Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)

Purpose. Information technology innovations have resulted in unprecedented access to an increasing variety of resources. The use of communication and information technology (C&IT) can promote the use of new practice approaches, enrich client-clinician relationships, and encourage clients' involvement in treatment (Dickerson et al., 2005; Kalichman et al., 2003). However, access to technology is not universal for all clients. Studies on the “digital divide” identify SES/educational level as the strongest differentiating factor (Bozionelos, 2004; Losh, 2004). Little has been written about the best practices of integrating C&IT with social work practice or what strategies best work in bridging the “digital divide.” This study examined: (1) the C&IT content currently taught in MSW programs, (2) the presentation of this content throughout the curriculum, and (3) strategies used to bridge the “digital divide.”

Methods. The nationwide sample included one hundred-twenty MSW programs/schools. A purpose sample was used so that public/private and geographic regions were represented. Telephone interviews were conducted with a faculty member who had first-hand knowledge about technology use in the curriculum. Study questions included: (1) in what curricular areas is C&IT integrated into the curriculum, (2) what factors promoted or blocked this integration, (3) how are student competencies assessed, and (4) in what ways are access issues for clients and students addressed? Content analyses (qualitative data) and descriptive/correlational analyses (quantitative data) were used.

Results. Curricular areas most commonly integrating C&IT were social action/advocacy (20%), policy (60%), and research (95%). Less frequent were practice courses (15%) and field education (10%). With few exceptions programs used technology for faculty-student and student-student communication. Some programs (19%) used technology to communicate with clients. Factors promoting technology integration were comprehensive university/college training centers, administrative support, and faculty interest. The primary barrier was administration's poor understanding about the faculty time needed to learn and design ways to integrate technology into their teaching. Few programs assessed student competencies. Programs acknowledged the inequities of the “digital divide” but had not addressed this issue.

Implications. Results highlight the potential that C&IT can have in social work education and practice. In most areas of the curriculum, the integration of C&IT is at a formative stage. Programs or individuals who have achieved this can be exemplars for those who are beginning these efforts. Findings also point to the need to carefully consider issues of access and familiarity/knowledge that clients or students have about C&IT. Recommendations are given for principles to utilize in technology integration efforts, strategies to address the inequities of the “digital divide”, and ways to evaluate future technology integration efforts.