Skip to main content

5 Reasons Higher Ed Administrators Should Use Twitter

"Higher ed executives are 10% more likely to be using social media compared to individuals in positions of leadership in the corporate world at Fortune 500 companies" (Donachie, 2017, n. p.). There are many reasons that Twitter, in particular, is popular among higher ed administrators. Here are 5. 
  1. To listen to constituents. Twitter is a great way for administrators to connect with people that often can be remote from them. Students, parents, counterparts, colleagues, alumni, and funders: all of these people can share their valuable input with administrators via Twitter.
  2. To keep up with the news. Twitter is often the first to have the breaking news. By following local and national news sources, higher ed news sources, academic and professional organizations, thought leaders, and relevant hashtags, administrators can be the first to know important information that impacts them.
  3. To make the news. Just like administrators are getting their news from Twitter, they can share  big news about the campus. Followers will want to know about that new building, big gift, big decision, special guest, major events and performances, awards, Orientation, Commencement, exams, and profiles of students, alumni, programs, and employees. 
  4. To ask questions. Considering making an important decision? Why not ask for help?
  5. To say thank you. No (good) administator works in a bubble. It's so important to thank the people who help you along the way. Remember to tag them so they're notified and retweet.
Thank you for reading this far. Be sure to share with me what I missed in the comments section.
Reference

Donachie, P. (2017). 

Higher ed leaders are 10% more likely to use social media than their corporate counterparts.  In EducationDive. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/news/higher-ed-leaders-are-10-more-likely-to-use-social-media-than-their-corpor/506325/


Comments

  1. UnknownJune 28, 2018 at 9:26 AM

    Great blog post. I really like 4 and 5. I think Twitter is a great way to ask questions and get information from constituents. Emails are becoming a thing of the past and Twitter is more of a real time, albeit virtual conversation. The scary part is the actual replies. Sometimes (well, a lot of times) responses go unregulated and respondents get into disputes. Twitter is also a great way to say thank you - to the campus, community, Legislature, etc. It's public and accessible for many who may not have immediate access to the President. It helps the public as they develop perceptions and impressions about the President.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scholars, Degree Completion Efforts, and Transparency: A Reflection on Rippner’s Chapter 6

Rippner (2016) explains that “government leaders want to ensure that a quality education is being produced at an efficient rate” (p. 144), which I believe is often in direct conflict with what university faculty believe is their goal. She recognizes that “faculty do not always identify themselves with their institution, but rather feel more loyalty to their fields” (p. 118). They are scholars first, tied to their discipline with responsibilities beyond teaching that include research or creative activity, service to the university usually in the form of shared governance structures, and occasionally, as at my institution, community service. Some faculty are also concerned with civic outcomes, such as participation in our larger democratic process, in addition to academic learning outcomes, and in my experience, are not focused on “higher completion rates and greater perceived employment prospects (e.g. jobs and salaries)” (p. 115). While they tend to be concerned about the achievement g
3 comments
Read more

Thinking & Acting Missionally: A Reflection on Lipsky’s Chapters 2 & 7

When I began watching the video (DeVoogd, 2018) and reading Lipsky (2010), I realized I wasn’t sure what the definition of a street level bureaucrat is. I thought it was the same as the as the “anonymous bureaucrat” described by Rippner (2016), but when I looked it up and got the definition, I found I was incorrect. I am clearly an anonymous bureaucrat, but I don't think I’m a street level bureaucrat. According to Lipsky (1969), street level bureaucrats are the intermediaries between the government and the public; their jobs are to implement policy but rarely have formal responsibility for the development or evaluation of it. In public higher education, these are the people who work directly with students and parents, particularly in places like service centers where people buy parking passes, get IDs, and add money to debit cards; financial aid offices; and student health centers. I’m convinced that unlike public school teachers, faculty are not street level bureaucrats as they d
2 comments
Read more