I created the following Sway presentation for both the Teaching & Technology Center as a Teaching & Technology Faculty Advisor and Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC), a “faculty development program that holds workshops, hosts guest speakers, runs retreats, awards grants, provides faculty time and space for their own scholarly writing, and supports faculty in their endeavors to improve student writing” at Bridgewater State University. The presentation contains a broad overview of digital tools for engaging writing assignments presented during a series of workshops. It includes many resources and videos with more information that could not be covered adequately during the workshops.
Here is the Sway presentation I created for the SEQuEL2017 conference sponsored by Quantity Across the Curriculum (QuAC) at Bridgewater State University. I am serving on QuAC this year and learned so much at today’s event! For more information about QuAC and for regular updates, please reach out to colleague Matt Salomone.
Here is information on the panel I will be participating in at CSWE. It is called: Integrating Theory and Practice: Meaningful Technology-Mediated Assignments for Real-World Learning.
To get there, follow directions to the fitness center. It is NOT accessible by easy to find elevators in the Tower building. I found it by going to the main lobby and going outside. Look for the soup place across the street, and go to the door to the right:
Once inside, go to the fitness center:
I had the pleasure of presenting at Community Services of Greater Brockton on March 4, 2015 to talk about client confidentiality in the age of social media. My colleague, Melanie Sage, has done related work and graciously allowed me to repost her related infographic. Here are some talking points from the Brockton presentation.
General Talking Points:
- It is not a matter of if we use technology, it is a matter of how we use technology
- Social worker voices tend to be missing from conversations and decisions about tech
- Confusion and fear about how to proceed with technology in practice drives avoidance not solutions
- This does a disservice to our clients, who may expect practitioners and services to meet them where they are with technology
- We run the risk of being culturally incompetent with clients
- How can we practice effectively if we don’t understand significant aspects of client’s lives, and this includes technology?
- Social media allows us to have asynchronous, non-geographically bound conversations, interactions, and connections with others
- These interactions can reach more people than ever before, and typically publicly archived
- We can advertise our services, provide the most up to date information for clients, and share research findings related to our practice, etc.
- Social media presents opportunities and challenges for social workers
- To avoid or lessen complications, develop a social media policy
In terms of confidentiality, the following guidelines from the Online Therapy Institute Ethical Framework for the Use of Social Media by Mental Health Professionals are helpful:
- Be upfront about appropriate methods of contact (i.e., text messages, email, public messaging)
- Provide the best level of protection for client data
- Recognize client concerns and be upfront about the challenges and risks involved with security and privacy. For example, if you email me I may have no control if my account is hacked, but here is how I protect your information as much as possible and what I will do if there is a problem. (Source).
- Not discuss confidential information on social media
- Be upfront about avoiding dual relationships on social media
- Have a policy in place if a client discovers on social media mutual friends, interests, or cultural groups with you. For example, I do not friend or follow current students on social media. If students find me, I welcome their conversation and dialogue, and questions.
- Do not ask for reviews on consumer review sites, and do not respond on consumer reviews in any way confirming whether someone is or was a therapy client
- Kolmes, K., Merz Nagel, D., & Anthony, K. (2010). Ethical framework for the use of social media by mental health professionals. Retrieved from http://onlinetherapyinstitute.com/ethical-framework-for-the-use-of-social-media-by-mental-health-professionals/
- National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Center for Workforce Studies. (2011, February). The tech-davy social worker: Prepared for the challenges of 21st century practice. Retrieved from http://careers.socialworkers.org/documents/TechSavvy.pdf
- Reamer, F. (2011, July 1). Eye on ethics: Developing a social media ethics policy. Retrieved from http://www.socialworktoday.com/news/eoe_070111.shtml
- Sage, M., Quinn, A., & Fitch, D. (2014). Use of social media in direct practice. Implications for training and policy. Presented at the CSWE Annual Program Meeting, Dallas, TX. Retrieved from http://melaniesagephd.blogspot.com/2014/02/social-media-and-social-workers.html
- Smyth, N. (2010, September 10). When is cultural incompetence okay? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://njsmyth.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/when-is-cultural-incompetence-okay/
Folks, here is my presentation from the Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR) conference held in New Orleans, January 2015.
Understanding the Process of Interagency Collaboration and Its Long-Term Effectiveness
Abstract: Background and Purpose: Charlestown Connects was an interagency collaboration in the neighborhood of Charlestown, Massachusetts. The Charlestown Connects program was an ongoing, formalized partnership between the City of Boston, neighborhood agencies, and other community agencies to improve community outcomes via interagency collaboration. In response to a request from the Office of the Mayor of Boston, the Boston College Graduate School of Social Work (BCGSSW) agreed to provide guidance on the evaluation of the program. This Phase I evaluation documented the structure, process, and implementation of Charlestown Connects. Phase I data collection was completed in 2008 and the evaluation itself was completed in 2010.
While limited social work research has explored interagency collaborations, there remains a persistent gap in the literature in terms of assessing interagency collaboration processes, outcomes and long-term effects. Building on the Phase I evaluation, this poster on the Phase II evaluation helps address these research gaps by expanding our understanding of interagency collaboration in terms of inputs, processes, and long-term community outcomes. This study informs social workers and others who contribute to community well-being infrastructure of the benefits, if any, of developing interagency collaborations. In addition, given the current economic climate, this research may provide important and timely interagency collaboration guidelines for social work practitioners.
Methods: Interviews with the original eight Charlestown Connects program stakeholders were conducted and observations of community meetings sponsored by Charlestown Connects were observed. Interviews explored stakeholder relationships to Charlestown Connects, program success and areas to improve, and program impact. Meeting observations tallied interagency collaboration processes in accordance with the study’s theoretical framework. Both interviews and meeting observations were transcribed and coded using HyperRESEARCH qualitative software using theoretical clustering framed by the study’s theoretical framework, thematic analysis, recurring themes from the first evaluation, and long-term factors that have emerged from the current evaluation..
Findings: This study has shown that Charlestown Connects enhanced communication infrastructure for community agencies while positively impacting perceptions of quality of life among Charlestown residents who were aware of Charlestown Connects. In the short-term, Charlestown Connects made noticeable, positive changes in service delivery issues with the City of Boston. In the long-term, it helped rebuild the communication infrastructure among participating agencies in Charlestown.
Conclusion and Implications: This study provides guidance on improving interagency collaborations for social workers and others engaging in community work. Evidence from the previous evaluation and the current study suggest that the program coordinator took on functions and responsibilities of a community social worker in his role coordinating Charlestown Connects, thus reasserting the important role macro social work may play in leading community infrastructure rebuilding efforts in the future.