Andersen, Denise.

OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

The specific evidence I have chosen to reflect my learning in OLTD 506 is a researched paper
on teachers using social media in the BC context. The paper demonstrates my understanding
of aspects one needs to consider if social media tools are to be used within the confines of a
public university. Julia calls this package of necessary considerations foundations and
boundaries of social media use in the classroom.
What I experienced when writing this piece was that I didnt really understand the reach and
adaptability of social media, the legislation that surrounds privacy in publically funded
institutions and how to level the playing field for all in an online setting. I am wiser about the
foundations and boundaries of social media in general but definitely wiser about the
legislation that governs all privacy issues in a BC public university. The specific program
outcome that this piece of evidence relates to is:

Consider responsibility, accountability and civility in online environments.

This OLTD outcome is important to my practice as an online educator because I was not
seeing the whole picture of teaching online. Achieving this outcome has helped me to visualize
teaching online in a context beyond the actual learning material. I have come to understand
that the logistics or foundational work is actually more important than the learning material.
The strong underpinnings of any course then allows for the flexibility of learning material and
teaching techniques.
Teachers and Social Media in the BC Context

Social media use in BC education at the post-secondary level requires an active comfort with
what is known as the foundations and boundaries of social media use. Social media use in the
classroom can be fraught with issues that arise from current privacy laws, user safety, social justice
issues and the over arching principle of professionalism and ensuing digital footprint (Hengstler, 2013,
Welcome to Foundations & Boundaries, D2L). This paper will attempt to describe my understanding of
the above issues and how I can begin to introduce social media into the classroom.
Social media use in my personal life is confined to an active Facebook site and a rarely used
Twitter account. I have not used social media as a teaching tool in the classroom primarily as I didnt
really understand social media or how it could be used in post-secondary education. Interestingly a
recent straw poll of the students revealed that many have an active and extensive social media
presence albeit their knowledge of social media boundaries and pitfalls was sadly like my own, virtually
non-existent. I was struck by the revelation that I, a digital immigrant, shunned social media as a
teaching tool primarily because I didnt know or understand how it worked and many of the digital

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

native students had plunged right in with nary a concern of the underpinnings of their activities.
Fortunately for all of us this course has increased my knowledge base, decreased my fear and inspired
me to move forward to assist the students with their knowledge gaps as it pertains to social media
boundaries.
Professionalism and digital footprints are something I think about regularly. The OLTD 506
readings have deepened my understanding of the topic, but I was unaware of how transparent and
permanent my digital footprint really is. Nursing education in the early 1980s taught that the public
held Nurses and Physicians to a different standard than other members of the public and we were at
risk of our professional license if we were found to be reckless individuals. I am sure this is still taught
but now within the context of professionalism but interestingly I have applied that erstwhile
responsibility to many areas of my life including teaching and my Internet presence. I know I am not a
reckless Internet user but when I read that there is no expectation of privacy on content once it is
made publicly available on the web (Stam, 2012) I had a rush of anxiety. I realized that the permanence
of everything I do digitally is creating a reputation or at the very least a profile of me. What groups I
join, what subscriptions I hold and my shopping habits are seemingly innocuous activities but what
picture am I painting and for whom? How do I usually determine the risk of my Internet activities?
My current student cohort was surprised, and shocked when I shared this snippet of digital footprints,
as sadly most had no understanding of the concept. Regrettably, I was not adequately prepared
(ostrich) to pursue this topic right then but have promised to create a lesson plan (eagle) for a later
date (Hengstler, 2011). The lesson plan will address perception of risk, immediacy & permanence,
passive, active and secondary footprints and how to manage a digital footprint.
As a publically funded institution the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
(FIPPA, 1996) sets out Vancouver Island Universitys (VIU) privacy principles and guidelines (VIU
University Secretary, 2014). FIPPA sets out the minimum standards a publicly funded institution in BC
must follow when managing personal information. FIPPA (1996) mandates how information is stored
and used in Canada as well as outlines the necessary criteria to meet if information is stored outside of
Canada. This, of course, has implications for faculty who choose to use social media as an educational
teaching tool because many social media sites are housed and operated outside of Canadian borders.
Cooper, Southwell & Portal (2011) have designed a guide for VIU faculty that lays out the privacy
principles and requirements as well as explores risks to privacy with social media and offers guidance
on how to minimize those risks. A policy guiding the use of social media at VIU is currently under

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

development but is housed within the standard of behavior policy (VIU, Standards of Behavior Policy,
2013).
Cooper et al (2011) suggest there are three main privacy principles faculty need to focus on
when designing course requirements that use social media: notice, knowledge and informed consent.
Students will need to receive written notice of the assignment that includes the technology to be used,
what personal information may be required, who and why it is required and the potential uses of the
information. This should if possible, be discussed early at the beginning of the course or prior to the
assignment. The final step is having the students give their written informed consent for the collection,
use and disclosure of their personal information.
As a Nursing program we have much experience with getting informed consent, as it too is a
cornerstone of healthcare privacy of information and a tool of decision-making. Initially, I believed our
program met the key three- step process for collecting and using personal data from students.
However, with more sober thought I realized because we like to dispense with the housekeeping
details quickly we might in fact be shortchanging the process. On the first day of classes we give notice
in writing of how our program will be using student personal information, we explain/provide the
knowledge, gain written informed consent in the way of standardized forms and then send off the
information to the appropriate persons by the end of the day. But we know the first day of classes is
when the students are least likely to absorb details of fine print documents and even less likely to ask
questions about what they are signing. So perhaps they havent actually given informed consent at all.
Perhaps a realignment of our faculty actions towards informed consent may serve our due diligence
better. I recognize I have applied the process suggested for social media use to general collection and
use of student personal information but the three-step process appears prudent and responsible.
Another key area Cooper et al. (2011) explored was the creation of a privacy protocol for
ensuring student notice, knowledge and informed consent when teaching with social media: research
the tool; discover the strengths, the weaknesses and know the policies of the social media site;
evaluate any identifiable privacy risks via FIPPA (1996) and then develop a privacy protection plan and
protocols for use. It is the due diligence a faculty needs to do to ensure privacy is maintained at the
level required by FIPPA (1996).
Social justice issues with Internet use is a topic that I have considered on occasion, but since I
teach at a post-secondary institution that has strong Internet connectivity and has a multitude of
computers available for student use it is not a prioritizing topic. It is however worthy of a deeper
exploration especially since I am planning on creating hybrid courses for our program. Hengstler (2013,

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

Social Justice Boundaries, D2L) writes that students who study online often self- select this delivery
model due to their technological leanings. The student population I was targeting for the hybrid
delivery model doesnt traditionally have education experiences beyond high school and they may well
be in a lower socio-economic bracket. These demographics are indicative of persons who often
struggle with accessing computers, connectivity and computer literacy skills (Wikipedia, 2013). It would
appear that my plan for the online courses hasnt evolved beyond the parameters of my own
privileged reality and understanding. The dilemma for me is do I knowingly move forward with a hybrid
course design knowing that I may be excluding persons whom, if given enough support, may succeed in
online learning?
I am ashamed to say I havent considered the digital divide in BC terms. Digital divide is defined
as an economic and social inequality of information and communication technologies (ICT) (Wikipedia,
2013). I have often thought about the world digital divide and even experienced that first hand when I
traveled to rural Kenya a few years ago. I know that Canada generally, and BC specifically, has pockets
of extreme poverty but I hadnt connected the dots between poverty, Internet access and digital
literacy. At VIU our commitment to the indigenous population is noteworthy and a statement of a true
community institution. In keeping to that commitment, our particular Nursing program (on three
campuses) has a specially designed curriculum that fully integrates indigenous ways of knowing (Stuart,
2013). Indigenous students have experienced great success in our entry-level Nursing program but I
wonder if our planned hybrid program would effectively set up barriers to enrollment given the digital
divide some indigenous populations experience. According to Pathways to Technology (2013) the
majority of indigenous communities in BC have some Internet connectivity but it could be improved
upon. The efforts to provide reliable Internet connectivity can be interpreted as a foundational
beginning to improving the socio-economic situation in rural indigenous communities but many
communities still grapple with a host of fundamental community ills. Some indigenous communities
report they have problems that include sub-standard or lack of housing, no clean water sources,
chronic health conditions, addictions, sexual abuse, adolescent parenthood and above average suicide
rates (Reading & Halseth, 2013). I believe these issues can affect and potentially undermine any gains
Internet connectivity may bring to the community. There are similar issues with Indigenous persons
living in urban centers. They are over represented in the lower socio-economic urban communities and
although they have access to computers via schools or public libraries their poverty may hold them
hostage in the advancement of digital literacy.

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

Personal safety with use of the Internet and social media specifically is a topic that is ripe with
truths and myths. According to danah boyd, (2012) a culture of fear is what drives both the myths and
truths. She claims that when an aspect of the Internet is not understood or misunderstood fear based
emotions rise and any subsequent risk assessments of digital media is then seen through a lens of fear.
How totally human we are! I am reminded of the late 1970s and early 1980s. There had been a rash
of stranger child abductions through out both Canada and the US and as imagined the media was
heavily involved in reporting the cases. The fear amongst parents and the general public was palpable.
Interestingly an entire industry was born out of the reported misfortune of those families.
Organizations staked out shopping malls and encouraged parents to be proactive by having their
childs fingerprints and identifying information documented and available should a horrible situation
happen to them. I recently found the laminated card that holds my then toddler daughters picture and
fingerprints. I can imagine the fear and responsibility I must have felt to consent to engaging with this
premise of perceived safety. Today the limitless Internet brings a similar fear to the masses only boyd
(2012) calls it a technopanic. Hengstler (2013, Safety Boundaries, D2L) claims a technopanic mentality
can lead to technology bans without a substantive or rigorous analysis of the risks & benefits
associated with a technology, accompanied by an assessment of --and experience with --how those
risks can be effectively handled. Technopanic can influence policy. The proliferation of cyber safety
messages and programs being offered in schools and communities underscores the fear we have for
our youth but it could very well be a generational driven anxiety. By chance I discovered that most of
the adult students I teach currently couldnt name an Internet safety rule besides keeping personal
contact data off the net but most were quite engaged on a myriad number of social media sites.
Interestingly personal contact data is quite easily found on legitimate sites and could be the least of
the problems.
Hengstler (2013, Safety Boundaries, D2L) concedes, from a functional perspective of an educator,
safety boils down to a benefit/risk analysis. She further posits that perceptions of risk change when
there is exposure to any one of what she refers to as the five pillars of risk: knowledge, skills and
training, practice and experience, policies & guidelines and confidence. Hengstler (2013) further states,
when dealing with social media, as often as possible, we want to be able to make conscious, rational
decisions based on the 5 pillars. Adults at the post-secondary level require Internet safety awareness
every bit as much as K-12 population even if social media isnt used as a teaching tool. Addressing
digital safety use can be viewed as a foundational topic for university success.
I have increased my knowledge of the foundational and boundary aspects of social media and

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

it has been an informative and enlightening experience even at the novice level of instruction. I
continue to be uncertain as to how I can use social media as a teaching tool but I am fully prepared to
offer students an adult oriented class on basic digital safety with specifics on social media. I am
convinced that all users of the Internet need a primer lesson on this topic and I am reasonably sure it
will soon be a core competency for K-12 cohorts but self-directed adults in post-secondary are a harder
group to engage. Currently students in our program range in age from 19-58 years thus it is quite likely
that they have not had a school-based opportunity to learn about digital safety and social media.

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

References

Baker & McKenzie Global Employment Practice Group. (2012). Introduction. In The Social Media Issue.
The Global Employer, 17(3). http://www.bakermckenzie.com/files/Publication/fbb96048-99a849f0-9d4f-f612e0bec1c0/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/2ee3b2aa-40e1-4612-93b803b7ee1feddb/bk_employment_globalemployersocialmedia_sep12.pdf
boyd, danah. (2012). Culture of fear + attention economy=?!?! (Video). Vimeo (producer).
Retrieved from: http://vimeo.com/38139635.
Cooper, S., Southwell, J., & Portal, P. (2011). Privacy guide for faculty using third party web
technology (social media) in public post-secondary courses. Vancouver Island University & BC
Campus Publication. Retrieved from:
https://www2.viu.ca/fippa/documents/Privacy_Guide_SocialMedia_Cloud_PostSecondary_Cla
sses_2011.pdf
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. (1996). Retrieved from:
http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/96165_00
Hengstler, J. (2011). Managing your digital footprint: Ostriches v. eagles. In S. Hirtz & K. Kelly (Eds.),
Education for a Digital World 2.0 (2nd ed.) (Vol. 1, Part One: Emerging technologies and
practices). Open School/Crown Publications: Queen's Printer for British Columbia, Canada.
http://openschool.bc.ca/info/edu/7540006133_2.pdf
Hengstler, J. (2013). Safety boundaries. OLTD 506 (D2L).
https://d2l.viu.ca/d2l/le/content/56545/viewContent/622567/View
Hengstler, J. (2013). Social justice boundaries. OLTD 506 (D2L).
https://d2l.viu.ca/d2l/le/content/56545/viewContent/622560/View
Hengstler, J. (2013). Welcome to foundations & boundaries. OLTD 506 (D2L).
https://d2l.viu.ca/d2l/le/content/56545/viewContent/622540/View
Pathways to technology: Connecting first nations to the world,
2013. http://www.pathwaystotechnology.ca/interactive-map
Reading, J., & Halseth, R. (2013). Pathways to improving well-being for Indigenous peoples. How living
conditions decide health. Retrieved from http://www.nccahccnsa.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/102/pathways_EN_web.pdf
Stuart, C. (2013). Building connections: Health and human services. Vancouver Island University
Retrieved from: https://www2.viu.ca/hhs/documents/HHSNewsletter2013web20130418.pdf
Vancouver Island University. (2011). Student conduct code. Retrieved from:
https://www2.viu.ca/policies/policies-index.asp

Andersen, Denise. OLTD506, 2014

Boundaries Paper

Vancouver Island University. (2014). Freedom of information and privacy act.

https://www2.viu.ca/fippa/
Wikipedia. (2013). Digital divide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide