about it.
To sum it up, would I use iPads in my Policy course again. YES!!! Am I going to use the iPads again next semester? NO!!! Fortunately or perhaps unfortunately for the Policy students… I have requested that the iPads be taken from my Policy course and be issued to the students in a new course I just developed here at UNK. The course is titled Social Media, Digital Activism, and eCitizenship. The course draws upon an interdisciplinary perspective of marketing, nonprofits, and advocacy. It also relies heavily on New Media Literacy and of course Social Media. I will try to blog about it later. At any rate, I am glad that the University is innovative and forward thinking enough to invest in new technology and allow faculty to experiment. I hope that we will continue to be able to do so but with an eye towards making the learning experience better. I know that in social work we need more exposure to technology and to keep an open mind about how technology impacts our profession, our clients lives, and education. After all, it’s not going away!
If you follow me on Twitter then you know that I have already sent out a link about this study I am conducting. However, I also wanted to share this brief blog post as it relates to my sampling strategy for this study. You may recall a post several months back about Participatory Culture and Web 2.0 for Social Work Education. This study is the next phase of my work so I hope you will join in. Here is some more information with the link below.
You are invited to participate in a survey entitled, Assessing New Media Literacies in Social Work Education. The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between media literacy and digital participation among social work educators and students. Specifically, this study will increase understanding regarding the use of information and communication technologies such as social media, while testing the validity and reliability of a newly developed assessment tool for self-reported media literacy levels.
Your participation is very important and the survey should not take more than 15 minutes of your time. You are being asked to complete an online questionnaire asking about basic demographics, digital participation, civic engagement, and new media literacies. You will be presented with a series of statements about media use, which will help determine your media literacy skills. At the completion of the survey, you will receive a score indicating your level of new media literacy.
Your participation is in this survey is completely voluntary and your consent will be assumed by your participation. You are free to decide not to participate in this study or to withdraw at any time without any adverse effects or penalties. Your decision about whether to be in the study or not is completely voluntary, and confidential. This study is not collecting any personal or identifiable information and risks to participants is minimal. The alternative to this study is simply to not participate. If you have any questions about the survey, feel free to contact the investigator at the contact information provided below.
To access the survey and find out your New Media Literacy Score, clink the link.
This post is mainly a follow up to a recent twitter chat I had with @laurelhitchcock about my iPad Policy course. Specifically she had asked about ideas for using iPads along with Wikis. If you have any suggestions, please leave a comment.
First off, I currently do not use Wiki’s in this course, although I definitely could and I see the pedagogical value in doing so. Pooling information/resources into a share space, collaboration, communication, and many other skills and benefits students could gain from this tool. I am doing something similar, that is gathering resources and information, however, I am using a different tool. I will also not be using this tool again the next time around. Here is a description of my assignment from my syllabus:
Social Bookmarking assignment: Throughout the course of the semester we will collectively gather social media resources or digital apps and advocacy/analysis resources that relate to Policy and or Programs. Utilizing the social bookmarking website Diigo, each student is responsible for finding, evaluating, and discussing two resources. Students will need to provide links to articles on advocacy strategies or links to the identified resource on the course blog by the due date. Each student will discuss the resource they found in class by the date their assignment is due as well as sharing your resource using the course hashtag #swpolicy410 on twitter.
This is where I could insert the * about using Technology for any given purpose. I really like social bookmarking and find the use of Diigo incredibly helpful….from a desktop or laptop. The mobile app is almost useless, but they do have a diigo browser app that adds in a bit more functionality for the iPad. I created a diigo group, to which each student has become a part of, and in this space we collectively bookmark information/resources/digital apps that relate to our course content and educational learning. So far it is going pretty well. Why then will I NOT use this app again?
Mostly because of the lack of functionality on the iPad. Next time around I will either use Pinterest or Spring Pad. I am more familiar with Pinterest, yes guys do use Pinterest, but I like the fact that SpringPad allows me or any user to take photos of things out in the world and share to my pads. I will be experimenting with this as a information gathering and dissemination tool in the future, but for now we are sticking with Diigo.
There are some Wiki apps available for the iPad, but unfortunately I have not really used them. I found this post by LifeHack that might help those wanting to use Wiki’s on their iPads.
The other ways I am incorporating the iPad into Policy is through the Policy Advocacy project. This is a semester long project that encourages students to identify a policy or issue and create an awareness campaign. I have been hesitant in providing too much direction regarding this assignment because I want students to be creative in what they develop and ultimately employ. I have sprinkled out some ideas as far as using digital storytelling methods and using social media, but I really want this to be organic and develop from the students perspective.
One last tool that I use in this class that makes use of the iPad directly is online quizzes using the app Socrative. I do have some issues with this app, mostly that I can’t weight my quiz questions, but for the most part it is really useful and cuts down on the amount of paper I would typically use for quizzes in class. Each week students take a quiz over the chapter we just covered. I create the quizzes on the app and when students come to class I push the quiz out to their iPads via the app. It is really fairly simple. I can see live results so I know exactly when each student is finished with the quiz. The app then generates a report which is sent via email and I can open using excel which I can than save into my grade book.
I will be back later on to detail more about my experience of using iPads in the Social Welfare Policy course. Feel free to leave a comment or suggestion. I am always open to new ideas and methods of how to make Policy more interesting and meaningful for students.
Well I am over 3 weeks into the new semester and more specifically into my Policy class, which has been selected as an iPad class this semester. I haven’t shared much about this as it was really a pretty quick process of applying, getting approval, and revamping my syllabus to address learning with iPads. I hope that as the semester continues I will come back to my blog here and share some of my initial insights. I do have plans to conduct a small evaluation of this project, so details on that will be forthcoming. For now, some initial thoughts as I am almost done with January.
When my course was selected I admit that I was over the top excited for my students. I was excited because I love integrating technology into my courses and being able to have an iPad mini for each student just seemed fantastic. I also kept reminding, and still do, myself that just because I was excited and thought about how each student will use the iPad to augment their learning and bring in relevant policy examples into our class discussions because they have access to the internet in the palm of their hand…That just because of all the potential I imaged, that it did and does not mean my students feel the same. The truth is, and the literature supports this notion, that many students are mystified and nervous about using technology in the classroom. I have asked my class and so far the sentiment of anxiety holds true. Partly for the fear of breaking or losing this free device, and partly because they recognize that they have never used a tablet for learning. I have tried to ease the anxiety by finding and sharing as many resources as possible about the iPad and how to use it. Mainly in the form of YouTube videos embedded in my Blackboard course. I think it has helped but time will tell.
I still have hope that some of the assignments I have designed to maximize the use of the iPad will yield positive learning outcomes, but again time will only tell. I am still excited for the potential that these devices have in my class but I am also quickly realizing that I have my work cut out for me. That is the idea of challenging students’ thinking regarding learning with the iPad. Yes, I do have many students Facebooking through class or checking email or whatever. I don’t plan on implementing a policy stating they have to put the iPads away and pay attention, because the fact is that many students are using their iPads to take notes. I also think that if they are that bored in my class, then I need to engage them more in the discussion directly. I have them using twitter and it is fine if they tweet during class. I have to just keep reminding them to identify the relevance to the course as they do so. This is perhaps one of my first learning moments, which I expected but did not fully recognize. This idea, again, that I need to change their perspective in regards to how to use the iPad for learning rather than just entertainment. Don’t get me wrong, entertainment is good, but I think it can also be educational. Stay tuned for future updates
This post is largely to serve as a follow up to some information I presented at the 2012 Council on Social Work Education Annual Program Meeting. If you stopped by my poster and are now stopping by my blog to get more information about this topic, THANK YOU. Here you will find more information in regards to what Participatory culture is and how the New Media Literacies are critical skills that people should be aware of in their pursuit of social media. I encourage you to watch the videos, follow the links, and seek out more information on this topic as I believe it holds extreme potential to impact social work practice. For those of you who have stumbled upon this blog via some other way, thanks for stopping by, and below is a brief introduction to what I presented at the Conference.
The Abstract:
Social media has transformed the way society is connected and interacts. Government, businesses, and nonprofits are adopting the use of social media by large numbers (Barnes & Matteson, 2009; Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). However, much of social media in social work centers on the tools and technology of what may or may not be possible. The interaction these tools allow is important but the interactivity is merely a property of the technology. Participation is a property of culture (Jenkins et al., 2009), and is preferred. As one actively participates, one is able to learn new skills and expand critical thinking (Jenkins et al., 2009). A focus on expanding access to new technologies is important, but it only carries us so far if we do not also foster the skills and cultural knowledge necessary to deploy these tools toward more positive ends (Jenkins et al., 2009). Social media can be used to impact social work education by exploring the concept of participatory culture and how new media literacies (Jenkins et al., 2009) can be adopted into the social work curriculum. Results on what nonprofit human service organizations are currently using and doing with social media provide the foundation for why new media literacy should be part of social work education.
Overview of the Literature:
The nonprofit sector has outpaced the public and private sectors in the adoption of social media (Barnes & Matteson, 2009; Barnes, 2011; LaCasse, Quinn, & Bernard, 2010; Young, 2012). Social media is used to demonstrate accountability, engage the community, advocacy, promote the organization and services, as well as for marketing and fundraising. To date, nonprofits have had relatively little success using the internet and many have made recommendations on how to use the internet and social media more successfully (McNutt & Menon, 2008; Sargeant, Saxton & Guo, 2011; Waters, 2007). One study with a large and broad sample indicated 11% of nonprofits identified no goals for using social media (NTEN, 2012). Another study (Young, 2012), highlighted that 62% of human service organizations identified no goals for using social media.
This is really a scant overview of the literature and there is much more to be reviewed. However, you can also read more about my own research, which I have posted here and a follow up here, or you can simply read my dissertation by visiting Virginia Commonwealth University here.
The issue I am trying to discuss with social media and social work is the idea of Participatory Culture and more specifically the New Media Literacies as identified by Henry Jenkins, Ph.D. You can find Dr. Jenkins on Twitter here or view his blog at Confessions of an Aca-Fan.
What is Participatory Culture? Essentially Jenkins defines Participatory Culture as a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, where strong support exists for sharing one’s creations, there is some type of informal mentorship taking place where knowledge is being passed along from experienced to novices. A Participatory Culture is also one in which members believe their contributions matter, and feel some degree of social connection with one another. Participatory Culture is a culture that shifts the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to community involvement.
I am a visual learner and I value Rich Media Content. You can view the video below to see Dr. Jenkins explain in a much more effective way, what Participatory culture is and how it relates to civic engagement.
Although that video focuses more on civic engagement than new media literacies, I think you begin to get more of an understanding about what Participatory Culture is all about. The next video then outlines the New Media Literacies as identified by Henry Jenkins in is white paper Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. A copy of this paper is available for download here.
The New Media Literacies (for those who choose not to watch the video) include:
Play- the capacity to experiment with one’s surroundings as a form of problem solving
Performance- the ability to adopt alternative identities for the purpose of improvisation and discovery
Simulation- the ability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real-world processes
Appropriation- the ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content
Multitasking- the ability to scan one’s environment and shift focus as needed to salient details
DistributedCognition- the ability to interact meaningfully with tools that expand mental capacities
CollectiveIntelligence- the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others toward a common goal
Judgement- the ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information sources
TransmediaNavigation- the ability to follow the flow of stories and information across multiple modalities
Networking- the ability to search for, synthesize, and disseminate information
Negotiation- the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms
Visualization- the ability to translate information into visual models and understand the information visual models are communicating as a key method for coping with large data sets and being able to make sense of the complexity of our environment
Again, this framework comes right out of the white paper, which can be accessed via the link in the previous paragraph. You can also access the Project New Media Literacies blog for more information.
The New Media Literacies help us as social workers to further understand the place of social media in our lives. I would also agree with Dr. Jenkins when he explains that it would be better for us to take an ecological perspective regarding this new digital environment. The ecological perspective resonates with us as social workers because it is part of the foundation of our profession. However, I would step back a minute and try to understand this through the lens of Media Ecology, which I briefly touched on in my dissertation research. Neil Postman (1970) explained that media ecology looks into the substance of how media affect human perception, understanding, value, interaction, and whether media facilitates or impedes chances for survival. “The word ecology implies the study of environments: their structure, content, and impact on people” (Postman, 1970, p. 161).
Of course this sounds familiar to us as social workers because we understand how the environment influences our clients, community, and world. I believe that as take hold of these new digital technologies (specifically social media) that we can use the New Media Literacies as a framework to increase the knowledge of our students and educators. Ultimately, I would view this process as something that happens through collaboration between student and teacher. I think the teacher would essentially act as a guide, while recognizing that students bring valuable experience and knowledge to the process. In fact, this is a process through which I am developing a course for and hope to have going live next fall. Should you know of any social work educators using social media in this way, please leave a comment on this post. I would love to talk with them about their experience.
The question remains, what will this look like in social work education? THE ANSWER: I don’t know! I have an idea, but to be honest my idea could totally flop. I think that it is part of what makes this process exciting, the idea of learning from mistakes is incredibly important. However, I do have an example of how the New Media Literacies and Participatory Culture apply to social work education. Essentially my plan is to take a somewhat experiential approach to learning and use the framework to help orient assignments that contribute to the foundation of social work knowledge. These assignments can take on many forms so I will start with an easy example: Advocacy and Awareness. About two months ago, the National Association of Social Workers sent a tweet that contained a link to a document showcasing the 2012 Presidential Candidates position’s on several important areas. You can download a copy of the PACE chart here.
I have to say I was excited that someone had taken the time to put together information from the Candidates on key issues so that I could be a more informed voter. I followed the link and downloaded the chart only to discover several pages of text. Go ahead, download it and see what I am talking about. Knowing what I know about the Internet, I figured people would not be as interested in reading this lengthy, albeit important, document. I wondered why they couldn’t put in a format that was easier to understand, like an infographic. After waiting for a couple of weeks I decided to take the candidate position chart and create an infographic to visually display the information in a more dynamic way.
As you can see, I utilized the skills identified under the New Media Literacies framework to help me design and create this new chart. Unfortunately, I have yet to tweet it out because I have been to busy to finish it. The fact is I do not have extensive knowledge in Photoshop or even in design. I simply used the Internet to get some ideas (networking), experimented (play) with some software on my computer, and translated (visualization) the document into a graphic that captures the eye and draws interest. The next steps, upon finishing, would be to share my creation with others via Twitter, Facebook, or any other social network. Participatory culture, namely a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, support for creating and sharing creations, and the belief that this contribution matters motivated me to engage in this effort. The informal mentorship took place when I watched YouTube videos on how to use a software program to organize and create my Infographic. This is precisely the type of activities that students can easily engage in using digital technologies and more specifically social media. In fact, many students and other individuals already do this.
I understand there are still challenges to engaging in the new digital environment and I’m sure that many will comment on this post highlighting the dark abyss of the Internet and social media that accompanies such unscrupulous activities like cyber-bullying or the anything else that perpetuates negativity. I do not wish to minimize those challenges at all but I do think that if we begin to educate our students about New Media Literacies that we will see positive outcomes. I also believe that as we begin to educate the next generation of social workers who have grown up using social media, we will help them to understand how to use these tools in a way that promotes social justice. Furthermore, just because students have grown up using social media does not necessarily imply they understand how to use it for learning, positive social change, or social work practice. Anecdotally, I have talked with numerous individuals in the human services sector that tell me they need social workers who have a diverse skill set including how to use social media within their organization. We as social workers are ethically obligated to be aware of the changing trends of social practice and to continually learn new ways of helping our clients. We should not shy away from social media, in fact we should embrace it; but only if we can do so using a framework that increases our understanding of how these new skills can help positively impact our practice.
Research is beginning to develop frameworks on how to best use social media, and the normative literature has numerous books and blogs devoted to the subject. The response to social media has been positive and negative. However, social media is not going away as it presents another communication channel to connect with many others. Human service organizations are also beginning to adopt social media and social work educators need to understand how to prepare social work students with the necessary skills for effective social media practice. The key premise is that using social media in the classroom or in the field should not be so focused on what tools to use or what those tools allow, although this is important. Educators need to understand the participatory nature of social media and how new media literacies can compliment social work practice.
But beyond this, my hope is that people will begin to understand the importance of social media, which many have. However, I really think we need to focus more on the critical learning that these tools allow and help our students to use these tools to engage, promote learning, and promote positive social change. But if you still only want to share photos of your last vacation with friends and family, that’s okay too.
If you really want to get an idea of why I think social media can impact social work practice, perhaps I should share with you several of my favorite Ted Talks that have influenced my view of the Internet and what is possible with social media. I created a blog post about this awhile back, which you can access here. I should also include the work of the “Great Explainer” himself, Dr. Mike Wesch, and his Anthropological Introduction to YouTube.
Dr. Wesch also talks about Media Literacy here, but by now I am thinking you have plenty with which to explore
References:
Barnes, N.G., & Mattson, E. (2009). US Charities’ Adoption of Social Media Outpaces All Other
Hackler, D. & Saxton, G. (2007). The Strategic use of information technology by nonprofit organizations: increasing capacity and untapped potential. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 474-484.
Kang, S., & Norton, H. (2004). Nonprofit organizations’ use of the world wide web: Are they sufficiently fulfilling organizational goals? Public Relations Review, 30(3), 279-284.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53, 59-68.
Kietzman, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54, 241-251. doi: :10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.00
Mansfield, H. (2011). Social media for social good: A how to guide for nonprofits. United States: McGraw-Hill.
McNutt, J.G., & Menon, G. M. (2008). The rise of cyberactivism: Implications for the future of advocacy in the human services. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 89(1), 33-38. doi: 10.1606/1044-3894.3706
Postman, N. (1970). The Reformed English Curriculum. In A. C. Eurich’s (Ed.), High School 1980; the shape of the future in American secondary education (pp. 160-168). New York, Pitman Publishing Corp.
Sargeant, A., West, D.C., & Jay, E. (2007). The relational determinants of nonprofit web site fundraising effectiveness: An exploratory study. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 18(2), 141-156.
Saxton, G. D., & Guo, C. (2011). Accountability Online: Understanding the Web-Based Accountability Practices of Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 270-295.doi: 10.1177/0899764009341086
Saxton, G. D., & Guo, C., & Brown, W. A. (2007). New dimensions of nonprofit responsiveness:The application and promise of Internet-based technologies. Public Performance & Management Review, 31(2), 144-173. doi 10.2753/PMR1530–9576310201
Waters, R.D. (2007). Nonprofit organizations’ use of the internet: A content analysis of communication trends on the internet sites of the philanthropy 400. NonprofitManagement & Leadership, 18(1), 59-76.
Young, J. (2012). The Current Status of Social Media use among Nonprofit Human Service Organizations: An Exploratory Study. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from https://digarchive.library.vcu.edu/handle/10156/3775
Okay, well it has been a very long and exciting summer and things are settling down a little bit with my new job so I figured I better come back to finish the write up on my dissertation. Previously I provided the results of the study examining the current status of social media use among nonprofit human service organizations, which you can find here. Now at the request of a fellow @VCUsocialwork PhD alum (@Jon_Singletary) and his current community organizations class, I have decided to include the implications of my study along with a bit of a discussion. I am going to try and stick to what I wrote in my dissertation since I have since become a little burnt out on the topic, which I hear is understandable. In all actuality, I am still pretty excited about this topic
The following is from the last chapter of my dissertation and since I own the copyright I figure I can post it here without any repercussions.
The current status of social media use among nonprofit human service organizations is that HSO’s initially adopted social media to engage with the community. Although many HSO’s continue to do this, promoting the HSO’s programs and services has also become a top priority. This is primarily done using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to share organizational newsletters, photos from projects, links to the HSO, and other information with their online community at least twice a day. Human service organizations have been using social media for more than five years and most plan to continue using social media in the future. Although HSO’s reported using social media less than ten hours a week, they were generally satisfied with the outcomes but admitted more assistance is needed.
Although the current status of social media use among HSO’s appears promising, many aspects of using this new medium require more attention. The evidence in this study may not confirm whether the digital divide of social media among HSO’s is decreasing or increasing; however, the study does suggest that HSO’s could benefit from additional assistance. McNutt & Menon (2008) argue the digital divide is particularly problematic where “situations of e-government activity has increased technological hurdles for participating in rule making and lobbying the legislature” as organizations may be left behind (p. 37). Expanding knowledge and technological capacity may be the first steps to closing the gap.
The digital divide is an important implication to consider when thinking about the participatory culture of social media. Henry Jenkins (2006) explains that focusing on expanding access to new technologies only takes one so far if there is not also a contemporaneous fostering of the skills and cultural knowledge necessary to deploy these tools towards certain ends. Access is important, but the development of a new skill set and knowledge is equally significant. This development stems from interaction via individuals using social media to work with a networked mindset, acting on the principles of openness, transparency, decentralized decision-making, and distributed action (Scearce, Kasper, & Grant, 2009). This is the social media ecology concept discussed in chapter one, which involves the platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, but also involves the user-generated activity of participatory culture to share information, connect with others for peer-to-peer learning opportunities, and a more empowered conception of citizenship. Closing the digital divide will be a multifaceted effort, but the use of social media and the participatory culture that it engenders will undoubtedly help to shrink the gap.
A second implication of this study is the need to think strategically about how to use social media. Many social media experts (Kanter & Fine, 2009; and Mansfield, 2011) assert the variety of benefits of using social media in the nonprofit sector. However, little empirical evidence exists that examines human service organizations directly. This study represents one of the first attempts to fill this gap in the literature and provide a foundation for future inquiry. Increased understanding of the current status of social media use among HSO’s will aid in assisting organizations with defining goals and thinking strategically about fundraising, promoting the organization, increasing transparency and accountability, as well as how to engage the community and support the organization in a way that is mutually beneficial.
The evidence from this study indicates a strategic social media plan should begin with a discussion around how to use social media and who should be involved. This means identifying who or how many individuals are responsible for the social media activities of the HSO and determining the best way to balance promoting the organization with community engagement so as to foster trust and maintain a genuine connection with the community. Respondents within this study seem to understand that social media users do not simply want advertisements, but rather real interaction with the organization. This can be done through transparency and accountability in addition to thinking creatively about community engagement. Finally, a discussion about how or whether to engage in fundraising via social media should also accompany a strategic social media plan so that precious resources are not wasted on efforts that result in diminutive dividends. Online fundraising is becoming increasingly fruitful and important (Ingenhoff & Koelling, 2009; and Rosenburg, Rooney, Steuerle, & Toran, 2011) ), but respondents in this study seem to understand that cultivating a genuine relationship with their online community will have greater dividends for the HSO in the long term.
The current status of social media use among HSO’s validates how technology is changing the way people interact. This has a profound impact on HSO’s as well as social work practice. McNutt & Menon (2008) argued, “social work advocates cannot ignore the promise that cyberspace and technology offers” (p. 38). This study demonstrates that social media cannot be ignored and that it encompasses more than just advocacy. One of the main tenets in social work is about creating connections and empowering vulnerable and oppressed populations. Social media offers these opportunities for those who care about social justice issues to empower others, share meaningful stories, raise awareness about particular issues, and to connect with others in more powerful ways. This connection is not meant to supplant the traditional face-to- face interaction, rather it is meant to support and enhance it. This is happening right now with the flow of content across multiple media platforms, which encourages people to seek out connections, new information, and to move towards a participatory culture. This is the cultural shift of convergence described by Henry Jenkins (2006). This study illustrates the profound motivation for adopting social media as respondents recognize the incredible potential for connecting with individuals and increasing community engagement for the greater good.
The power of social media and participatory culture resides within the people who are passionate enough to mobilize and respond to an issue. The ideological underpinnings of social media combined with the social purpose of HSO’s explain why this combination is a natural fit. The social media ecology and participatory culture described in chapter one encourage sharing, learning, openness, and impact individuals in deep and meaningful ways through the creation of trust and empowerment. Human service organizations also work to create trust and empower those whom they serve. Obviously this can only be done when the tools are used in an appropriate manner. However, this is one of the greatest and most exciting aspects of this new medium.
This study provides a foundation to explore best practices and offer suggestions for future research. The fact that a number of human service organizations are using social media and believe it to be valuable is an indication that this area of inquiry is important to social work practice, administration, and advocacy. The path of social media in social work holds incredible potential and should not be diminished or simply relegated to other professions. Others use this new medium and social work cannot afford to be left behind. The ecology of social media represents a new paradigm of building community, empowering others, developing a new skill set, and connecting for the greater good.
Wow, I actually haven’t read that since I defended my dissertation last spring and it is actually pretty good. In the months sense I have started to delve into more of Henry Jenkins work around participatory culture and I am currently reading Howard Rheingold‘s new book Net Smart. I’m interested in understanding more about how social media can help nonprofit organizations, but I am equally interested in helping social workers understand how social media, the tools and the practices, can help with macro-level social work. Inherent in this should be a basic understand not only of the technology, but what it means to participate in the digital environment. You can check out Jenkins and Rheingold for more information around that, but that is essentially where I would like to go next.
I am also interested in knowing if or how many schools of social work currently incorporate social media into their macro practice courses. I know I am and that Jon is at Baylor U., but what else is being done? (Jon if you are interested in partnering on this topic just let me know lol). I see major implications, mostly positive but also some negative, for integrating social media into this realm of social work practice. I have some ideas on where to start, which I will be sharing at CSWE in November so if you will be there please stop by. Okay, I generally try to keep things short and I have gone on with this post. As always, please contact me if you have any questions or leave a comment on this post. You can always contact me via twitter @JimmySW. Thanks.
If you haven’t yet seen or joined socialworkhelper.com, you should head over there as soon as you finish reading this post. This website was built by a social worker for social workers and contains many valuable resources on a myriad of topics relating to social work. Deona has done a great job in creating this resource and integrating social media apps and other tech innovations such as instant messaging and video chats.
A fair amount of social workers are already using the site and posting some great information and more importantly, connecting for the greater good. Once you have created an account, you can begin posting information and or consuming what has already been posted on the site. There are areas for clinicians, students, macro social workers, and even unconventional social workers…But aren’t we pretty much all unconventional
I truly believe that this site is one of the first comprehensive online communities for social workers. It is free to sign up, so head on over and take a look around at socialworkhelper.com.
I have finally gotten to the point where I have enough time to post an update about the social media survey I conducted for my dissertation. If you have access to the Virginia Commonwealth University Library, then you can always go and access the completed dissertation there. Here on my blog, I am taking a bit of a different approach disseminating the results because I think they will be more useful to the #RVA nonprofit community. What follows is essentially the chapter four of my dissertation, and I will write more about the implications of the findings in another post. Before I get on with the results, let me provide a brief synopsis of this project.
The aim of the study is to understand the current status of social media use among nonprofit human service organizations by exploring and describing the social media platforms in use, associated practices with social media, the frequency of use, general satisfaction, and plans for the future use of social media. A cross-sectional research design was selected and a survey instrument was created for the study. Data were collected from 125 nonprofit human service organizations in the Richmond, VA metropolitan area that were identified from a sampling frame of nonprofit organizations. The sample size (125) was identified after pre-screening and cleaning the data. Initially, over 160 respondents participated in the survey, although many did not fully complete the survey, left a number of responses blank, or simply started and never finished.
This study represents one of the first of its kind to focus solely on nonprofit human service organizations or HSO’s. The study utilized a cross-sectional survey design to describe and explore social media use among these unique organizations. The study was guided by five general questions, which also formed the basis for the conceptual model (which I will detail in another post). The five questions included:
What are the reasons HSO’s are using social media?
What are they doing/using?
How often do they use social media?
What are the expected outcomes?
What are the plans for the future?
The data for this study were collected using the email listserves of ConnectRichmond.org and the Southside Community Partners. The electronic survey was also posted to their Facebook pages and on Twitter using #RVA and #ConnectRVA to increase the visibility of the study. Individual emails were also sent out to 120 participants identified from several lists of nonprofit human service organizations over a 3-phase period. Once again, the theoretical basis for the study will be discussed in another post, but for now onto the results of the stud.
First, a quick description of the respondents participating in this study.
Nonprofit human service organizations were the target sample and the primary position of the respondent from those organization included Founders, Executive Directors, Assistant Directors, Program Directors, Marketing/Development Directors, Communications Directors, and others. Other was the largest category selected; however, a number of respondents specified Development or Program Director after selecting Other. The breakdown of primary position within the organization and the number of years of service is shown in the table below.
The Primary, secondary, and tertiary mission focus of the organizations were identified by the respondents to include: Education(1), Mental Health/Crisis Intervention/Health (2), and Youth Programs (3). Technically the last two were tied, and again the category Other was selected most frequently; however, respondents neglected to specify any mission focus. The bar graph below further demonstrates other mission foci.
The average annual budget was over 2 million dollars with the range being $2,500 to $42,000,000. Despite the broad range, over half of the HSO’s clustered in the range between $0 and $700,000 (55.3%, N=68).
Moving into some of the technology related questions, the majority of respondents reported having a website that contains links to their social media profiles (82.4%). Over 16% (N=21) reported having no such links on their websites.
A majority of respondents indicated their organization has no dedicated social media staff position (81%, N=101), and the remaining HSO’s that do have such a position have a variety of titles for that position (as demonstrated below).
Next respondents identified the social media platforms in use. Unsurprisingly, the most popular social media platforms include Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn. The table below indicates the most frequently used platforms as well as the year the specific platform was created. Respondents identified other social media platforms such as Pinterest, Tumblr, and Ning.
The trend of social media adoption in HSO’s was also explored with the majority of organizations reporting social media adoption around the year 2008. The graph below demonstrates the various platforms and the adoption trend. It should be noted that although the graph appears to indicate a drop off in the year 2012, it is not actually what is happening. The survey was administered in February, and I suspect that if the question were asked again in December, the trend line would continue to increase or level off near the top.
The next thing examined was organizational policies regarding social media. Social media policies included whether policies existed and when they were implemented. Almost 85% (N=106) of respondents reported no policy existed prohibiting the staff use of social media. When asked if there was a policy with guidelines allowing staff to participate in social media, 56.8% (N=71) reported no. Additionally, 64% (N=80) reported there was no policy encouraging the use of social media, 80% (N=100) reported that social media websites were blocked from access on their work computers, and 65.6% (N=82) reported no policy encouraging social media access through the use of an HSO’s computers. Additionally, HSO’s had a policy on how to handle comments posted to the HSO’s blog, Facebook page, or other social media platforms with 54.4% (N=68) reporting no and 45.6% (N=57) reported yes. The graph below illustrates the trend for social media policy adoption.
Social media allows individuals to share a variety of information and resources through links to rich content. Content involves videos, images, articles of text, or audio such as blogs and podcasts. The content an HSO shares with followers varied with 88% of respondents identifying the top three as newsletters/information, links to our organization, and photos (N=110). Nearly 74% of respondents identified sharing links to specific information (N=92), and 64.8% reported sharing links to other organizations (N=81). A total of 14 respondents identified “Other” content that their HSO shares. The text responses included: Pins on Pinterest and Tumblr, training information, legislative information, fundraisers, press coverage, program information, class schedules, studio recordings of youth projects, and general announcements of events (N=5). The remaining categories and their frequencies are reported below.
The survey also examined social media goals of HSO’s. Of the 125 respondents, 62.4% (N=78) stated no and 37.6% (N=47) replied yes. The respondents who replied yes were then asked to answer a sub question defining those goals. Of those who responded, 36% (N=45) reported the top goal for using social media was to “engage the community” followed closely by “promoting the organization or services” (34.4%, N=43). Respondents were allowed to select any of the six options that applied to their organization. The table below shows the goals respondents could select from along with their frequencies and percentages.
Moving into some more specific Territory, I was interested in understanding the reasons for using social media and what or who initially prompted the organization to use social media.
Seven options were available for respondents to identify the reason(s) why their HSO uses social media. Respondents were asked to select all the applicable reasons for adopting and using social media. The number one reason for using social media was to promote/advertise services or events (96%, N=120) followed by engaging with the community (92%, N=115). The least identified reason for using social media was to demonstrate transparency/accountability (48.8%, N=61). The graph below illustrates the total number of respondents selecting the particular reason(s) why the HSO uses social media.
The initial prompt for using social media question asked respondents to identify any and all of the 9 categories that prompted their HSO to begin using social media. Respondents selected enhancing relations with existing audiences as the top choice (72.8%, N=91) followed by rounding out their communications mix as number two (64.8%, N=81). The least identified prompt was to replace another communications channel used previously (11.2%, N=14). The graph below further illustrates the total number of respondents identifying what prompted the HSO to begin to use social media.
Respondents were asked to identify the number of updates posted to social media profiles in a given day. An update meant Facebook status updates, tweets, blog postings, or content that was generally shared via social media. Ninety-three respondents selected the range of 0-2 for the number of social media updates posted in a given day accounting for 74.4%. The second range of 3-5 accounted for 21.6% (N=27) of the respondents and 3.2% (N=4) selected the range 6-8. There was only one HSO that reported posting more than nine updates in a given day.
The time dimension asked for the number of staff hours distributed across the organization that are devoted to social media in a week. This was meant to include tweeting, updating, blogging, and the general posting or sharing of content. The average number of hours was 5.78 (S.D. 7.57) and the range of hours included 1 to 40. Only 19% (N=24) of respondents devoted 10 hours or more to social media in a given week.
The last few questions of the survey asked respondents to think about the acts involved in social media, such as commenting, sharing, or posting information, as well as the social media platform used by classifying the number of platforms into general categories. These categories included Social Networking sites, Video-Sharing sites, Image-Sharing sites, Blogs, and Location-Based social media sites. These questions used a Likert-scale to asses the general satisfaction or outcomes associated with using social media.
First, the survey asked whether experimenting with social network sites has enhanced the relationship between the agency/organization and stakeholders, constituents, board members, or the general community. Respondents were progressively less sure about the remaining categories as 37.6% (N=47) reported not knowing if video-sharing sites, image- sharing sites (40.8%, N=51), blogs (43.2%, N=54), and location-based social media sites (52.8%, N=66) enhance the organizations’ relationship with stakeholders, board members, or the community. The complete list to this question is included in the table below.
Next, the survey asked whether social media offers the opportunity to interact with others. The majority of (89.6%, N=112) affirmed that social networking sites do offer the opportunity to interact with a variety of people and organizations (41.6%, N=52 Strongly Agree and 48%, N=60 Agree). Responses were generally more agreeable towards the type of social media when asked about interaction (see the table below). However, respondents remained uncertain about location-based social media and whether it offers opportunity for interaction (46.4%, N=58). It may be possible that respondents are unsure what location-based social media are, accounting for the large percentage of “Don’t Know” responses.
One of the main questions of the study sought to understand whether social media helps the HSO. This question used a Likert-scale similar to the above questions but with different categories. The categories are displayed in the table below along with their frequencies and percentages. Results are generally positive with most respondents strongly agreeing or agreeing that social media helps the HSO raise money (47%, N=59), increase donors (39.2%, N=49), increase membership (36%, N=45), increase new clients (42.4%, N=53), increase community awareness of programs and services (92.8%, N=116), increase trust and connections with the community (67.2%, N=84), share information (96%, N=120), collaborate with others (66.4%, N=83), and recruit volunteers (56%, N=70). The final category “Be more successful” was excluded as this category is also included in question 22. However, on this question 62.4% (N=78) of respondents generally agreed that using social media helped the HSO.
Another important question looking at general satisfaction with their HSO’s use of social media indicated positive attitudes towards HSO’s use of social media. Twenty percent (N=22) strongly agree and 52% (N=65) agree that social media has been useful in achieving the mission of the organization. In addition, 19.2% (N=24) strongly agree and 58.4% (N=73) agree that information obtained from social media sites is useful to their HSO. Social media was evaluated as being important to the HSO with 20.8% (N=26) strongly agreeing and 56% (N=70) agreeing. Only 12% (N=15) strongly agree and 35.2% (N=44) agree that social media helps the HSO to empower their clientele, while 27.2% (N=34) neither agreed or disagreed.
In regards to the amount of time, 25.6% (N=32) strongly agree and 46.4% (N=58) agree that the HSO should devote more time to social media than they currently do. No respondents disagreed with increasing their social media use in the future, which indicates they are likely going to increase use in the future, and 26.4% (N=33) strongly agree and 56% (N=70) agree that they plan to do so. Just over 31% (N=39) of respondents agreed that social media has been difficult to use effectively. However, 23.2% (N=29) disagreed with that statement and 20% (N=25) neither agreed nor disagreed. Finally, when asked whether HSO’s are using social media only because the community believes they should, 45.6% (N=57) disagreed and 18.4% (N=23) strongly disagreed with the statement.
The last area this study examined was the resources and capacity to engage in using social media. The survey used a question that was adapted from the Marguerite Casey Foundation Organizational Capacity Assessment Tool, which was originally developed as a self- assessment measure of organizational capacity (Guthrie et al., 2004). This tool was adapted for this study using a Likert-scale to measure an HSO’s resources and capacities to engage in the use of social media across ten different categories.
The self-assessment generally scored well in the moderate to high range in all but three of the categories. Respondents indicated low (32.8%, N=41) to moderate (35.2%, N=44) support from board members, low (30.4%, N=38) to moderate (38.4%, N=48) access to outside assistance for social media pursuits from either individuals or their social networks, and low (23.2%, N=29) to moderate (48.8, N=61) knowledge of how to use social media to meet strategic goals. The existence of a website and broadband Internet were assessed the highest at 69.6% (N=87) and 68.8% (N=86) respectively. The existence of electronic hardware such as a computer, smart phone, or tablet was also rated high at 56.8% (N=71). Approximately 54% (N=67) of respondents identified high capacity for social media use because the HSO has a written mission statement with clear expression or reason for existence, values and purpose, followed closely by 24% (N=30) who rated this criterion as moderate. Knowledge of how to use various social media platforms was rated moderate at 42.4% (N=53) and high at 40.8% (N=51). Support from the community was rated by 42.4% (N=53) as moderate, and no HSO rated none on this specific criterion. Generally, HSO’s responded with moderate (48%, N=60) to high (20.8%, N=26) capacity and resources to dedicate to the future use of social media.
Okay, so this was a lot of information and I am incredibly grateful to the RVA nonprofits that participated in the study. I will follow up with this post writing about the implications of this findings and some other ideas/concerns I have regarding social media use among nonprofit human service organizations. However, in a couple of sentences here is what all this actually means…
The data suggests that HSO’s use social media to promote their organization and or services and programs, and to engage with the community to enhance relationships. Additionally, the evidence suggests that HSO’s are generally satisfied with using social media.
The next post will have a bit more of a discussion to it, as this entry really was the meat and potatoes of the study. Thanks for stopping by to read and I hope this information helps you and your organization in some way. If you have any questions or want to know more, feel free to leave a comment or you can contact me via Twitter @JimmySW.
There has been a lot of talk it seems lately surrounding academic research and the need to get out of the silo and share/collaborate with others about research. I agree with much of the sentiment but I wonder if this culture will ever change. To be honest, as one embarking on an academic career, the publication cycle worries me!!! My research interests center on technology and the notion that technology today changes faster than my 2 year old changes her mind, means that by the time my research makes it to the masses it could already be outdated.
For example, I conducted a small project over a year ago and submitted it for publication. I have yet to hear back on whether it is being considered or if it has even been sent out for peer review. The typical turn around time for journals is 6 months or more. I had a book review that took nearly a year to get published. I mainly agree with the sentiment surrounding the need to share research because I see a lot of benefit in it. However, the culture of publish or perish needs to change in order for academics to initiate the collaboration. Moving ahead in my career, I already plan to share my research via my blog and other social media platforms. I will also continue to write (and hopefully publish) in order to fulfill the academic requirement. There will just have to be some small differences in content to get around the issue of copyright….WHICH is a whole other issue that really upsets me when it comes to publishing. I will save that rant for another time
Well I guess that something had to ignite the fire enough within me to finally come back and write a blog post again in the midst of dissertating. I’m nearly done with the dissertation and plan to post many results here on my blog. This is also the reason for this post, or the fact that NTEN/ Blackbaud/ Common Knowledge just released their 2012 Nonprofit Social Networking Benchmark Report. There is a wonderful Infographic, which sums up the report nicely and the link will also help you download the full report.
I have to say that the information is great. I am so glad that this data is being compiled and I have built a survey instrument using similar questions to these folks for my dissertation. I also compiled my data during the same time period, but with a much smaller sample that was focused on Nonprofit Human Service Organizations. I focus on these unique organizations because of their important roles in society and NO research has looked at how they use social media.
The Benchmark report and my dissertation have many things in common. This makes me smile because it indicates that my findings are generalizable. However, I do have some problems with the recent Report. The main problem is around their methodology. I understand they only solicited and primarily reported descriptive data, but they do not explain this in the report. They have a small section on their methods but nothing beyond that. This is critically important because of how the data is being used in practice. For all we know, the methods they used could be based upon incorrect statistical principles which would nullify all of the findings. I don’t think this has happened, but in a sector which promotes transparency I would think they would have no problem in divulging their methodology.
This is also important considering the new statistic they are reporting around the cost of a follower on Twitter and a Like on Facebook. They indicate that these numbers are based upon self-report and that respondents have different ways of calculating this cost. I would be extremely cautious when looking at this statistic and thinking about basing some budget decisions around this because there is no clear indication of how the number was developed. It is a good statistic, just not one I am very confident in.
I am defending my dissertation in a little over a week and will likely begin to disseminate my own findings after that date. This is mostly to help the community where I collected my data, but it will also help many other nonprofit human service organizations think about their own social media strategies, planning, and implementation.
The semester is now over and I am reflecting on my iPad course, as well as looking through some of my anonymous comments from students. I have yet to get my actual course evaluations but I did have students volunteer to complete an exit survey on their experience of learning with the iPad. I will share a few tidbits as I am hoping to get this written up and submitted for publication. I have a previous post about my initial thoughts on learning with the iPad, which you can find here. I also wrote up a post about an iPad specific assignment that I created for the course, which you can find here.
This post is mainly a follow up to a recent twitter chat I had with 
