Using Geographic Information Services (GIS) to Teach Social Work

Background and Purpose: Geographic Information Services (GIS) is data mapping software commonly used in geography, public health, urban planning, and increasingly social services. GIS has several social work-relevant purposes, including mapping community assets/problems and assessing service accessibility and adequacy. Social work instructors have been encouraged to introduce students to GIS in their field practicums and classrooms, but GIS continues to be under-recognized within the profession. This study explores social work instructors’ experiences teaching GIS to MSW students in order to elicit information about how GIS-related content can be successfully integrated into social work education. Research questions include: (1) What factors facilitate teaching GIS to MSW students? (2) What are the challenges? and (3) How do social work faculty navigate these challenges?

Methods: Twelve U.S. social work faculty who currently teach GIS as a primary or secondary learning objective in one or more of their MSW courses participated in this study. Participants were initially recruited via emails to several academic social work list-servs, after which snowball sampling was used to identify additional subjects. Thirteen instructors meeting our selection criteria were identified and all but one agreed to participate in a semi-structured interview regarding their motivations and experiences teaching GIS to MSW students. Interviews were conducted via telephone or in person, lasted approximately 30 to 90 minutes and with consent, were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis with an iterative process was performed to identify, develop, and refine themes for data interpretation. Within-case and cross-case analyses were conducted to verify and examine the emerging themes with inter-rater reliability. Coding memos were created to record logistical details and analysis points.

Results: Social work instructors described facilitating and challenging factors emanating from students, their teaching institutions, and the field. These challenges included students’ anxieties about GIS technology and the perceived irrelevance of GIS to clinical practice, as well as a facilitating factor of macro-oriented students’ interest in GIS as a “tangible” and marketable skill. Instructors described “navigating and mitigating” students’ anxieties through structured instruction and accessible assignments designed to help students build confidence through ‘quick wins’. Instructors actively sought “student buy-in” to GIS by demonstrating its relevance to the field’s “person-in-environment” philosophy, using social work-specific teaching examples, and having students map personally or professionally meaningful data. Institutionally, lack of technological resources and support for teaching GIS emerged as a challenge, which instructors addressed by “building infrastructure”, through interdisciplinary collaboration and creating their own teaching materials. Lastly, trends in social work, especially the emphasis on clinical practice, impact GIS instruction (ex. no social work ethical guidelines exist for technological and GIS-based practice).

Conclusions and Implications: Examining instructors’ experiences provides guidance about how social work instructors can build upon facilitating factors and navigate challenging factors from students, their institutions, and the field. Moreover, studying GIS instruction highlights trends in the field of social work, particularly changing values about community-based practice and technology. Multiple implications for the field exist, including creating ethical guidelines and GIS teaching tools.