Book Review of "#Follow the Leader: Lessons in Social Media Success from #HigherEd CEOs"
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Zaiontz, Dan. (2015). #Follow the leader: Lessons in social media from #HigherEd CEOs. St. Louis, MO: EDUniverse Media. Pages: 143. Price: 29.99 USD (paper).Dan Zaiontz's #Follow the Leader's subtitle, lessons in social media from #HigherEd CEOS, pithily captures the essence of the book. Written as a social media manual for leaders in higher education, it is based on interviews with twenty-two college and university presidents in Canada and the United States, focusing on they navigate the social media landscape, using (as the frequent use of hashtags already suggests) Twitter, yet also Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Google+, YouTube and other tools build and maintain an institutional presence, communicate with various stakeholders, and create and support virtual communities for their respective higher education institutions. #Follow the Leader is an accessible, engaging and well-structured book that outlines the risks and rewards of social media presence for higher education leaders, culls best practices from the range of social media profiles it offers on college/university presidents that have been interviewed, and offers planning tools and matrices for higher education leaders and their communication advisors develop workable and actionable social media strategies. Importantly, #Follow the Leader is not an academic treatise nor does it desire locate itself within larger scholastic debates around social media consumption and behaviour, theories of leadership and management, the corporatization of higher education and the politics of higher education leadership and administration, name a few potential discussions. While avoiding these debates and those similar them may contribute its reading ease, better situating itself in various kinds of debates that traverse higher education and business management, academically and in terms of policy, might have also deepened the significance of its approach and message.Zaointz's primer begins with the suggestion that, in 2015, when the book was published, social media presence for higher education leaders wasn't mandatory. Yet, his whole book is a detailed examination of the merits and benefits of actively cultivating such a presence. He begins with outlining key questions that leaders should entertain in deciding embark on their respective social media journeys, including their reasons for engaging with prospective and current students, faculty, alumni, government, media and fundraising stakeholders, their own personal capacities for risk and reputational harm and their personal strengths as communicators. Thus, Zaointz's manual is both a how to as well as a learn from. While profiling the relatively successful strategies employed by his interviewees, including presidents of such institutions such as Laurentian University, Southern New Hampshire University, Olds College, and the University of Cincinnati (as well as the now maligned University of Missouri), Zaointz also outlines the steps required build a social media presence and the strategy undergird it for a higher educational leader testing the social media waters and looking for guidance.Zaointz argues that benefits of an active social media presence, such as improved metrics on student satisfaction, ameliorated reputational perceptions, favourable legislative change, and renewed funding, need outweigh the potential risks personal, professional and institutional reputations. He suggests that when higher education leaders seek build and cultivate a social media presence, they should align their messaging with that of their institution's interests and values, be transparent, model someone they find effective, identify interests and provide metrics, design a success matrix and work with strategic advisors or communication specialists. Zaointz diagnoses three models of social media content creation: the ghostwriter, the hybrid and the independent. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,071 | 0,038 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».