Uses of Technology in Education Abroad

Transcription

1 Uses of Technology in Education Abroad Authors: Mandy Reinig, Pennsylvania State University-Altoona (Task Force Chair); Penny Schouten, NY; and Michael Bova, Academic s International (API) May 5, 2010 Introduction The Education Abroad Knowledge Community commissioned a task force to investigate the ways in which technology is currently being used in the education abroad field. A survey was sent to over 2,700 education abroad directors and assistant directors, who hailed from a variety of institutions and organizations. In total we received 515 responses. The majority of institutions that responded to the technology survey were, Master s or Doctoral/Research institutions. In total, they represented 75.9 percent of all respondents. This was followed by program providers with 13.6 percent and a few associate colleges and specialized institutions. Thirteen institutions either forgot or declined to enter their Carnegie Institution Type so their data is considered missing but is still reported for some areas and listed as missing. One note is that we did not control for two people responding from the same institution. However, since this survey was sent only to directors and assistant directors, we determine that this overlap is small, as we would count on them to communicate within their office to clarify who is answering. Participants were asked a variety of questions related to the types of technology they use, how they are using the technology and who in their office is in charge of the technology use. We discovered, not surprisingly, that most education abroad offices are not using the technology that is available. If they are using technology, it is not being used to its full potential. One example is using technology for recruitment but not advising. The large majority of respondents have also taught themselves how to use social media technology. Survey Demographic Information The majority of institutions that responded to the technology survey were, Master s or Doctoral/Research institutions. In total, they represented 75.9 percent of all respondents. This was followed by Providers with 13.6 percent and a few associate colleges and specialized institutions. 13 institutions either forgot or declined to enter their Carnegie Institution Type so their data is considered missing but is still reported for some areas and listed as missing. The chart below illustrates the breakdown of institutions represented in this survey. One note is that we did not control for two people responding from the same institution. However, since this survey was sent only to directors and assistant directors, we figure this overlap to be small, as we would count on them to communicate within their office to clarify who is answering. 1

2 Institution Types Carnegie Institution Type Total Respondents Percentage Associate's Liberal Arts or General /Associate's Doctoral/Research Universities Extensive or Intensive Master's and Universities I or II provider organization/company Specialized Institution Missing Another point, not explicit from the above chart, is that the distribution of responses is not a representative sample of the total number of institutions. Please see the table below. It is, however, more representative of the number of students sent abroad each year. In absolute number the majority of students sent abroad tend to come from doctorate/research, masters, and baccalaureate institutions. Even though associate colleges make up more than 50 of all institutions nationally they tend to send fewer students abroad which could relate to their lower response rate. Carnegie Institution Type Total * Respondents Percent Responding Doc/Research Masters Associate *from IPEDS, 2005 Study Abroad Staffing The below charts demonstrate the staffing available at the institutions represented in this survey. As is illustrated, most institutions have at least one full-time staff member and over half have at least one part-time staff member with many reporting one of each. This survey did not ask the position titles of staff members so it is not known if offices are directed by an Education Abroad Advisor, a Study Abroad Director, or a Study Abroad Assistant Director. Interestingly, none of the institution types had a full-time staff member represented for all respondents within their category. For example, this survey had 182 Doctoral/Research Universities respond but only 170 have at least 1 full time staff person (with some having many more than that). This is also true for the institution type and part-time staff numbers. It is 2

3 also interesting that for all institutions the majority had 0-5 full-time staff (67.8 percent) and 0-5 parttime staff (93.9 percent). It would have been interesting to compare number of students sent abroad with number of staff but that was outside the scope of this survey. Full-time Study Abroad Staff Type Total Respondents > 100 Associate's & Liberal Arts or General /Associate's Doctoral/Research Universities, Extensive or Intensive Master's and Universities I or II provider organization/company Specialized Institution Total Part-time Study Abroad Staff Type Total Respondents Associate's & Liberal Arts or General /Associate's Doctoral/Research Universities, Extensive or Intensive Master's and Universities I or II provider organization/company Specialized Institution Total

4 Types of Technology Being Used We asked people what types of technology they were using. This included everything from Facebook to Twitter to SecondLife. The results indicate that most people are not taking advantage of the technology that is currently available. The following list indicated the rank order of the technology currently be used by different institutions and program providers. Facebook seems to the be the most widely used followed by Blogs, YouTube and Video, and Twitter. 1 st Facebook 2 nd Blogs 3 rd YouTube/Videos 4 th Twitter 5 th Other 6 th Instant Messaging 7 th Webinars 8 th Live Chat 9 th Flickr 10 th LinkedIn 11 th Wikis 12 th Customized 13 th Ning 14 th SecondLife This does vary by institution. For example, if institutions are using technology, they are most likely using Facebook and doctoral or master s universities and program providers, make up the majority of users. The following charts illustrate some of the more popular technology and their use by institution type. 4

5 5

6 6

7 It was also found that most respondents (63.3 percent) were not using blogs and were also not using Twitter (77.9 percent). However, over half of the program provider respondents are using blogs while all the other institution types, except specialized institutions, predominantly checked no to the use of blogs. Similar results are found for the use of Twitter; over half of program providers are using Twitter while the majority of the other institutions checked no. When we examine the use of wikis we find that almost all respondents, 95 percent, do not use wikis. Interestingly, more institutions use Live Chat as a communication option. The majority of respondents still do not (89.1 percent) but several doctoral/research institutions and program providers make use of Live Chat in their communication efforts. Even more institutions are using Video, which could mean YouTube or other means. This category was purposeful left vague since videos can be used in a variety of capacities. Over 24 percent of respondents said they make use of some sort of video. The majority of use is found with doctoral/research and master s universities as well as program providers. There are also more institutions using Webinars than there are using Twitter percent of respondents are using webinars in some capacity. Once again, this is seen mostly with doctoral/research and master s universities as well as program providers. The number of people using Flickr, a photo sharing site, drops in comparison to the use of Webinars percent of institutions are not using Flickr. Even fewer are not using LinkedIn, a professional social networking site. Over 92 percent of respondents are not using LinkedIn. The highest number of respondents reporting use is only 13 with both doctoral/research universities and program providers respectively. Finally, for Ning, a customizable social networking service, only 2.3 percent of respondents report using Ning and only at the doctoral/research, master s university and program provider levels. No one is using Second Life, a virtual environment, in their communication efforts. Twenty-one institutions, or 4.1 percent, indicated that they are using a customized system. While 18.1 percent said that they were using something other than the technologies the Taskforce had listed on the 7

8 survey. The other types of technologies people are using include Skype, which seemed to be most often listed in terms of other forms of technology, as well as Moodle, a open source course management system, Blackboard or Angel, a course management system, text messaging, goabroad.net, cafeabroad, studioabroad, and university specific websites or networking sites. Some other types of technology only mentioned once or twice include wiggio, MySpace, Survey Monkey, itunes U, listservs, Orgsync, among a few others. These results demonstrate that the majority of institutions are not taking advantage of the available (and mostly free) technologies. This could be for a variety of reasons but previous informal surveys have found that the majority are not using these technologies because they do not know how to effectively incorporate them into their education abroad efforts. 8

9 How Social Media Technology Being Used Social Media Technology is still a relatively new form of technology especially in the education abroad field. For the majority, its uses have not yet been fully explored. This section of the survey attempts to examine how those that are using social media technology are using the technology within their office. This includes everything from recruitment to marketing to advising. The below tables illustrate the many uses of social media within international education and how educational institutions are using them today. Using Social Media To Recruit Students 70.5 of all respondents using technology are doing so to recruit students. Type of Institution of those reporting Total they use technology to Respondents recruit students Providers Doctoral/Research Universities Liberal Arts/General Specialized Master s /Universities / Since students do most of their research for schools and programs on the Internet 1 institutions realize they need to have a web presence. Being found on Facebook and YouTube (the second largest search engine behind Google) 2 gives them more flexibility and exposure. providers are currently taking advantage of these channels, having the highest percentage of usage within their category type, followed closely by doctoral/research universities and baccalaureate colleges-liberal arts/general. The lowest usage is from associate s colleges and baccalaureate/associate colleges. 1 Scrolling Toward Enrollment: Website Content and the E-Expectation of College Bound Seniors: Noel-Levitz, 2009, 94C7649EC052/0/EExpScrollingTowardEnrollment09.pdf 2 Schonfeld, Erick, ComScore YouTube Now 25 of All Google Searches, December 18, 2008, 9

10 Using Social Media to Inform/Engage Their Target Audience 70.5 of all respondents using technology are doing so to inform and engage a target audience. Type of Institution Total of those reporting they use Respondents technology to recruit students Providers Doctoral/Research Universities Specialized Master s /Universities Liberal Arts/General / It makes sense that if 70.5 percent of institutions are using social media to recruit students, the same percentage would be using it to engage their target audience. providers still take the lead over other institutions. The difference comes with / ; although they are still one of the lowest users, they register 27 percent higher in using it to engage their audience, but they do not consider that engagement to be recruitment. Using Social Media for Alumni Outreach 65.2 of all respondents using technology are doing so for alumni outreach. Type of Institution Total of those reporting they use Respondents technology to recruit students Providers Specialized Doctoral/Research Universities Master s /Universities Liberal Arts/General / The third most popular use for social media technology is communicating with study abroad alumni. When used to its fullest potential, social media can be used to incorporate alumni to engage prospective and current study abroad students. It can also be used to keep alumni engaged to support the institution, or for program support such as networking, internships and advisement/promotion. 10

11 Using Social Media to Build a Virtual Community 60.0 of all respondents using technology are doing so to build a virtual community. Type of Institution Total Respondents of those reporting they use technology to recruit students Providers Specialized Doctoral/Research Universities Master s /Universities Liberal Arts/General / The numbers here remain fairly consistent as compared to the previous charts, except for. Again, if institutions are using social media technology to engage and recruit students as well as maintain contact with study abroad alumni, then it makes sense that they are building a community for these audiences to engage with each other. Advising Students about s Using Social Media to Advise Students 50.0 of all respondents using technology are doing so to advise students about their programs. Type of Institution Total of those reporting they use technology to Respondents recruit students Providers Specialized Doctoral/Research Universities Master s /Universities Liberal Arts/Gen /

12 The percentages for advising students using social media technologies are lower with only 9.5 percent of all institutions indicating they use it extensively for advising. This may be due to the informal nature of social media, suitable for program advising, but seemingly unsuitable for academic advising. Using Social Media to Contact Colleagues 43.0 of all respondents using technology are doing so to contact colleagues. Type of Institution Total of those reporting they use technology to Respondents recruit students Providers Specialized Master s /Universities / Doctoral/Research Universities Liberal Arts/General Fewer institutions are using social media to contact and share information with colleagues. Considering the definition of Web 2.0 technologies, this is surprising. There are efforts in international education to share field-related information, like research and visa requirements, with colleagues via social media, but they seem to go unnoticed but the majority in the field. This could be for a variety of reasons including not understanding how the technology works or being concerned with privacy issues. Either way it seems that many colleagues in the field are missing out on reliable information that is available instantaneously. On the program level, if it is being used to engage students and alumni, then colleagues should be a part of this community as well. For example, this might include faculty who lead programs, on-site faculty, and colleagues in offices across campus, etc. Faculty directors could use social media to recruit students or ask a study abroad advisor a question. On-site faculty could ask questions of home institutions. The interaction possibilities are huge but do not seem to be realized yet but most institutions. providers have the highest percentage of usage in this category, but since they are usually not based on a campus or near colleagues, it makes sense that they would employ social media as another channel for communication. 12

13 Using Social Media to Monitor Their Organization s Reputation 42.5 of all respondents using technology are doing so to monitor their organization s reputation. Type of Institution Total Respondents of those reporting they use technology to recruit students Providers Specialized / Doctoral/Research Universities Master s /Universities Liberal Arts/General The fact that this is rated as one of the lesser uses of social media should be alarming. Only 6.4 percent of all respondents indicated that they use monitoring extensively and 36.1 percent use it somewhat. Again, the nature of Web 2.0 is sharing information and chances are there are discussions about the organization occurring on blogs, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Word of mouth is hard to control and the only way to combat it is to participate in the discussions. If an institution offers quality programs and provides good services, then the chatter will likely be positive. However, a disgruntled individual can be very vocal using a variety of communications channels. In many cases, the community itself will step in to defend an organization that for the most part offers a good customer experience. But if there is truth behind the complaints and the institution is not aware of the problem, not addressing the issue could severely damage their reputation. The percentages here are relative to the amount of usage from the previous charts, with program providers that rely on social media more, also monitoring it more frequently. Associate seem to be monitoring less than they are using, which might indicate that they are projecting information more than they are listening to their community. 13

14 Using Social Media for Pre-Departure Orientation 40.0 of all respondents using technology are doing so to deliver pre-departure orientations. Type of Institution Total of those reporting they use technology to Respondents recruit students Providers Doctoral/Research Universities Master s /Universities Specialized Liberal Arts/General / Since program providers are not usually based on campus, it would be logical that in order to provide pre-departure orientation to students from a variety of geographical locations, that they would rely on technology. The same would hold true for institutions that offer their programs to students from other institutions or conduct orientations when students are not scheduled to be on campus. 14

15 Who Monitors Social Media and How They Learned to Use it Although the following chart compares who monitors the various social media applications, one statistic it quickly communicates is what social networks are not being used. Ning, Wikis, LinkedIn, Flickr and Live Chat have less than a 20 percent usage rate. As for who is responsible for monitoring these networks, across the board, the responsibility mostly falls to the staff, followed by the director or assistant director (self), student workers and IT/MIS or other department. Social Media Monitoring Responsibility Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Facebook Blogs YouTube (Video) Twitter IM Live Chat Flickr LinkedIn Wikis Ning The following tables, broken down by institution type, illustrate who within the organization is monitoring each application. As reflected in the chart above, staff are the main monitors followed usually by the director or assistant director (self) or student workers. They also demonstrate which institution types are using or not using each application. This breakdown shows that program providers use multiple social media channels and associate colleges have not yet adopted social media as a communications tool. 15

16 Monitor Who is Monitoring Facebook by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Monitor Who is Monitoring Blogs by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using

17 Monitor Who is Monitoring YouTube by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Monitor Who is Monitoring Twitter by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using

18 Monitor Who is Monitoring Instant Message by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Monitor Who is Monitoring LiveChat by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Monitor Who is Monitoring Flickr by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using

19 Monitor Who is Monitoring LinkedIn by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using Monitor Who is Monitoring Wikis by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using

20 Monitor Who is Monitoring Ning by Institution Type: Liberal Arts Gen Master s Doctoral/ Research Provider Specialized Staff Self Student Workers Not monitoring IT/MIS Dept or Other Not using How Did Those Using Communication Technology Learn to Use It? In addition to asking respondents how they were using technology, we also wanted to know how they had learned to use the various types of technology represented in our survey. The below graph demonstrates, for all of the technologies combined, the percentage of how people learned to use the various forms of technology and this is broken down by institution type. As is demonstrated by the results below, most respondents are not using the technology. If they are using a certain form of technology the majority have taught themselves. Few have hired staff with social media skills, worked with their IT departments, or participated in on-line training sessions. The tables following the chart illustrate, by institution type, how a few of the different forms of technology were learned. It is noticeable that institutions are either not using the technology or have taught themselves. This has striking implications that will be talked about later in this report. A few have been able to go to their IT Departments and receive training but it would be interesting to know what type of training they received and if they were able to apply this training to the education abroad field. A few respondents did select that they learned through other means than those listed. Many of these responses included such items as not knowing what the technology was or not having time to learn. For those that answered with another method of learning these responses include learning via student workers such as interns and using Google as a resource for training and instruction. 20

21 21

22 Facebook Master' How learned Associa te's College s Baccalaur eate - Liberal Arts or General /As sociate's Doctoral/Re search Universities- Extensive or Intensive s College s and Univers ities I or II provider organization/co mpany. Speciali zed Institut ion Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Tot al

23 Twitter Master' How Learned Associa te's College s Baccalaur eate - Liberal Arts or General /As sociate's Doctoral/Re search Universities- Extensive or Intensive s College s and Univers ities I or II provider organization/co mpany. Speciali zed Institut ion Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Tot al

24 Instant Messaging Master' How Learned Associa te's College s Baccalaur eate - Liberal Arts or General /As sociate's Doctoral/Re search Universities- Extensive or Intensive s College s and Univers ities I or II provider organization/co mpany. Speciali zed Institut ion Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Tot al

25 Baccalaure ate - Liberal Arts or General Baccalaure ate/associa te's Blogs Doctoral/Resear ch Universities- Extensive or Intensive Master's and Universities I or II provider organization/ company. Specialize d Institution How Learned Associate' s Total Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Wikis Master' How Learned Associa te's College s Baccalaur eate - Liberal Arts or General /As sociate's Doctoral/Re search Universities- Extensive or Intensive s College s and Univers ities I or II provider organization/co mpany. Speciali zed Institut ion Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Tot al

26 YouTube Master' How Learned Associa te's College s Baccalaur eate - Liberal Arts or General /As sociate's Doctoral/Re search Universities- Extensive or Intensive s College s and Univers ities I or II provider organization/co mpany. Speciali zed Institut ion Hired staff with these skills/inte rests Not using Other Taught ourselves Trained by IT Dept Used online training Tot al