Handout for Harnessing Social Media Session at CSWE APM 2014

Harnessing Social Media: Developing Ethical Student Engagement Guidelines for Social Work Education The focus of this think tank is to guide participants through the process of developing a targeted and personalized interaction framework to harness the power and opportunity digital spaces can afford students to think about and interact with the world.

Today we want you to‌ 1. Compare and contrast multiple current positions, attitudes, and perspectives on the appropriateness of educational engagement with students in social media venues.

2. Identify at least three components of your teaching practice, and program engagement protocols, which could be better served by explicit policy regarding the establishment of proper boundaries in social media interactions.

3. Recall at least 3 examples of existing policies you were presented with, during the session, which have addressed issues of student and faculty privacy, methods of interaction, and pedagogy focused explanations for participation in educational social media interactions.

Leaders David McLeod @mcleodda Jimmy Young @JimmySW Shane Brady @Dr_Pracademic

Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world. ~Freire

APM 2014

Some key points from the literature •

While creating spaces and opportunities for student discovery, idea generation, and societal contributions may be handled in a variety of ways in social work classes, digital spaces and social media provide instructors and students with important tools for discourse, advocacy, and praxis that have the potential to move us closer to Freire’s vision of critical adult learning (Wernet, 2002).

•

Digital technologies have increasingly crept into the social work classroom as students, administrators, practitioners, and others begin to expect some level of technological inclusion to enhance learning (Coe Regan & Freddolino, 2008; NASW, 2005; Perron, Taylor, Glass, & Margerum-Leys, 2010; Roblyer et al., 2010).

•

Social media in particular provides students with the opportunity to utilize tools for discourse, discovery, and action that in many cases, they are already familiar and comfortable with using (Jenkins, 2006).

•

Many educators struggle with incorporating technology in a manner that compliments pedagogy and increases student competencies (Parrot & Madoc-Jones, 2008; Perron et al., 2010). This struggle is further complicated by misconceptions regarding the use of technology, specifically social media, and a discussion around appropriate interactive boundaries in the classroom.

•

Utilizing a guiding theory of social constructivism as conceptualized by Rodwell (1998) and a fundamental belief that adult learners are best served by processes that engage them in problem solving and critical thinking (Adams & Horton, 1975; Cooke & MacSween, 2000; Freire, 1970; Lange, 2004), we hope to use this think tank to help social work educators think about some key considerations for such implementation within the context of their own classrooms and institutions.

2

APM 2014

3

APM 2014

Bib / References Adams, F., & Horton, M. (1975). Unearthing seeds of fire: The idea of highlander. Winston-Salem, NC: Blair.

Coe Regan, J. A., & Freddolino, P. P. (2008). Integrating technology in the social work curriculum.Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

Cooke, A., & MacSween, A. (Eds.). (2000). The rise and fall of adult education institutions and social movements. The Seventh International Conference on the History of Adult Education (pp. 1-383). New York: Oxford.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. NewYork: Continuum International.

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy, and Courage. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. Lange, E. A. (2004). Transformative and restorative learning: A vital dialectic for sustainable societies. Adult Education Quarterly, 54(2), 121-139. doi:10.1177/0741713603260276 NASW (National Association of Social Workers)/ASWB (Association of Social Work Boards). (2005). NASW & ASWB Standards for technology and social work practice. Retrieved from http://www.socialworkers.org/practice/standards/NASWTechnologyStandards.pdf.

Parrott, L., & Madoc-Jones, I. (2008). Reclaiming information and communications technology for empowering social work practice. Journal of Social Work, 8(2), 181- 197.

Perron, B. E., Taylor, H. O., Glass, J. E., & Margerum-Leys, J. (2010). Information and communication technologies in social work. Advances in Social Work, 11(1), 67-81.

Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Wiley, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.03.002 Rodwell, M. K. (1998). Social work constructivist research. New York: Garland Publishing Group.

Wernet, S. P. (2002). The role of the internet in educating social work practitioners and online advocates. In S. F. Hick, & J. G. McNutt (Eds.), Advocacy, activism, and the internet (pp. 59-71). Chicago: Lyceum.

4

Thanks for coming!

Here’s a link to a draft of our paper on this topic (currently under review) http://goo.gl/2nbBZU

Contact info: David A. McLeod, PhD, MSW University of Oklahoma Anne and Henry Zarrow School of Social Work damcleod@ou.edu | @mcleodda | 405-325-4647 Shane R. Brady, PhD, MSW University of Oklahoma Anne and Henry Zarrow School of Social Work srbrady@ou.edu | @Dr_Pracademic Jimmy A Young, PhD, MSW University of Nebraska at Kearney, School of Social Work youngja2@unk.edu | @JimmySW