See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233095257

Information Technology and Social Work—The Dark

Side or Light Side?

Article  in  Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work · November 2006

DOI: 10.1300/J394v03n03_02

CITATIONS READS

23 3,052

4 authors, including:

Rick Csiernik
King's University College
127 PUBLICATIONS   765 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

3rd edition of Responding to the Oppression of Addiction; union backed EAP case study; evaluation of Animal Assisted
Therapy rs with dementia View project

Practising Social Work Research: Case Studies for Learning, second edition View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rick Csiernik on 08 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 SECTION I:
TECHNOLOGY
AND EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

Information Technology and Social Work–

The Dark Side or Light Side?
Rick Csiernik, PhD, RSW
Patricia Furze, MSW, RSW
Laura Dromgole, BSW, MSW (Candidate), RSW
Giselle Marie Rishchynski, BSc, BSW

SUMMARY. The transition from industrial society to information soci-

ety has had a significant impact upon social work. Benefits emerging
have included simplified recording and assessment, electronic advo-

Rick Csiernik is Professor, School of Social Work, King’s University College at the
University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario (E-mail: csiernik@mountaincable.net).
Patricia Furze, is with Furze and Associates, London, Ontario (E-mail: namaste@
furzeandassociates.com).
Laura Dromgole is with London and Middlesex Children’s Aid Society, London,
Ontario (E-mail: lcdro@sympatico.ca).
Giselle Marie Rishchynski is affiliated with School of Social Work, King’s Univer-
sity College, London, Ontario (E-mail: grishchyQ@uwo.ca).
[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: “Information Technology and Social Work–The Dark Side or Light
Side?” Csiernik, Rick et al. Co-published simultaneously in Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work (The
Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 3, No. 3/4, 2006, pp. 9-25; and: Information Technology and Evidence-Based So-
cial Work Practice (ed: Judith M. Dunlop, and Michael J. Holosko) The Haworth Press, Inc., 2006, pp. 9-25.
Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service
[1-800-HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address: docdelivery@haworthpress.com].

Available online at http://jebsw.haworthpress.com

© 2006 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J394v03n03_02 9
10 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

cacy, interactive distance education opportunities and online group

work and supervision. However, information technology can also be so-
cially isolating and has led to new social issues including the creation of
a false sense of safety, particularly among children and adolescents.
Other concerns include the increased pace of work, the role of e-counsel-
ling and the emergence of a technologically inspired generation gap be-
tween new and established workers. Three focus groups, comprised of
new BSW candidates, experienced part-time MSW candidates and field
practice educators, were held to explore these issues. Themes generated
included concerns regarding confidentiality, workload, and the compro-
mising of basic social work practice and the therapeutic relationship.
However, technology was also seen as having the potential to support geo-
graphically isolated clients and those with disabilities as well as providing
another mechanism to connect with adolescents. Technology is ideology
and while its advance is inevitable, social workers need to maintain a
healthy scepticism while avoiding both unhealthy enthusiasm and un-
necessary resistance, as technology will continue to create both chal-
lenges and opportunities for the profession. doi:10.1300/J394v03n03_02
[Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Ser-
vice: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com>
Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2006 by The Haworth Press, Inc.
All rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS. Information society, technology, technological risks,

limitations and benefits

Social work is the art of self. Social work is what we bring to,
whatever we have, our ability, our skill. It is through the relation-
ship, that invisible thing that happens between two people that
change happens–we could lose that with technology.

–Association of Social Work Field Practice Educators (2004)

INTRODUCTION

In the 19th century North American society began to move out of the
agrarian age and into the age of machines. The industrial revolution was
the antecedent for worldwide change including the need for and devel-
opment of the profession of social work. At the end of the 20th century a
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 11

second great societal transformation had begun to gain momentum and

as a result, we have been witness to the beginnings of the transition from
industrial society to information society in the developed and develop-
ing worlds. This transition has immense implications for the profession
as the dawn of the information age has brought great benefits to social
work including:

• accessing information quickly through the Internet (Geraty, 2004;

Giffords, 1998),
• more simplified recording (Ames, 1999) and assessment (Nurius &
Hudson, 1988),
• electronic advocacy (Fitzgerald & McNutt, 1999; McNutt, 2002),
• interactive distance education for isolated and working students
and social workers (Knowles, 2002; McCarty & Clancy, 2002;
Thurston & Cauble, 1999), and similarly
• online group work (Finn, 1999; Galinksy, Schopler & Abell, 1997;
Pleace, Burrows, Loader, Muncer & Nettleton, 2003; Schopler,
Abell & Galinksy, 1998),
• supervision (Stofle & Hamilton, 1998; Suler, 2000), and
• e-counselling and e-therapy (Grohol, 1997, 1999; Stofle, 1997).

However, there is also a dark side to this increasingly prominent in-

formation technology, one for which caution needs to be exercised and
prudence exhibited. For just as industrialization brought great benefits,
it also brought forth great disparities, inequalities, social injustices and
oppression. Technology is ideology. It is a tool that supports the pro-
duction of knowledge and the development of skills and thus it also has
significant values implications (Cwikel & Cnaan, 1991; Kreuger &
Stretch, 2000). To be unaware of the implications of adopting and inte-
grating new technologies into a profession that continues to struggle
with the concept of evidence-based practice is not only naïve but verges
on negligence. Thus, it is acknowledged that information technology is
a reality of contemporary social work practice and that its influence will
continue to grow. This fact, however, necessitates that as a profession
we adopt a critical appraisal of the implications of this new practice
tool.
This article provides an overview of pertinent issues practitioners
need to consider as information technology becomes more ingrained in
social work. This is particularly relevant as digital immigrants (those of
us who initially learned to type and tabulate rather than word process
and Excel our documents) are challenged by the views of digital natives
12 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

(those for whom burning a CD and taking a picture with a digital phone
is as routine as is conducting a psychosocial assessment). An examina-
tion of the different perspectives of digital immigrant and digital native
social workers regarding information technology is also provided illus-
trating the distinct issues beginning, and established practitioners have
concerning, this encroaching technology.

Practice Issues

The practice of social work is about the interface of people, their fami-
lies and their communities. Social workers are agents of social control but
we also promote social welfare and social change to empower the individ-
ual, the group and the community. As a result we regularly work with dis-
advantaged, disenfranchised and oppressed populations (Armitage, 1996).
Endemic to our work is the question: how can we reduce or ameliorate the
social condition of isolation and enhance individuals’ connectedness with
one another? Four prominent factors that promote change for individuals
are: positive regard, therapist accurate empathy, therapist genuineness and
the depth of patient self-exploration (Carkhuffe & Truax, 1965). Thus, a
key practice question to ascertain is: does information technology advance-
ment promote these factors or rather does it further disempower individu-
als?
As social workers we are aware that how we communicate influences
the degree of isolation or connectedness clients perceive. We know that
there are several components of communication of which the written text
is but one small fraction. The other components include the tone of voice,
body language, facial expression and its congruence or lack of congru-
ence. Information technology, as a result, has attempted to bring these
components to individuals through web cams, voice technologies, emot-
icons for e-mail and netiquette (i.e., the rules of online communication)
with varying degrees of success. This has all been done in an attempt to
simulate direct person-to-person and to some degree face-to-face contact
(Robson & Robson, 1998; Stofle, 1998).
In promoting change, the issue of genuineness or self-congruence
means that the better connected or more isolated the social worker, the
more or less the social worker may promote or assist the individual to
connect with him/herself and others. Therefore, the more isolated social
workers become, the less capable we are of reducing alienation and pro-
moting connections. The energetic “felt sense” of communication can
become a disengaged sense of the other leading to a further sense of iso-
lation and alienation. Information technologies can create and enhance
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 13

isolation for individuals who are often alone, sitting, focused on a com-
puter screen for long periods of time, and who frequently lose sense of
time as occurs with gamblers in casinos that provide no indication of
day or night. A false sense of confidentiality and privacy is also created
and it can readily reduce the amount of physical activity in which an
individual engages (Gendlin, 1981).
The pace of society in the information age has sped up dramatically.
Technologies have played a part in giving us easy access to one another
through fax, e-mail, cell phones, chat rooms and online messaging.
However, what has the potential to bring us together also leads to isola-
tion and greater interpersonal separation. The speed of technology cre-
ates the lure of immediate gratification and the pressure to communicate
more quickly and perhaps more often with larger numbers of individu-
als. However, the quantity of interactions seems to be replacing and
displacing depth and quality.
The energetic felt sense of the relationship that develops can also be
distorted through these new technologies. Web cams and video tele-
conferencing, which have been developed to allow individuals visual
access to one another to assist in communication, are still distorting. In
clinical practice during the 1980s one-way mirrors were used with in-
dividuals and families to allow for interdisciplinary and team partici-
pation in assessments and training. It was discovered that even though
the team observing was as little as three to five feet away behind the
mirror from the individuals being observed, the social worker in the
room with the client had a qualitatively different experience from the
observers regardless of the number of cameras used or angles em-
ployed. As a result, when providing team feedback to the client, the
social worker physically present in the room was the one whose as-
sessment was given priority over the observers. Technologies, by their
very essence, are intermediaries in the exchange between individuals.
The camera lens and mirrors allowed for objectification, sometimes
clarity, but not necessarily understanding or accurate empathy. These
aspects of the process were best gained by the social worker in the
room, energetically. Likewise, web cams that are gaining increased
prominence can objectify and distance the individual from others
rather than enhancing connectedness.
Television and computer technologies are very powerful focusing
agents. Even highly distractible clinical populations such as children
presenting with attention issues are able to focus for long periods of
time at a computer. Likewise, television, gaming and computer soft-
wares are designed to focus and sustain attention. As a consequence we
14 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

are being trained to expect to sit passively and be entertained. The prac-
tice fallout is that increasing numbers of parents are expressing con-
cerns with issues of obesity and reduced level of activity in their
children as their children are spending less time interacting with their
peers in sports and imaginative, unstructured play. Many times, infor-
mation technologies are used to entertain children who are more pas-
sively involved. What becomes reduced is the physical interaction of
the body, essential in both learning and in incorporating learning. These
individuals have fewer requirements to internally develop the skills of
patience, self-control and the self-discipline needed to manage the state
of boredom, which is not an infrequent occurrence in life. In social work
practice large numbers of children are seen who have not developed
these skills internally. These children seek external ways to provide
themselves with the “quick fix” that will reduce boredom. Information
and electronic technologies provide the “quick fix” but increased de-
pendency on an external source for what needs to be developed inter-
nally leaves children at risk for developing unhealthy coping strategies.
These can manifest themselves through alcohol and other psychoactive
drug addiction, impulse control disorders, such as problem gambling or
eating disorders, or through compulsive sexual behaviour.
Sex and money are often related to power and disenfranchised indi-
viduals often struggle with access to finances and abuses of power,
which readily occur in the area of human sexuality. Conditions involved
in the information technology domain create the opportunity for abuses
in these areas to flourish. In practice over the last five years, an increas-
ing vulnerability of children to sexual predators via chat rooms has been
witnessed (Relph & Webb, 2003). In chat rooms, pseudo-intimacy can
develop. Children can be more easily deceived, as one of the fundamen-
tal aspects of in-person communication is the congruence or lack of
congruence between the verbal message and the non-verbal message.
Transparency in our relationships allows us to make use of our intuitive
feelings and instincts to uncover deceit or dishonesty. With technology
mediating transparency, sexual predators have easier access to a child
within the confines of what feels like a safe, private place. Many parents
present concerns over their children, both boys and girls, being enticed
into posting their photos, often sexualized, on the Internet, and/or dis-
closing their personal details such as address and full name, all of which
allows for easier access by the predator. A risk also exists of being
drawn into using web cams to send nude images or simply being ex-
posed to language and thoughts used in chat rooms which are personally
and sexually degrading. These experiences are hardly new to society,
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 15

however, the number of children and young adolescents involved and

the ease at which they can become involved have increased dramati-
cally as a result of information technologies. Likewise in practice we
also see teens and preteens agreeing to meet their chat room “friends”
and making plans to travel, sometimes out of the country, with
individuals who they have never met in person.
There are ongoing efforts by police and legal authorities to create
safety on the Internet and yet pop-ups of, and e-mails containing, sexu-
ally explicit, unbidden, arousing material can be as frequent as SPAM.
There are often difficulties finding ways to close these pages leading to
prolonged exposure of persons of all ages to such arousing materials
that in the past they would have had to actively seek out. The problem
with these occurrences is that what underlies compulsive sexual behav-
iour and makes people vulnerable to developing this, is the pairing of
the feelings of arousal with the elements contained within the experi-
ence. The sudden viewing of such provocative information paired with
our natural curiosity leads to increased viewing. The power of the tech-
nology also allows this behaviour to develop in relative secrecy. In the
United States in 2002, 98 million unique individuals visited the top five
free pornography sites, in an industry that is estimated to generate reve-
nues of over one billion dollars annually and for which 70% of traffic
occurs during the 9-5 workday (Lawson, 2005).
Clearly, compulsive sexual behaviour is an emerging social issue ex-
acerbated by the elements of information technology. Social workers
generally have not been well-educated or prepared for this issue during
their training. Thus, they are not well aware of, prepared to identify or to
treat this problem. A related social problem that is also facilitated by the
Internet is compulsive gambling. This, too, is an area where education
and training of social workers is lagging behind individuals presenting
for treatment, leaving the issue often overlooked or misunderstood and
counselling provided inadequate (Hargreave & Csiernik, 2003).
Another related concern in practice for social workers is the role that
information technologies, in the forms of chat rooms, news groups, mes-
sage boards, e-clubs and personal e-mails, are having in facilitating af-
fairs between adults. Again, this is not a new problem but the conditions
are such that individuals, who in the past might not have sought out con-
tact with others, are now given the accessibility and psuedoprivate condi-
tions surrounding information technologies and find themselves more
easily crossing over their own personal and relationship boundaries. As
a result, in practice it is not uncommon to hear that individuals who are
often under pressure, or going through a stressful time emotionally,
16 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

cross these boundaries and as a result present to social workers with a

host of emotional, moral, physical, spiritual and, at times, legal prob-
lems. The availability, affordability, and anonymous nature of the con-
tacts mediated by information technology are all factors involved in
facilitating these issues.
However, perhaps the greatest challenge to the standards of the profes-
sion is the emergence of e-counselling and e-therapy. Clients having ac-
cess to the e-mail of their counsellors have created the need for renewed
clarity around boundaries and roles let alone the issues associated with a
purely electronic relationship where a client and social worker never meet
in the three-dimensional world. Concerns raised regarding conducting
counselling via the Internet, e-mail, or through chat rooms are extensive
and contain both ethical and legal components as well as a casework as-
pect. Topics that necessitate consideration ethically and legally include
confidentiality, informed consent, file management and, of course, duty
to protect. Clinical concerns include the level of expertise and skill in the
medium as compared to traditional social work skills, the ability to estab-
lish an electronic therapeutic relationship, increasing time spent docu-
menting contact with clients, and using streamlined interviews with
clients rather than spending time with them face-to-face; and again the
confidentiality, anonymity and security of the electronic relationship
(Ames, 1999; Gelman, Pollack & Weiner, 1999; Kamani & Regehr,
2003; Rock & Congress, 1999). In attempting to streamline the process of
electronic assessment and adapt to conducting electronic counseling, we
can lose the creative process of discovering new solutions. These con-
cerns were sufficiently significant for the British Columbia Association
of Clinical Counsellors (2002) to recommend to its membership that they
avoid the practice of offering services via the Internet or related informa-
tion technologies. However, the question then emerges, if it is not regu-
lated and registered professionals who are engaged in this type of
counselling, then who will and is providing this form of assistance
(Stofle, 1997)?
There are obviously new practice issues and areas that have been
created by the evolution towards an information-based society and
with this comes the questions of what is practice and how to practice
in this new age? These new technologies also leave us pondering
questions of what now is adequate social support and how do we
forge therapeutic rapport in this new emerging social reality? As
well, there exists the risk of a profession generation gap between new
practitioners, those most likely to have comfort with and ability to
use and adapt to alternative technologies for social work interaction
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 17

with clients, contrasted with more established and experienced so-

cial workers who completed their under-graduate term papers using
technology that included a portable typewriter, erasable bond paper
and white out. This last consideration led to the hosting of several fo-
cus groups comprised of both beginning and established social work-
ers who were asked to relate their thoughts and concerns about the
role of information technology and social work.

METHODOLOGY

Three focus groups were held between September and October

2004, with 17 volunteers who freely participate in the groups and
who were all associated with the School of Social Work at King’s
University College at the University of Western Ontario in London,
Ontario. The Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) program at King’s
University College is a two-year honours professional program with
103 students enrolled at the time of the research, 59 of whom were in
their first year of the program. The Master of Social Work Program
(MSW) was in its second year of existence with 43 students enrolled,
23 of whom were in their second year of the three-year part-time pro-
gram. The first focus group consisted of seven students enrolled in
the first year of the Bachelor of Social Work Program while the sec-
ond was comprised of seven second-year part-time Master of Social
Work students. The third group consisted of members of the Associ-
ation of Social Work Field Practice Educators (ASWPFE). ASWPFE
members serve as supervisors for King’s University College School
of Social Work interns and also serve on School of Social Work com-
mittees and advisory bodies.
Seven open-ended questions were asked of each of the three groups’
members. The data was gathered through free-flowing conversation and
as a result not all questions were formally posed during the course of
each session. Questions were, however, asked under two distinct cate-
gories: (1) the impact of technology on social work practice and (2) the
impact of technology on social work education. The focus groups were
taped and then the tapes reviewed for themes that arose. Themes were
identified from the transcription of each focus group session.
18 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

RESULTS

It (technology) is going to change the flavour of the world . . . and

what we as social workers will be called on to do, to deal with that
(may be) beyond our scope, our understanding, our appreciation.
(ASWPFE member, 2004)

Four distinct themes were consistently identified in each of the three

focus groups. The first and most prominent theme focused on confiden-
tiality and the impact information technology has on being able to pro-
vide privacy for clients. The second theme was that of workload and the
role of technology in changing the social work environment. The third
and the most profound theme identified was the purpose of social work
practice and the power technology has to potentially compromise the
basic principles of social work practice and the fundamental therapeutic
relationship. The fourth and most general theme focused on the impact
of information technology on social work education.
Technology was directly identified as reducing the ability to keep cli-
ent information confidential. Participants stated that client confidentiality
is currently being compromised with increased use of computer files for
client information, the sharing of client information across agencies and
provinces and the use of voice mail. Particular concern was identified
with e-counselling or use of e-mail because in most cases it is difficult to
confirm a person’s identity via e-mail and computers are presumed to be
easily accessible by illegal means. Cell phone use was also identified as
an unsecured way of sharing information between clients and social
workers with the potential for significant privacy implications. Interest-
ingly, a member of the MSW focus group identified that the general lack
of knowledge and understanding of technology by social workers, in par-
ticular computer technology, exacerbated problems in maintaining confi-
dentiality.

Computer training is not a part of social work training and it’s not
often a part of agency training either. So, we are given these tools
but don’t fully understand them. Where does the info(rmation) go
and how do we ensure we handle it safely and responsibly? (Mas-
ter of Social Work Student, 2004)

In response to the question of how technology impacted the thera-

peutic relationship, several forms of information technology were
identified. These included e-mail, voice mail and video conferencing.
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 19

Participants identified that information technology has the potential to

remove the personal connection of face-to-face meetings and may un-
dermine two essential components of social work practice: (1) the fun-
damental relationship with another human being and (2) the cues
taken from a person’s body language during an in-person therapeutic
encounter. Undermining these core components of social work may
skew the interpretation of language and may pose a risk to clients, as
subtle cues for emotional distress may be missed if the contact is not
directly face-to-face.

E-counselling would probably be fraught with dangerous misin-

terpretations using the English language. (Master of Social Work
Student, 2004)

Technology and the removal of face-to-face contact were identified

as also posing a serious threat to effective safety planning for an emo-
tionally distraught or volatile client, as their true identity, location or
meaning of language may not be known. Safety issues and the loss of
the subtleties within the therapeutic relationship were also themes iden-
tified in all three focus groups.
Positive aspects of technology were, however, also acknowledged
and identified. Technology such as e-mail, instant messaging and
video conferencing were consistently identified as creating the op-
portunity for social workers to provide assessments and counselling
to isolated groups throughout the community. Prominent among
these were those residing in rural and remote areas who would not
normally have access to a social worker and secondly, to populations
who have a disability that reduced their mobility or ability to com-
municate in face-to-face, verbal interactions. Identified within the
MSW focus group were populations of people with hearing disabili-
ties that rely heavily on technology to communicate in our society,
through e-mail or video conferencing with an interpreter. E-mail was
also identified as reaching persons who would not otherwise engage
in a therapeutic relationship, due to embarrassment about their issues
or identified problems, or difficulty engaging in relationships. Ado-
lescents in particular were identified as benefiting from a combina-
tion of e-mail and face-to-face interactions.
Two members of the BSW focus group believed that technology
could provide social workers with more time for direct client service by
streamlining record keeping and enhancing the ability to access client
and service information. Focus group participants identified that infor-
20 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

mation technology in social work has been used to track appointments,

provide time management tools and provide data for assessing agency
outputs. However, participants in the MSW and ASWPFE groups had
concerns that rather than beneficial, this technology was actually inef-
fective in providing more direct client time and interfered with this pro-
cess. MSW and ASWPFE group members also stated that from their
experiences information technologies in the form of computer records
and voice mail had created more indirect service hours for social work-
ers. They stated that few agencies are in fact functioning solely on
paperless files, thus creating both paper and computer files and there ap-
pears to be continually increasing demands to constantly check voice
and e-mail messages.
The most significant difference between the BSW and MSW groups
centered on e-counselling. MSW respondents identified concerns about
ensuring the genuine nature of the contact and relationship with a coun-
sellor, and specifically, this group also had concerns about verifying the
counsellors’ credentials and accountability as a social worker. Creden-
tials and the resulting accountability, through registration of the profes-
sion, was not an issue identified by the BSW group. Interestingly, the
ASWPFE focus group members identified themselves as having far less
knowledge about online counselling and technology in social work than
did the BSW students to whom the ASWPFE members were providing
supervision.
In all three focus groups, participants identified age and previous ex-
perience with current technology, as having an impact on social work-
ers’ comfort level and also their effectiveness in communicating online
or through other technological means. Focus group members agreed
that current technology, whether it is video conferencing, e-mail or chat
line style interactions, requires a different skill set than direct, face-
to-face social work interactions, that seek to establish and build inter-
personal relationships and rapport.
However, those just beginning their social work education and those
with extensive work and supervisory experience did share the perspec-
tive that social work in its truest form is about the relationship. Where
the groups did differ was that the younger members in the BSW group
identified themselves as more computer and technologically savvy,
having had extensive experience with online conversations. They were
also more open to online learning and computerized record keeping.
MSW participants and ASWPFE focus group members also openly ex-
pressed concerns about the credibility of online degrees with both groups
identifying the need to ensure that a placement component is in place
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 21

for direct service experience and assessing of direct practice social

work skills.

We are losing interpersonal skills. There is something to be said for

coming to class, coming to campus. Interactions with fellow class-
mates, learning new perspectives, new ideas and hearing other peo-
ple’s history and actually having one-on-one time with professors,
opposed to sitting in your room on a computer. It doesn’t add (to in-
terpersonal skills), it takes away. (Bachelor of Social Work Student,
2004)

A consistent perspective among the three focus groups was that

PowerPoint use in class by professors or students was an indicator of
appearing more professional. There was one dissenter in the BSW
group who stated that at times the context, discussion and interaction of
classroom and topic discussion is lost to the technology of PowerPoint.
Members of the MSW group appreciated the appearance of Power-
Point, but acknowledged that the content is the true test of ability and
professionalism.

We have to keep up with technology. It becomes about profes-

sional image. Right or wrong, PowerPoint lends credibility versus
overheads done that morning. As social workers we get drawn into
that whether we want to or not. It is a credibility issue. (ASWFPE,
2004)

However, another member of the ASWPFE focus group identified

learning the most from one particular professor because the professor
loved what he was doing and had charisma. It was this professor’s cha-
risma that made the participant want to learn and the respondent had
concerns that PowerPoint did not facilitate that type of mutual learning
experience. This concept was in contrast to the idea identified in the
BSW group by one participant that because we are media focused, tech-
nology has become equal with ability and thus, PowerPoint is better all
around.
Identified within both the MSW and ASWPFE focus groups was the
idea that information technologies will change the scope and type of
counselling and interventions social workers will be involved in, partic-
ularly with children and adolescents seeking service. A final important
message from the study’s participants was that technology and direct
22 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

practice should complement each other rather than working in isolation

from each other or from other techniques. Technology has its place be-
side direct social work practice, not in lieu of it.

DISCUSSION

The pace of change in the information technology era is so fast that

even the phrase information technology (I.T.) has become an outdated
term. Hypermodern technology, or simply hypertechnology, “the entire in-
terconnected assemblage of various technologies operating worldwide
which interact electronically” (Kreuger & Stretch, 2000, p. 103), has begun
to replace the simpler idea of I.T. While certainly there are benefits, this
article has primarily examined the limitations of hypertechnology on both
clients and practitioners. The belief that hypertechnology will change so-
cial work practice, both in the tools used for interventions with clients and
in the issues brought to the social worker-client relationship, was identi-
fied by all participants irrespective of their level of education or amount
of practice experience. An underlying concern, however, is to what extent
social work values will be incorporated into new technologies. Will the
outcome manifest itself in high-quality social work practice or merely
convenient and comfortable practice that serves administrative and orga-
nizational system functions ahead of client system needs?
Technology is a tool, be it a revolver or a telephone; be it an auto-
matic assault rifle or the Internet. Thus, it is not only the function and
purpose of the tool but how we use it that is problematic or beneficial.
This, again, firmly focuses us on the importance of the profession of So-
cial Work also adapting evidence-based practice as a technology. Ulti-
mately whichever hypertechnologies we chose to include or exclude
from our individual and collective practices and opt to teach within our
Faculties and Schools of Social Work, it should be to improve social
work practice and to enhance the lives of our clients and our communi-
ties.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly for a profession that fo-
cuses on oppression, is the issue of access. What will be our collec-
tive professional response, as hypertechnology broadens its scope
and hold in the world and in social work, for those who do not have
access to or the ability to use the new technologies? If our practice
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 23

Practitioner/Provider Questions

1a. What types of technologies are currently mediating my relationships with my

clients?

1b. What is the impact of these technologies on my client's experience of my support

and assistance?

1c. Do these technologies promote my creating a meaningful personal relationship of

warmth, empathetic understanding, positive regard and congruence?

2. Do the benefits of hypertechnology offset the limitations of not working

face-to-face with clients?

3. How has technology related to my social work practice changed since I became a
social worker? What have the positive and negative implications of this technology
been for:

(i) my agency
(ii) funders of my agency
(iii) my own practice as a social worker

4. If only those interventions that adhere to scientific-technological inputs and

solutions are deemed evidence-based, how does the process orientation of
social work and the diversity of views fit?

Consumer/Client Questions

1. Does providing information in technologically accessible form enhance the

service I receive?

2. Do the benefits of the technology offset the limitations of not working face-to-face
with my social worker?

3. Is the technology that mediated the relationship with my social worker helping me
to feel connected, understood and supported in making changes?

becomes too intertwined with hypertechnology do we not further

perpetuate an under-class of disenfranchised and alienated persons?
If have and have not about to add a new dimension and if technology
becomes an increasingly significant barrier to participation in soci-
ety, then what will be our response–as agents of social control or
agents of social justice? The industrial age spawned the profession of
social work with all its strengths and its limitations. Will this new
technological era deliver us as a profession more relevant and mean-
ingful in the lives of our clients and our communities (the light side?)
or will it turn us to the dark side?
24 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

REFERENCES
Ames, N. (1999). Social work recording: a new look at an old issue. Journal of Social
Work Education, 35, 227-237.
Armitage, A. (1996). Social welfare in Canada revisited: facing up to the future. Don
Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.
British Colombia Association of Clinical Counsellors (2002). Counselling via tele-
phone or computer. Code of Ethical Conduct and Standards of Clinical Practice for
Registered Clinical Counsellors. Retrieved on 17 June 2005 from http://www.bc-
counsellors.org.code2001.htm
Carkhuff, R.R., & Truax, C.B. (1965). Training in counseling and psychotherapy: an
evaluation of an integrated didactic and experiential approach. Journal of Consult-
ing Psychology. 29(4), 333-336.
Cwikel, J., & Cnaan, R. (1991). Ethical dilemmas in applying second-wave informa-
tion technology to social work practice. Social Work, 36, 114-120.
Finn, J. (1999). An exploration of helping processes in an online self-help group focus-
ing on issues of disability. Health & Social Work, 24, 220-231.
Fitzgerald, E., & McNutt, J.G. (1999). Electronic advocacy in policy practice: A
framework for teaching technologically based practice. Journal of Social Work Ed-
ucation, 35, 331-341.
Galinsky, M.J., Schopler, J.H., & Abell, M.D. (1997). Connecting group members
through telephone and computer groups. Health & Social Work, 22, 181-188.
Gelman, S.R., Pollack, D., & Weiner, A. (1999). Confidentiality of social work records
in the computer age. Social Work, 44, 243-252.
Gendlin, E.T. (1981). Focusing. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Geraty, E. (2004). Social Work and the Internet. Retrieved on 21 June 2005 from
http://member.aol.com/Egeraty/Page6.html
Giffords, E.D. (1998). Social work on the Internet: An introduction. Social Work, 43,
243-251.
Grohol, J.M. (1997). Why Online Psychotherapy? Because there is a need. Retrieved
on 10 June 2005 from http://psychcentral.com/best/best3.htm
Grohol, J.M. (1999). Best Practices in E-therapy. Retrieved on 28 June 2005 from
http://psychcentral.com/best/best3.htm
Hargreave, C., & Csiernik, R. (2003). An examination of gambling and problem gam-
bling in Canada. In R. Csiernik & W.S. Rowe (Eds), Responding to the oppression
of addiction: Canadian social work perspectives. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars
Press.
Kamani, K., & Regehr, C. (2003). Clinical, ethical, and legal issues in e-therapy. Fami-
lies in Society, 84, 155-162.
Knowles, A.J. (2002). E-learning in social work: Emerging pedagogical and policy is-
sues. Currents: New Scholarship in the Human Services, 1(1).
Kreuger, L.W., & Stretch, J.J. (2000). How hypermodern technology in social work ed-
ucation bites back. Journal of Social Work Education, 36, 103-114.
Lawson, P. (2005). Intervention in the workplace. In R. Csiernik (Ed), Wellness and
work: Occupational assistance in Canada. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars Press.
 Section I: Technology and Evidence-Based Practice 25

McCarty, D., & Clancy, C. (2002). Telehealth: Implications for social workers. Social
Work, 47, 153-161.
McNutt, J.G. (2002). New horizon in social work advocacy. Electronic Journal of So-
cial Work, 1. Retrieved on 23 June 2005 from http://www/ejsw.net/IssueView2.asp
Nurius, P.S., & Hudson, W.W. (1988). Computer-based practice: future dream or cur-
rent technology? Social Work, 33, 357-362.
Pleace, N., Burrows, R., Loader, B., Muncer, S., & Nettleton, S. (2003). From self-ser-
vice welfare to virtual self-help. In E. Harlow & S. Webb (Eds), Information and
communication technologies in welfare services. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica
Kingsely Publishers.
Relph, B., & Webb, S.A. (2003). Internet child abuse. In E. Harlow & S. Webb (Eds),
Information and communication technologies in welfare services. Philadelphia,
PA: Jessica Kingsely Publishers.
Robson, D., & Robson, M. (1998). Intimacy and computer communication. British
Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 26, 33-41.
Rock, B., & Congress, E. (1999). The new confidentiality for the 21st century in a man-
aged care environment. Social Work, 44, 253-262.
Schoech, D. (2002). IT and human services: the good, the bad and the ugly. Currents:
New Scholarship in the Human Services, 1(1).
Schopler, J.H., Abell, M.D., & Galinsky, M.J. (1998). Technology-based groups: A re-
view and conceptual framework for practice. Social Work, 43, 254-267.
Stofle, G.S. (1997). Thoughts About Online Psychotherapy: Ethical and practical con-
siderations. Retrieved on 10 June 2005 from http://members.aol.com/stofle/
onlinepsych.htm
Stofle, G.S., & Hamilton, S. (1998). Online Supervision for Social Workers. Retrieved
on 15 June 2005 from http://newsocialworker.com
Suler, J. (2000). Myths and realities of online clinical work. Psychotherapy and clinical
work in cyberspace. The Psychology of Cyberspace. Retrieved on 10 June 2005
from http://www.rider.edu/%7Esuler/psycyber/myths.html
Thurston, L.P., & Cauble, E. (1999). Using interactive multimedia to build child wel-
fare competencies in social workers. Journal of Research on Computing in Educa-
tion, 32, 298-306.

doi:10.1300/J394v03n03_02

View publication stats