Seattle University Bachelor of Social Work Program ...€¦ · Bachelor of Social Work Program . Assessment Report . AY 2014-15 . Faculty . Mary Kay Brennan, ... o 40% (2) of those

Seattle University Bachelor of Social Work Program

Assessment Report AY 2014-15

Faculty Mary Kay Brennan, LICSW Clinical Professor and Program Director Amelia Seraphia Derr, MSW PhD Assistant Professor Gerson Kleinberg, MSW Instructor and Field Liaison Morna McEachern, MSW PhD Instructor Riva Zeff, MSW Clinical Professor and Field Director Adjunct Faculty Madeline Lovell, MSW PhD Professor Emerita Sabina Neem, LICSW Jennifer Tilghman-Havens, MSW MBA Eric Waithaka, MSW PhD Staff Naomi Rosenberg, MACJ

AY 2014-15 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY BACHELOR OF SOCIAL WORK PROGRAM 1


AY 14-15 Assessment Report Summary Evaluation Data & Analysis for Program Improvement

OVERVIEW

The AY 14-15 Assessment Report contains a summary of assessment findings by competency that affirm or indicate a need for program improvement. Evaluation data is reviewed and analyzed by social work program faculty for the purpose of continuous program improvement. All Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) accredited programs must measure, provide summary data and outcomes for the assessment of each of the identified competencies in the form of the percentage of students achieving the program’s established benchmark (Accreditation Standard 4.02). Further explained by CSWE:

Students are assessed on their mastery of the competencies that comprise the accreditation standards of the Council on Social Work Education. These competencies are dimensions of social work practice that all social workers are expected to master during their professional training. A measurement benchmark is set by the social work programs for each competency. An assessment score at or above that benchmark is considered by the program to represent mastery of that particular competency.

‘

CSWE’s Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) of 2008 identify 10 competencies and 41 generalist practice behaviors for all BSW programs. Our assessment includes a review of the program’s Explicit Curriculum, that is the degree to which our students are prepared to meet the competencies and practice behaviors, and the Implicit Curriculum, that is the context in which our student learn. GRADUATING CLASS OF 2015: EMPLOYED, GRADUATE SCHOOL, AND SERVICE The 2015 Cohort had 15 Bachelor of Social Work graduates who have successfully launched into social work practice, graduate school, and service. Specifically:

• 33% (5) obtained full-time employment in the field of Social Work o 40% (2) of those employed were hired by their senior year field practicum sites

• 40% (6) are pursuing graduate school: 1 is currently in graduate school (Seattle University Law School), 20% (3) are accepted and beginning their social work graduate studies in 2016 (Boston College, Case Western), and another 13% (2) are currently applying for social work graduate programs.

• 7% (1) is volunteering with Teach for America • 20% (3) were unable to be reached

SAMPLE OF FINAL SUMMARY COMMENTS FROM EXIT SURVEY “I feel like I have a lot more knowledge about how to treat clients and engage with them.” “The professors are all very approachable, supportive, and understanding. A lot of the skills we learn are useful, like ecomaps or interviewing skills.” “…professors are AMAZING at what they do and overwhelmingly care for their students.”


ASSESSMENT PLAN The Social Work program systematically assesses both explicit and implicit curriculum annually through multiple measures to ensure continuous review for program improvement. The measures employ direct and indirect methods yielding quantitative and qualitative data. Each faculty member is responsible for coordinating an assessment measure of the program’s assessment plan. The assessment data is compiled by the Social Work professor who teaches the research sequence (Dr. Amelia Seraphia Derr). The data is contained within the Assessment Report table (included in this report) and copies of the measurement tools are included as an Appendix to this report. Social Work faculty then analyze and discuss data, and identify areas and actions for program improvement during the annual fall retreat. Proposed actions are based on faculty agreement. Dr. Derr summarizes and writes the final Assessment Report. The annual Assessment Report is disseminated to the program’s Community Advisory Committee, Practicum Advisory Board, the College and University Assessment coordinators, and various College and University administrators each fall. The CSWE completed Form AS4(B) Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes is posted annually on the program’s website. All individual summary reports of collected data are available upon request. EXPLICT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT METHODS The program’s assessment plan employs three measures used to evaluate the 10 program competencies and 41 practice behaviors required by CSWE. Supplementary to these measures, a senior focus group is held each June covering overall curriculum coherence, program strengths and areas of growth, and other implicit programmatic activities (i.e., advising, accessibility, attentiveness to diversity within program and university). EXPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT MEASURES

1. Final Field Performance Evaluation of students as rated by MSW Practicum Instructor on each practice behavior. MSW Practicum Instructors rate placed social work student’s ability to demonstrate practice behaviors using the ALCEA developed instrument. A Likert scale of 1-5 (1= Unsatisfactory, 2 = Marginal, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Good, 5 = Excellent) is used. This measure provides data on student attainment of each practice behavior. Student practice behavior raw scores are averaged to obtain the score for the relevant competency (e.g. practice behaviors 1-6 are related to competency #1, 7-10 to competency #2, etc.). Each student’s competency rating is tallied to gain the percentage of students achieving the benchmark of 3.0 or higher for each competency. The program’s competency benchmark is that 90% of all students will receive a rating of 3.0 or higher. A score of 3.0 indicates that students have achieved, and demonstrated, average competency and practice behavior skills at a BSW level. The program’s aspirational goal is for 75% of students to achieve a rating of 4.0 or higher, indicating an above average competency and practice behavior skills.

2. Senior Final Field Performance Self-Evaluation on each practice behavior. Senior social work students rate their perceived attainment and ability to demonstrate practice behaviors using the ALCEA development instrument. A likert scale of 1-5 (1= Unsatisfactory, 2 = Marginal, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 =


Good, 5 = Excellent) is used. This measure provides data on student attainment of each practice behavior. Student practice behavior raw scores are averaged to obtain the score for the relevant competency (e.g. practice behaviors 1-6 are related to competency #1, 7-10 to competency #2, etc.). Each student’s competency rating is tallied to gain the percentage of students achieving the benchmark of 3.0 or higher for each competency. The program’s competency benchmark is 90% of all students will receive a rating of 3.0 or higher. A score of 3.0 indicates that students have achieved, and demonstrated, average competency and practice behavior skills at a BSW level. The program’s aspirational goal is for 75% of students to achieve a rating of 4.0 or higher, indicating an above average competency and practice behavior skills.

3. Senior Capstone Paper is an embedded practice research assignment in the program’s senior synthesis

course, SOCW 4030 Research III: Capstone. A rubric developed by the instructor is used to evaluate and rate students’ ability to demonstrate specific practice behaviors. The benchmark for attainment is 90% of students’ Capstone papers are at or above 74% of rubric total. University assessment “aspirational” standard is the percentage of students at or above 90% of rubric total and “minimally meets or fails to meet” standard is defined as at or below 30% of rubric total.

IMPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT METHODS The Social Work program monitors and evaluates how we deliver and administer our educational program, termed the implicit curriculum. The implicit curriculum, as conceived by CSWE and explicated by Holloway (2009), “suggests that student learning outcomes are not only affected by the formal course instruction but also the policies and procedures which govern program conduct and guide social interaction within the educational setting.” In other words, it is the larger context or climate in which our students learn. IMPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT MEASURE Senior Exit Survey: During spring quarter of their senior year, students are asked to complete a 20 item questionnaire using Survey Monkey. Evaluation questions contain rating scales (5 point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree) as well as open-ended comment sections. Elements contained in the Senior Exit Survey are thought to potentially impact or have implications for educational outcomes. The elements are:

• Commitment to diversity • Advising • Participation in service (including academic service learning) • Capacity and capabilities for leadership • Resource and supports utilization • Identification of program strengths and areas of needed improvement

SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT MEASURES There are several supplemental measures utilized by the Social Work program including:

• Senior Focus Group


• College Course Evaluations • Multiple Field Practicum Administration Rating Tools

These additional measures are drawn upon when analyzing curriculum competencies. Field Education Annual Report The Field Education component of the curriculum, as led by the Field Director Prof. Riva Zeff, assesses its own functioning including suitability of sites, field practicum instructors’ competencies, quality of liaison services, and quality of offered trainings each year. Students evaluate the quality of their field site, practicum instructor, and field liaison. Agency-based Practicum Instructors are asked to evaluate the overall quality of the program and its field liaison. Field Liaisons are asked to evaluate the quality of the agencies’ experience and Practicum Instructors. Data findings from the evaluations are analyzed and used to improve the field education component. A summary of findings is presented to faculty and the Practicum Advisory Board each fall and contained in the Field Education Annual Report. Note on Assessment Measures and Calculation of Benchmarks: This year, as we began to institutionalize our assessment process, we revisited our calculation methods for the benchmarks and made some changes to ensure clarity and consistency. Our benchmark percentage for each of our ten competencies is calculated by averaging all of the raw scores (from both practicum instructor and student report) for each practice behavior corresponding to its related competency. For example, competency #1 - identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly - has six related practice behaviors. Students rate themselves on each of the six practice behaviors in their Final Field Performance Self-Evaluation and practicum instructors rate the students on each of the six practice behaviors in the Final Field Performance Evaluation. All twelve scores (six from the student and six from the practicum instructor) are averaged to get an aggregate raw score for competency #1 for each student. The same is done for each of the ten competencies resulting in every student having an overall competency score for each of the ten competencies. Then, for each competency, we calculate the percentage of students who receive at least a 3.0 for their overall competency score. As stated previously, our benchmark goal for each competency is that 90% of students will receive an aggregate raw score of 3.0 or above. A score of 3.0 indicates that students have achieved, and demonstrated, average competency and practice behavior skills at a BSW level. The program’s aspirational goal is for 75% of students to achieve a rating of 4.0 or higher, indicating an above average competency and practice behavior skills. Currently, we are using the Senior Capstone Paper and as additional measure of our explicit curriculum with a goal of 90% of students getting at least a 74% of overall rubric points. We are not currently including this measure to calculate our benchmark percentage. Looking forward, we are planning to include this measure in our benchmark calculation by isolating the Capstone Paper rubric sections that are related directly to particular practice behaviors, rather than using the overall rubric score, and determining how we would like to weight the Capstone Paper measure in relation to the other measures explained above when calculating the benchmark percentage. We will enter a period of review regarding how to integrate this measure into our benchmark calculations as we transition to the new CSWE 2015 EPAS, which will require revised competencies and practice behaviors.


EXPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: AFFIRMING PROGRAM The program soundly met established benchmarks for all ten program competencies: Competency 1: Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. 96.7% of our students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. In addition, 63% were rated “good” or above (4) and 10% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score for all students was a 4.02. Overall, students felt very prepared to engage in professional social work practice and noted multiple opportunities to engage in professional formation. They cited Field Practicum as their main learning tool for this objective and also appreciated Practicum Seminar assignments and professor interaction as reinforcing professional and supervisory norms. 100% of the seniors reported participating in service, excluding their field practicum. while at Seattle University, offering additional opportunities for them to develop professional skills. Competency 2: Apply social work ethical principles to guide social work practice. 96.7% of students were rated as “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to apply social work ethical principles to guide social work practice. In addition, 63.3% of students were rated “good” or above (4) and 13.3% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score for all students was a 3.91. Students reported that they felt fully competent in understanding values and ethics in our program. Students discussed learning about values and ethics in Practicum Seminar, Practice classes, Race & Ethnicity, and Human Behavior in the Social Environment; however, several students mentioned that all classes cover this topic. Completing the Values Paper in Practice I and talking about ethical conflicts happening in the field in the Practicum Seminar and Capstone Research Course contributed to self-reflection. A few students requested more discussion of ethical issues happening in their field experiences.

Competency 3: Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. 63.3% were rated “good” or above (4), and 6.7% were rated excellent (5). The average score was a 3.88. The Capstone Paper is used as a supplemental measure to assess academic writing and overall learning at the end of the BSW coursework. Our goal is for 90% of students to get 74% or higher on the Capstone Paper rubric. This year we fell just short of that with 87% of students reaching that bar. However, 73% of students met our aspirational goal of getting 90% or higher on the Capstone rubric, suggesting that there is a wide range of writing abilities in our students, with most doing well and a few needing additional supports. 89% of our students reported using the Writing Center, which was almost double the number from the prior year (47.6%). Ideas for continued attention to improving student writing are addressed in the Program Improvements section of this report. Competency 4: Engage diversity and difference in practice. 100% of our students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to engage diversity and difference in practice. 73.3% were rated “good” or above (4), bringing us very close to our aspirational goal, and 13.3% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 4.19. Students cited experiences gained in practice courses and their field practicum as formational. Specific course activities mentioned were ecomaps, interview skills, group norms and community organizing projects. Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain


current strategies in teaching students to engage diversity and difference in practice. We will continue to place students in field practicum agencies that serve many different communities with diverse social service needs. Students will continue to reflect on and engage with academic material regarding culturally responsive and responsible social work practice in the Introduction to Social Work , Social Justice in Social Work, and Practice classes. Competency 5: Advance human rights and social and economic justice 100% of students were rated as “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to advance human rights and social and economic justice. 66.7% of the students were rated “good” or better (4), and 13.3% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 3.98. Students positively noted many of the courses in the curriculum that influenced their capacity to advance human rights and social and economic justice and repeatedly pointed to Race and Ethnicity and Macro Practice courses as formational. They felt overwhelmingly confident in their ability to advocate for change. As noted in 2012-13 and 2013-14 reports, in response to student feedback we reviewed curriculum content on social justice and developed a new required course, Social Justice in Social Work: Ethical Professional Formation to provide knowledge and skill development for anti-oppressive social work practice with diverse communities. This course will be offered twice a year starting in Fall 2015 and will be taught by our new faculty member with an expertise in policy practice, Dr. Joseph DeFilippis. Competency 6: Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. We achieved our aspirational goal for this benchmark, with 76.7% of students rated “good” or above (4). 6.7% of students were rated excellent (5). The average score was 3.89. The Capstone Paper is used as a supplemental measure for this competency because it assesses for critical engagement with research to inform their social work practice and critical production of research to inform their agencies and the field. 87% of students achieved our goal of 74% or above in the overall Capstone rubric and 73% met our aspirational goal of 90% of rubric points. Individual sections of the rubric that pertain to this competency are: 87% met the bar for the “Introduction and literature review” section; 87% for the “Methods” section; 73% in “Results” section; and 80% in the “Discussion and implications” section. Senior Focus Group responses all conveyed a view and experience of comfort and preparedness in using research as a practitioner. Students repeatedly highlighted the research sequence as being formational in their ability to use research as a tool for advocacy and to apply a critical lens when reviewing research for evidence-based practice. Faculty will continue to encourage practicum instructors to actively engage students in the literature relevant to their practice. The faculty member who teaching the research sequence has implemented a Research Article Critique assignment in the Data Analysis course to develop skills in critical consumption of research and numeracy. Though students feel confident and were rated well by their practicum instructors in the Final Field Evaluation, the Capstone Papers had more variation in student success, which we attribute to writing skills and ability, rather than research skills. We address strategies for supporting student writing in the Program Improvements section of this report.


Competency 7: Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. 50% of students were rated “good” or above (4), and 10% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 3.82. The section of the Capstone Paper that pertains to this competency, “Theoretical Frameworks”, assesses for knowing and applying theory to research/practice. 93% of students met the bar in this section, which was up from 79% in the previous year. Faculty efforts to increase student capacity to recall and apply theory to their capstone projects, as discussed in the 2013-14 report, have been successful. Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain current strategies teaching human behavior and the social environment. To come closer to our aspirational goal in this competency, there will be continued effort to clearly identify essential Human Behavior in the Social Environment theories and assist student in application of those theories in practice. Strategies for this effort are addressed in the Program Improvements section of this report. Competency 8: Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and social work services. 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and social work services. 46.7% of students were rated “good” or above (4), and 6.7% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 3.65. Only about half of student in the senior focus group reported confidence in their ability to advocate for policy change while the other half expressed the need for more content in this area, especially as it applies to policies that impact their practicum work. Strategies for supporting students in this are addressed in the Program Improvements section of this report. Competency 9: Respond to contexts that shape practice 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to respond to contexts that shape practice. 43.3% of students were rated “good” or above (4), and 10% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 3.72. The intention of this competency is to prompt students to remain current with the many contexts that shape and inform service delivery and practice resulting in the improvement of the quality and relevancy of services. It is our intention to support and provide our students with opportunities for leadership formation and hence the development of informed self agency in the program, college, university, community and ultimately in the field of social work. 100% of seniors stated that they demonstrated leadership capacity and capabilities to improve human well-being at their field practicum site. Notably, seniors are additionally providing leadership in various capacities on campus and in their communities including: 12% New Student Orientation, 33% Seattle University Youth Initiative, 17% campus club, 17% Student Leaders for the Common Good, 17% Student Governance, 17% Other/Community. Competency 10: Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities 100% of students were rated “satisfactory” or above (3) on their ability to engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities. 63.3% of students were rated “good” or above (4), and 6.7% were rated “excellent” (5). The average score was 3.99. Students referenced experiences gained in Practice courses and their Field Practicum. Specific course activities mentioned were ecomaps, interviewing skills, group norms and community organizing projects. Students excelled in the field demonstrating their ability to use generalist practice skills as rated by themselves and practicum instructors.


100% of those who did an intervention in their capstone projects met the benchmark in the “Assessment & Intervention” section.

IMPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: AFFIRMING PROGRAM Diversity Students overwhelmingly felt their classes were places that they could raise and discuss issues about diversity and difference. Students saw a commitment to diversity in the curriculum, student cohort, and in selection of field settings. Students were treated respectfully by faculty, staff, and their fellow students.

• 100% of students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, “SU’s Social Work classes encourage discussions about diversity and difference (Survey item #1). On a Likert scale of 1-5, student ratings averaged 4.10.

• 80% of students agreed or strongly agreed that they felt free to raise issues about diversity that were important to them in their social work course (Survey item #2), with a mean score of 3.90.

• Program demonstrates a commitment to diversity (Survey item #3) in its: o Curriculum - 78% students agree or strongly agree (μ=3.89) o Selection of field settings and their clientele – 78% of students agree or strongly agree (μ=3.67) o Student Cohort – 67% of students agree or strongly agree (μ=3.89)

• Students are treated with respect in SU’s Social Work program by: o Faculty – 100% students agree or strongly agree (μ=4.33) o Administration and staff – 100% students agree or strongly agree (μ=4.44) o Fellow classmates – 89% students agree or strongly agree; 11% neutral (μ=4.22)

Advising In general students received timely advising but had mixed experiences with advising helpfulness and accuracy. In the comment section of the Senior Exit Survey, there were not consistent responses to collectively summarize the two who did not have strong experiences. This area is addressed in the Program Improvements section of this report.

• 89% of students were able to access timely advising in the Social Work program and / or the College’s Advising Center (μ=4.22)

Service Students overwhelmingly continue to participate in service related activities (excluding their field practicum) while at Seattle University, which faculty and students see as excellent preparation for the field and an opportunity for increased learning.

• 100% of our students participated in service (i.e., academic service learning, international service, or volunteerism) including the following types of service:

o 100% Academic Service Learning in a Social Work course o 89% NASW Lobby Day o 67% Service learning in other classes o 56% Volunteer o 33% Social Work Club


o 33% SU Youth Initiative o 22% in international service, o Examples Service sites included: SUYI Bailey Gatzert programs, Washington Middle School

YEAH!, Seattle Tilth, Nature Consortium, Lifelong AIDS Alliance, Poverty Action Network, Asian Counseling and Referral Services, Headstart, Volunteer Chore Services, International Student volunteer in Thailand.

Leadership Students demonstrated leadership capacities and capabilities to improve human well-being in a variety of on campus and off campus settings, Including:

• 100% while in their field practicum • 33% in SUYI • 12% in New Student Orientation • 17% each in a campus club, Student Leaders for the Common Good, and Student Governance • 17% in other community settings • Examples of leadership roles included: Immersion Leader, Shinnyo-En Temple Fellow, Partners for

Action & Community, SLEEq Leader, Family Engagement Team K-12 Coordinator, Orientation Advisor, Orientation Coordinator, Retreat Leader, Dance Marathon MC

Utilization of Resources & Supports Over two-thirds of social work students used faculty for references and over three quarters received financial aid while in school. One third of our students used the Career Center, though all received one workshop, Resume Writing, in their Practicum Seminar and are invited to a Professional Development night with alumni and agency directors. Almost all (89%) of our students use the Writing Center, up by 36% from last year, which is a desired outcome. One third of our students utilized Disability Services, indicating a need for continued efforts to support students with disabilities in our program.

• 89% used the Writing Center • 78% received financial aid and 78% received scholarships • 67% used faculty for a written reference or recommendation • 33% utilized Disability Services • 33% used the Career Center • 22% went to Collegiums

Graduate School In the graduating senior class, 22% immediately applied and were accepted to graduate Social Work schools (i.e., Boston College, Case Western Reserve). Of the remaining students, 75% said they plan to attend graduate school in the future. Program Strengths In addition to the program strengths listed above, explicit and implicit curriculum strengths as noted in the Senior Exit Survey (n=10) and Senior Focus Group (n=15) include:


• Professional preparation by getting practical and useful training • Excellent professors that show care for students • Time for self-reflection and self-awareness assignments • Professors asking students to consistently use a critical lens and supporting student advocacy efforts • Small class sizes and cohort model • The capstone class and project • Practicum sites and the practicum experience EXPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Although the program met all benchmarks for program outcomes, areas for growth are discussed below, along with proposed improvements:

Competency 3: Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. The Capstone Paper is used as a supplemental measure to assess academic writing and overall learning at the end of the BSW coursework. While the benchmark for competency #3 was met, the goal for the Capstone Paper rubric was not. Our goal is for 90% of students to get 74% or higher on the Capstone Paper rubric. This year we fell just short of this goal, with 87% of students reaching 74%. However, 73% of students met our aspirational goal of getting 90% or higher on the Capstone Paper rubric, suggesting that there is a wide range of writing abilities in our students, with most doing very well and a few needing additional supports. 89% of our students reported using the Writing Center, which was almost double the number from the prior year (47.6%). Faculty will continue focused attention on students struggling with writing while maintaining the rigor of writing assignments. Faculty will continue efforts started in 2012 with the “Writing Across the Curriculum” initiative, which contains scaffolded assignments across the curriculum, incorporating the submittal of multiple drafts, peer review, use of the Writing Center, and library in-service. Faculty have discussed and coordinated the teaching of APA, how to do literature reviews, and accessing SU’s library holdings. We have decided to increase the number of sources required for the Literature Review assignment in the Human Development course and added a synthesis element to the Annotated Bibliography assignment in the Intro to Social Work course. The program will continue to use the Capstone Paper as final evidence of critical thinking and writing. Competency 7: Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. Although the benchmark for this competency was achieved, in order to come closer to our aspirational goal (75% of students receiving a “good” or above), there will be continued effort to clearly identify essential Human Behavior in the Social Environment theories and assist students in the application of those theories in practice. Specifically, in Practice I, II, & III, faculty will be more explicit in requiring students to identify their theoretical lens throughout the course. In addition, the Human Development course will add a section to the final assignment that requires theory identification, and Seminar course will add theory to case example discussions. Additionally, the Research Capstone instructor will continue to refer to the role of theory in research and encourage students to identify their theoretical perspective as they develop and execute their Capstone Projects.


Competency 8: Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and social work services. Only about half of student in the senior focus group reported confidence in their ability to advocate for policy change while the other half expressed the need for more content in this area, especially as it applies to policies that impact their practicum work. Strategies for supporting students in this area include continued use of master assignments in Policy (i.e., policy analysis, legislative process, following a bill, etc.) and supporting students’ involvement in NASW Lobby Day. In addition, one of the new faculty hired in the 2014-15 search has expertise in policy practice and advocacy and will be teaching the social work policy courses starting in AY 2015-16. IMPLICIT CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Diversity A little over one third of students who responded to the Senior Exit Survey thought the program displayed a commitment to diversity through its hiring of faculty. Students noted the lack of gender and racial diversity in faculty. Program demonstrates a commitment to diversity in its:

o Faculty – 38% agree or strongly agree, 25% of students disagree or strongly disagree, (μ=3.13) Two faculty searches conducted in AY 14-15 recruited and sought a diverse hiring pool of candidates and resulting finalists. Our top candidates and eventual hires contributed to both racial and gender diversity of the faculty. We anticipate student experience of program commitment to diversity to increase as they are able to interact with new faculty members. The program will continue efforts to enhance faculty diversity through the current AY 15-16 faculty search, adjunct hires, guest lectures, and speakers. Advising Although students reported in the Senior Exit Survey that they were able to receive timely advising, they had mixed experiences with advising helpfulness and accuracy. 56% received accurate and helpful advising within the Social Work program and / or the College’s

Advising Center, 22% were neutral on this question, and 22% reported that they did not receive accurate and helpful advising (μ=3.56)

There were no qualitative comments submitted in relation to this question, making it a bit difficult to address specifically. However, program efforts to ensure accurate, timely, and consistent advising will continue through quarterly advising memos for faculty, and attending trainings and workshops on advising offered by the college. Program Improvements In addition to above improvements, students were asked in the Senior Exit Survey and Senior Focus Group for areas where the program could improve. Areas mentioned included:

• Increased options for macro field experiences and macro content in courses • More knowledge of concrete resources to offer clients (e.g. Medicare, SNAP) and deeper skill

development (e.g. CBT, DBT) • Incorporate both more global content and more current local events into the curriculum • Need for more content in policy advocacy, especially as it applies to policies that impact their practicum

work


• More content on gender • More international content and electives • More scholarships that are social work specific



Student Scholarship and Field Practicum AY 2014-15

Capstone Research Papers Spring 2015

Catherine Carrico Is There a Relationship between Race and Detention Sanctions?

Dawn MacDonald Vargas BFD CARES Outcomes Assessment: Efficacy Measures in the Reduction of Non-Emergent 9-1-1 Calls

Kennedy Diaz Sentencing in Juvenile Court: Does Gender Matter?

Kelsey McGarry Participant Success at Young Adult Services

Chantal Herrada Examining the Difference in the Ways Needs are Assessed and Met for Externalizing and Internalizing Clients

Amber Morrow Bariatric Surgery Patients’ Participation in a 5k: A Program Evaluation for UW Weight Loss Management Center

Jasmine Jackson Literacy Needs of DESC Clients: Case Managers’ Perspectives

Taylor Scott Staff Perceptions of Restraint Use at Ryther

Karen Katigbak Race and the Criminal Justice System

Kelsey Smith Music Movement Therapy in Adult Day Health

Linda Lam The Importance of Family Support: A Map of New Life Clients’ Lives

Giovanna Torres Barriers to a Higher Education: A Needs Assessment for Renton Area Youth and Family Services

Eric Lilly Burnout among Young Adult Services Staff

Jennifer Whalen Secondary Traumatic Stress and Burnout at Childhaven

Tierra Lovelace The Importance of Self-Care in Social Work

Social Work Honors Theses Presented June 9, 2015

Director of ASSW Departmental Honors: Dr. Rachel Luft

Kelsey Smith Title: Portion Control or Daughter Control? Mothers, Daughters and Food Norms Supervisor: Dr. Julie Harms-Cannon Reader: Dr. Morna McEachern

Dawn MacDonald Vargas Title: The Shit We Say: Wicked Humor in Relation to Secondary Trauma Coping Supervisor: Dr. Morna McEachern Reader: Dr. Amelia Seraphia Derr


Social Work Program Student Scholarship and Field Practicum AY 2014-15

Field Practicum: BSW Senior, Agency, and Practicum Instructor

BSW Senior Agency Placement Practicum Instructor Catherine Carrico King County Superior Court Rosemary Fraine, MSW

Kennedy Diaz King County Superior Court Rosemary Fraine, MSW

Chantal Herrada

Ryther Colin Powers, MSW

Jasmine Jackson

Downtown Emergency Services Center PACT Tyler Vermalya, MSW

Karen Katigbak King County Superior Court Rosemary Fraine, MSW

Linda Lam Asian Counseling Referral Service Man-Ting Lam, MSW

Eric Lilly YMCA Young Adult Services Kristen Brennan, MSW

Tierra Lovelace Family Resource Center, Childrens' Home Society, Kent

Noelle Hoori, MSW

Dawn MacDonald Vargas

Bellevue Fire Department CARES Natasha Grossman, MSW

Kelsey McGarry YMCA Young Adult Services Kristen Brennan, MSW

Amber Morrow

UW Medical Center Ruth Foster Koth, MSW & Carol Charles, MSW

Taylor Scott

Ryther Colin Powers, MSW

Kelsey Smith Full Life Care April Prepotente, MSW

Giovanna Torres Renton Area Youth Services Morgan Wells, MSW

Jennifer Whalen Childhaven, Auburn Carmen Rodriguez, MSW



Bachelor of Social Work Program Assessment Data: Competency Attainment Summary AY 2014-15 COMPETENCY #1

Competency / Practice Behavior

Measure Competency Benchmark or

Practice Behavior Criterion

Outcome: % of students at or

above benchmark

(additional relevant data in parens)

Analysis and Implications for Program Affirmation and Improvement

Competency #1

Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly.

Aggregate competency score consisting of the average raw scores of all practice behaviors from within this competency (from both Practicum Instructor (PI) and student rating on Final Field Performance Evaluation).

Competency Benchmark:

• 90% of students receive a competency score ≥ 3 on PI and self evaluation (Aspirational Goal (AG): 75% of students receive a competency score ≥ 4)

Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Marginal, 3=Satisfactory, 4=Good, 5=Excellent

96.7

(AG = 63.3%;

Grand mean of competency score for all students =

4.02)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved.

Field Evaluations: 96.7% of students were rated satisfactory (3) or above on competency 1, resulting in successful benchmark achievement. In addition, 63% of students were rated good (4) or higher and 10% were rated excellent (5).

Supplemental Measures

Focus group:

Senior Focus group themes for the question: “How prepared are you to engage in professional social work practice? To use supervision and consultation? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?”

There were 21 comments, 17 of them offering positive reflections and assertions that students were “100%

1.1 Advocate for client access to the services of social work

Field Evaluation by Practicum Instructor, Item

90% of the students are rated by their Practicum Instructors as 3.0 SATISFACTORY or higher on a 1-5 scale

100

AG = 66.7

Senior Exit Self Evaluation, Item

90% of the students rate their attainment of practice behavior as 3.0 SATISFACTORY or higher on a 1-5 scale

100

AG = 73.3

1.2 Practice personal reflection and self-correction to assure continual professional



100

AG = 73.3


COMPETENCY #1





above benchmark



development; Senior Exit Self Evaluation, Item


100

AG = 80.0

prepared” and felt “ready to be a professional.” They cited practicum as their main learning tool for this objective and also appreciated seminar assignments and professor interaction as reinforcing professional and supervisory norms. 4 of the comments offered suggestions for improvement including understanding that experiences of supervision vary across agencies and students may be having very different experiences.

Exit Survey:

100% of the seniors reported participating in “service” excluding their field practicum while at Seattle University; of that 100% participated in academic service learning with the social work curriculum, 89% participated in Lobby Day, and 33% did service work with the SU Youth Initiative. Implications for Program Improvement Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain current strategies teaching professional identity formation and conduct. Students note multiple opportunities for both practice preparation and practice experience. Program will need to continue to monitor student experiences with supervision. The Field Director

1.3 Attend to professional roles and boundaries;



93.3

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3

1.4 Demonstrate professional demeanor in behavior, appearance, and communication;



93.3

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 86.7

1.5 Engage in career-long learning;



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #1





above benchmark





100

AG = 73.3

will plan a training session on supervision for next year.

1.6 Use supervision and consultation.



93.3

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #2





above benchmark



Competency #2

Apply social work ethical principles to guide social work practice. (EP2.1.2)

Aggregate competency score consisting of the average raw scores of all practice behaviors from within this competency (from both PI and student rating on Final Field Performance Evaluation).



96.7

(AG = 63.3


3.91)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We met our benchmark on this competency with 96.7% of students rated as satisfactory (3) or above. 63.3% of students were rated good (4) or above. 13.3% were rated excellent (5).

Supplemental Measures

Focus group:

Senior Focus group themes on the question: “How aware and knowledgeable are you with regards to the values and ethics that guide social work practice? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?”

There were 22 comments, 18 of them were positive with students reporting that they felt fully competent and suggesting we “breathe” values and ethics in our program. In particular, seminar, practice classes, race & ethnicity, and HBSE covered this topic, however, several students mentioned that all classes cover this topic,

2.1 Recognize and manage personal values in a way that allows professional values to guide practice;



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 86.6

2.2 Make ethical decisions by applying standards of the NASW 2008 Code of Ethics and, as applicable, IFSW / IASSW.



100

AG = 66.7


COMPETENCY #2





above benchmark





100

AG = 73.2

which is the program’s intent, and “they are incorporated in almost, if not every, assignment.” Completing the Values paper in micro practice and talking about ethical conflicts happening in the field in the Practicum Seminar and Capstone Research Course contributed to self-reflection. 4 comments offered constructive criticism including two suggesting we talked and wrote about ethics and values but didn’t practice using them, and one asking for more discussion of ethical issues happening in their field experiences.

Implications for Program Improvement Program efforts are affirmed and therefore we will maintain current strategies teaching social work values and ethics for practice throughout the curriculum. Faculty will continue to create space for consulting about ethical issues in the seminar and capstone courses.

2.3 Tolerate ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts



93.3

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 66.7

2.4 Apply strategies of ethical reasoning to arrive at principled decisions.



100

AG = 66.7



100

AG = 79.9


COMPETENCY #3





above benchmark



Competency #3

Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments.




100

(AG = 63.3;


3.88)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated satisfactory (3) or above on their field evaluations. In addition, 63.3% of students were rated good (4) or above on this competency. 6.7% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures Capstone Paper: This supplemental measures is a rigorous Capstone paper used to assess academic writing and overall learning at the end of the BSW coursework. Our goal is for 90% of students to get 74% or higher on the Capstone paper rubric. This year we fell just short of that with 87% of students reaching that bar. However, 73% of students met our aspirational goal of getting 90% or higher on the Capstone rubric, suggesting that there is a wide range of writing abilities in our students, with most doing well and a few needing additional supports. The rubric sections pertinent to this competency assess for professional writing ability and critical thinking and include “Overall quality, professionalism, and document design”, in which 80% of students scored 74% or above, “Introduction and literature review”, which had 87% of students meeting 74% or above, and “Discussion and Implications”, which had 80% of students reaching the bar. Exit Survey: 89% of respondents (N=8) reported using the Writing Center, which was almost double the

3.1 Distinguish, appraise, and integrate multiple sources of knowledge, including research-based knowledge, and practice wisdom.



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3

3.2 Analyze models of assessment, prevention, intervention, and evaluation



100

AG = 73.3


COMPETENCY #3





above benchmark





100

AG = 73.3

number from the prior year (47.6%). Implications for Program Improvement Faculty will continue focused attention on students

struggling with writing while maintaining rigor of writing assignments. Faculty will continue efforts started in 2012 with the “Writing Across the Curriculum” initiative, which contains scaffolded assignments across the curriculum, incorporating the submittal of multiple drafts, peer review, use of the Writing Center, and library in-service. Faculty have discussed and coordinated the teaching of APA, how to do literature reviews, and accessing SU’s library holdings. We have decided to increase the number of sources required for one of the literature review assignment in the Human Development course and added a synthesis element to the annotated bibliography assignment in the Intro to Social Work course. The program will continue to use the Capstone paper as final evidence of critical thinking and writing and develop more nuanced elements of this assignment to include in future assessment data.

3.3 Demonstrates effective oral and written communication in working with individual, families, groups, organization, communities and colleagues



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 73.3


COMPETENCY #4





above benchmark



Competency #4

Engage diversity and difference in practice. (EP2.1.4)




100

(AG = 73.3


4.19)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We met our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated satisfactory (3) or above. 73.3% of students were rated good (4) or above, bringing us close to our aspirational goal. 13.3% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures Focus Group: Senior Focus group themes on the question, “How prepared do you feel to engage in generalist practice with diverse populations and settings? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?” 20 total comments. 14 were positive citing experiences gained in practice courses and their field practicum. Specific course activities mentioned were ecomaps, interview skills, group norms and community organizing projects. 6 of the comments were both positive and offered constructive criticism. Students requested more content and experience with diverse populations and more knowledge of concrete resources to offer clients (e.g. medicare, snap).

4.1 Recognize the extent to which a culture’s structures and values may oppress, marginalize, alienate, or create or enhance privilege and power



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 86.7

4.2 Gain sufficient self-awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in working with



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #4





above benchmark



diverse groups; Senior Exit Self Evaluation, Item


100

AG = 86.7

Implications for Program Improvement Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain current strategies in teaching students to engage diversity and difference in practice. We will continue to place students in field practicum in which they have the opportunity to interact with diverse populations. In response to student feedback we developed and will be starting a required course, Social Justice in Social Work: Ethical Professional Formation to provide knowledge and skill development for anti-oppressive social work practice with diverse communities.

4.3 Recognize and communicate their understanding of the importance of difference in shaping life experiences;



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 73.3

4.4 View themselves as learners and engage those with whom they work as informants.



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 93.5


COMPETENCY #5





above benchmark



Competency #5

Advance human rights and social and economic justice. (EP2.1.5)




100

(AG – 66.7


3.98)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated as satisfactory (3) or above. 66.7% of the students were rated good (4) or better, 13.3% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures Focus Group: Senior Focus group themes on the question, “How knowledgeable and able are you to apply the knowledge gained about the consequences of inequality, oppression, and injustice and advocate for change locally and globally? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?” There were 24 responses, 16 of which positively noted many of the courses in the curriculum. Students repeatedly pointed to Race and Ethnicity and Macro Practice courses as formational and noted that “this knowledge was gained in every class.” They felt overwhelmingly confident in their ability to advocate for change. Suggestions included requests to incorporate both more global content and more current local events into the curriculum. Two students asked for more experience pushing back while situated in bureaucratic systems and one student expressed frustration when “white supremacy and

5.1 Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 86.7

5.2 Advocate for human rights and social and economic justice;



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #5





above benchmark





100

AG = 73.3

heteronormativity weren’t addressed.” Implications for Program Improvement While the program efforts are affirmed, consideration of

increased attention to local social and economic justice issues will incorporated. In addition, faculty will monitor the implementation of a course designed in 2014 to provide formational experiences with issues of social justice. The field director will add more clarity in PI orientation and training regarding ensuring students have opportunities to advocate in their practicum activities .

5.3 Engage in practices that advance social and economic justice.



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3


COMPETENCY #6





above benchmark



Competency #6

Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research.




100

(AG = 76.7


3.89)

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark partially achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated as satisfactory (3) or above. 76.7% of the students were rated good (4) or better, 6.7% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures Capstone Papers: 87% of students achieved our goal of 74% or above in the Capstone Rubric and 73% met our aspirational goal of 90%. Sections of the rubric that pertain to this competency assess for critical engagement with research to inform their practice and critical production of research to inform their agencies and the field: 87% met the bar for the “Introduction and literature review” section; 87% for the “Methods” section; 73% in “Results” section; and 80% in the “Discussion and implications” section. Focus Group: Senior Focus group themes on the question, “How knowledgeable and prepared are you to use research to inform and evaluate you practice? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?” There were 20 comments

6.1 Use practice experience to inform scientific inquiry



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 80.0

6.2 Use research evidence to inform practice.



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #6





above benchmark





100

AG = 73.3

all of which conveyed a view and experience of comfort and preparedness. Students repeatedly highlighted the research sequence and the instructor of it, stating that they felt “very prepared to research the heck out of something” and “inspired to use research to make things that need improvement better and to apply a critical lens.” Implications for Program Improvement This analysis indicates students feel confident and are able to utilize research to inform practice and practice-informed research. Faculty will continue to encourage PIs to actively engage students in the literature relevant to their practice. The faculty member who teaching the research sequence has implemented a Research Article Critique assignment in the Data Analysis course to develop skills in critical consumption of research and numeracy. Though students feel confident and were rated well by their PIs, the Capstone papers had more variation in student success, which we attribute to writing skills and ability.


COMPETENCY #7





above benchmark



Competency #7

Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. (EP2.1.7)




100

AG = 50.0


3.82

Overall Analysis of Benchmark: Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark with 100% of students rated as satisfactory (3) or above on this competency. 50% of the students were rated good (4) or better, 10% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures: Capstone Papers: Overall, 87% of students met the benchmark of 74% or greater for the rubric total on the Capstone papers and 73% of students getting 90%. The section of the Capstone paper that pertains to this competency assesses for knowing and applying theory to research/practice; 93% met the bar in the “Theoretical Frameworks” section. Implications for Program Improvement: Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain current strategies teaching human behavior and the social environment. There will be continued effort to clearly identify essential HBSE theories and assist student in application of those theories in practice. Specifically, in Practice I, II, & III, faculty will be more explicit in requiring students to identify their theoretical lens throughout the course. In addition, the Human

7.1 Utilize conceptual frameworks to guide the processes of assessment, intervention, and evaluation



100

AG = 53.3


85% of the students rate their attainment of practice behavior as 4.0 GOOD or higher on a 1-5 scale

100

AG = 53.3

Capstone 85% of the students receive 74% or higher of total rubric points

87.0

7.2 Critique and apply knowledge to understand person and the environment



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #7





above benchmark





100

AG = 80.0

Development course will add a section to the final assignment that requires theory identification, and Seminar course will add theory to case example discussions.


COMPETENCY #8





above benchmark



Competency #8

Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and social work services. (EP2.1.8)




100

AG – 46.7


3.65

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated as satisfactory or above on this competency. 46.7% of the students were rated good or better, 6.7% were rated excellent. Supplemental Measures Focus Group: Senior Focus group themes on the question, “How prepared are you in terms of advocating for policy change and policy analysis, macro work? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?” There were 17 responses with about half reporting confidence in their ability to advocate for policy change and half expressing the need for more content in this area, especially as it applies to policies that impact their practicum work. Implications for Program Improvement The program will continue to have master assignments in Policy (i.e., policy analysis, legislative process, following a bill, etc.). The program will also support students’ involvement in NASW Lobby Day.

8.1 Analyze, formulate, and advocate for polices that advance social well-being



100

AG = 46.7



100

AG = 60.0

8.2 Collaborate with colleagues and clients for effective policy action



100

AG = 46.7



100

AG = 60.0


COMPETENCY #9





above benchmark



Competency #9

Respond to contexts that shape practice. (EP2.1.9)




100

AG – 43.3


3.72

Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated as satisfactory or above on this competency. 43.3% of the students were rated good or better, 10% were rated excellent. Supplemental Measures Senior Exit Survey: 100% of seniors stated that they demonstrated

leadership capacity and capabilities to improve human well-being at their field practicum site. Notably, seniors are additionally providing leadership in various capacities on campus and in their communities including: 50% New Student Orientation, 33% Seattle University Youth Initiative, 17% campus club, 17% Student Leaders for the Common Good, 16% Student Governance, 27% Community.

Implications for Program Improvement Program efforts are affirmed and, therefore, we will maintain current strategies for teaching awareness and responses to changing contexts of practice.

9.1 Continuously discover, appraise, and attend to changing locales, populations, scientific and technological developments, and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services



100

AG = 66.7



100

AG = 73.3

9.2 Provide leadership in promoting sustainable changes in service delivery and practice to improve the quality of social services



93.3

AG = 33.3



100

AG = 53.3


COMPETENCY #10





above benchmark



Competency #10.1-10.4

Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities. (EP2.1.10)




100

AG = 63.3


3.99

Overall Analysis of Benchmark Benchmark achieved. Field Evaluations: We achieved our benchmark for this competency with 100% of students rated as satisfactory (3) or above. 63.3% of the students were rated good (4) or better and 6.7% were rated excellent (5). Supplemental Measures Focus Group: Senior Focus group themes on the question, “How prepared do you feel to engage in generalist practice with diverse populations and settings? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?” 20 total comments. 14 were positive citing experiences gained in practice courses and their field practicum. Specific course activities mentioned were ecomaps, interview skills, group norms and community organization projects. 6 of the comments were both positive and offered constructive criticism. Students

10.1. – Engagement

10.1.1 Substantively and affectively prepare for action with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities;



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 66.7


COMPETENCY #10





above benchmark



10.1.2 Use empathy and other interpersonal skills



100

AG = 80.0

requested more content and experience with diverse populations and more knowledge of concrete resources to offer clients (e.g. medicare, snap).

Capstone Papers: 100% of those who did an intervention met the benchmark in the Assessment & Intervention section. 80% met the benchmark for the Discussion section. Overall, 87% of students met the benchmark of 74% or greater for the rubric total. Implications for Program Improvement Students excelled in the field demonstrating their ability to use generalist practice skills as rated by themselves and practicum instructors.



100

AG = 93.3

10.1.3Develop a mutually agreed-on focus of work and desired outcomes



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 73.3

10.2 —Assessment

10.2.1 Collect, organize, and interpret client data



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 86.7


COMPETENCY #10





above benchmark



10.2.2 Assess client strengths and limitations;



100

AG = 80.0



100

AG = 80.0

10.2.3 Develop mutually agreed-on intervention goals and objectives



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3

10.2.4 Select appropriate intervention strategies.



100

AG = 66.7



100

AG = 80.0


COMPETENCY #10





above benchmark



10.3 —Intervention

10.3.1 Social workers

Initiate actions to achieve organizational goals;



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3

10.3.2 Implement prevention interventions that enhance client capacities;



100

AG = 66.7



100

AG = 86.7

10.3.3 Help clients resolve problems;



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 86.7


COMPETENCY #10





above benchmark



10.3.4 Negotiate, mediate, and advocate for clients



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 73.3

10.3.5 Facilitate transitions and endings



93.3

AG = 66.7



100

AG = 60.0

10.4 —Evaluation

10.4.1 Social workers critically analyze, monitor, and evaluate interventions.



100

AG = 73.3



100

AG = 66.7


Seattle University Bachelor of Social Work Program Assessment Report AY 2014-15

Appendix – Assessment Measurement Tools

Final Field Performance Evaluation (Completed separately by practicum instructor and by student)

Introduction The process of evaluating the student's performance is meant to be a continuous, dynamic, and collaborative throughout the quarter. The end of quarter evaluation provides an opportunity to thoughtfully analyze, denote, and summarize the student's progress at that given time. Areas of concerns should not be initially identified in this evaluation rather have been raised throughout the placement experience within supervision. A student's field education as documented in their individualized Educational Plan and assessed in this evaluation is organized around the Field Practicum learning objectives and ultimately the overall program objectives. These learning objectives and corresponding activities to help the student reach the objective remain constant for the entire field education experience. It is recognized that student learning in the field is highly developmental. It is expected that the longer the student has contact and experience at the agency their knowledge and skills will evolve commeasurably. General Instructions Fall and Winter Quarterly Evaluations are formative in nature. Students are evaluated on their performance on specific benchmarks as well as an overall rating of the learning objective. The Spring Quarterly evaluation is the student 's final assessment of their knowledge and skills for effective social work practice. Therefore, it is meant to reflect a summative and cumulative evaluation of their performance in the field. The student and Practicum Instructor meet to discuss the Practicum Instructor 's evaluation, the student's self assessment, and areas of focus for the next quarter. Once the evaluation is complete, the number of hours in the field is recorded, the Log of Hours is attached (signed by the student and Practicum Instructor), and the evaluation is signed. Criteria for Evaluation Practicum Instructors rate student's performance in the activiti es to help students reach the objective and learning objectives according to the following criteria:

1 2 3 4 5 N/0

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Good Excellent No opportunity to observe

1 =Unsatisfactory* Student's performance is far below expectations. Student does not demonstrate the knowledge and skills to complete learning activities. Student has not displayed sustained changes in performance despite corrective action requested within supervision.


2 =Marginal* Student's performance is below expectations. Student marginally or inconsistently demonstrates the knowledge and skills to complete learning activities. Student performance requires a high degree of supervision and direction. 3 =Satisfactory Student's performance meets expectations for beginning generalist practice. Student demonstrates the knowledge and skills to complete learning activities. Student consistently utilizes supervision for enhanced practice. 4 =Good Student's performance consistently and strongly exceeds expectations. Student demonstrates strong knowledge and skills to complete learning activities. Student actively uses supervision to enhance practice and professional development 5 =Excellent Student's performance far exceeds expectations. Student consistentl y demonstrates excellent knowledge and ski l ls to complete l ea rnin g activities. Student asserti vely uses supervision N/0 =No opportunity to observe. At the time of the evaluation a student may not have had the opportunity to demonstrate the particu l a r benchmark. It i s expected that all benchmarks wi ll be accompl ished by the end of the 450 clock hours of field experience. *Practicum Instructors are required to write comments if a student receive a rating of marginal or unsatisfactory.The Field Liaison should be notified immediately.

Competency #1: Intern identifies as a professional social worker and conducts himself/herself accordingly.

Practice Behaviors

Student l-5/ NO

PI 1-5/ NO

l.l Advocates for client access to the services of social work

1.2 Practices personal reflection and self-correcti on to assure continual professional development

1.3 Attends to professional roles and boundaries

1.4 Demonstrates professional demeanor in behavior, appearance and communication

1.5 Engages in career-long learning

1.6 Uses supervision & consultation effectively

Student self score for competency 1 :

Student self-assessment for competency 1:

Practicum Instructo r overall rating of st udent performance for competency I:

Comments for competency 1:


Competency #2: Intern applies social work ethical principles to guide professional practice.

Practice Behaviors Student 1-5/ NO

PI 1-5/ NO

2.1 Recognizes and manages personal values in a way that allows professional val ues to guide practice

2.2 Makes ethical decisions by applying stand ards of the NASW Code of Ethics and, as applicabl e, of the In ternational Federation of Social Workers/ International Association of Schools of Social Work Ethics in Social Work, Statement of Principles

2.3 Tolerates ambi guity in resol ving ethical conflicts

2.4 Applies strategies of ethical reasoning to arri ve at principled decisions.

Student self score for competency 2:


Practicum Instructor overall rati n g of student performance for competency 2: Comments for competency 2:

Competency #3: Intern applies critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments.

Practice Behaviors Student 1 -5/NO

PI 1 -5/NO

3.1 Disti nguishes appraises and integrates mul tiple sources of knowledge, including research-based knowledge and practice w isdom.

3.2 Analyzes different models of assessment , prevention, intervention , and evaluation.

3.3 Demonstrates effecti ve oral and wri tten communication in working with individual , families, groups, organi zations, communities and coll eagues.

Student self score for competency 3: Student self-assessment for competency 3: Practicum In structor overall rating of student performance for competency 3: Comments for competency 3:

Competency #4: Intern engages diversity and difference in practice.

Practice Behaviors Student

1-5/NO

PI

1-5/NO

4.1 Recognizes the extent a cu ltu re's structures and values may oppress, ma rginali ze, ali enate, or create or enhance privil ege and power

4.2 Gains sufficien t self-awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases a nd val ues in working w ith di ve rse grou ps

4.3 Recogni zes and communicates thei r understanding of the im portance of difference


in shapin g life experiences

4.4 Vi ews him or herself as a learner and engages those with whom s/he works as informants.

4.5 Treats all cli ents and colleagues with respect irres pective of diversity Student sel f score for competency 4:


Practic um Instructor overal l rating of student performance for competency 4:


Competency #5: Intern advances human rights and social economic justice.

Practi ce Behavi ors

Student l -5/ NO

PI

1 -5/NO

5.1 Understands the forms and mechanisms of oppression and di scrimination

5.2 Advocates for human ri g hts and social and econom ic justice.

5.3 Engages in practices that advance social and economic justice.



Practic um Instructor overall rating of student performance for compete ncy 5:


Competency #6: Intern engages in research-informed practice and practice-informed research.

Practice Behaviors Student l -5/ NO

PI 1-5/ NO

6.1 Uses prac ti ce experience to inform scientific inquiry

6.2 Uses research evidence to inform practice

6.3 Understands the importance of u sing resea rch as an aid in understanding an age ncy's evaluati on efforts (gra nts, needs assessments, client progress, etc)

Student self score for competency 6: Student self-assessment for competency 6:

Practicum Instructor overall ratin g of student pe1formance for competency 6:


Competency #7: Intern applies knowledge of human behavior and the social environment.

Practice Behaviors Student l-5/ NO

PI 1-5/NO

7.1 Utilizes conceptual frameworks to guide the processes of assessment , interventi o n and evaluation

7.2 Critiques and applies knowledge to understand pe rson and e n vironment


7.3 Demonstrates knowl edge of life-stage development in the process of assessment, intervention and evaluation

Student self score for competency 7: Student self-assessment for competency 7:

Practic um Instructor overall rating of student pe1formance for competency 7:


Competency #8: Intern engages in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and social work services.

Practice Behaviors Student 1-5/NO

PI 1- 5/NO

8.1 Analyzes, f ormulates, an d advocates f or pol i cies that advance social well-being

8.2 Collaborates with colleagues and clients for effective policy action. Student self score for competency 8:


Practicum Instructor 's overall ratin g of student's pe1formance for competency 8:


Competency #9: Intern responds to contexts that shape practice.

Practice Behaviors Student

1-5/ NO

PI 1 -5/ NO

9.1 Discovers, appraises, and attends to changing l ocal es, populations, scientific and technological developments, and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services

9.2 Provides l eadership in promoting sustainabl e changes in service deli very and practice to improve the quality of social services.

Student self score f or competency 9: Student self-assessment for competency 9:

Practicum Instructor overall rating of student performance for compete ncy 9:


Competency #10: Intern engages, assesses, intervenes and evaluates with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities.

Practice Behavi ors Student

1-5/NO

PI 1-5/NO

Engagemen t

10.1 Substan tivel y and effecti vely prepares for action with ind i v idual s, families, groups, organizat i ons, and commun iti es

10.2 Uses e mpathy, reflective li stening, and other interpersonal skills


10.3 Develops a collaborative and mutuall y agreed-on focus of work a nd desi red outcomes

10.4 Establishes rapport with cli ents s/he works with

Assessments

10.5 Collects, organizes , and interprets client data

10.6 Assesses client strengths and limitations

10.7 Develops mutually agreed upon intervention goal s with clients

10.8 Selects appropriate intervention strategies.

Interventions

10.9 Initiates actions to achieve organizational goal s

10.10 Implements preventions and/or interventions that enhance client capacities

10.11 Helps clients resolve problems

10.12 Negotiates, mediates, and advocates for clients services

Transitions and Terminations

10.13 Facilitates transitions and endings

Evaluations

10.14 Criticall y analyzes, monitors, and evaluates inte rventions



Practicum Instructor overall rating of student performance for competency I 0:


Student's overall self-assessment comments (briefly describe learning experiences-include strengths and areas for improvement):

PI overall comments ( include strengths a nd areas for improvement):


Senior Capstone Paper

The Senior Capstone Project is designed to be a senior synthesis experience for students in the BSW Program to demonstrate their ability to apply theoretical research constructs to the evaluation of their own social work practice in their field praticum. During Spring Quarter, students in SOCW 4030 will finalize evaluation research in their field practicum for detailed analysis. This analysis will represent the student’s ability to master the classroom knowledge given in preparation for social work practice and to demonstrate the ability to integrate such learning across the curriculum into practice in the field. There will be two products of this analysis. First, students will prepare a 20-page paper (at minimum) using the accompanying outline. Second they will showcase their work in an oral presentation made to the Social Work Program faculty, field instructors, students, and staff at the end of the quarter.

There are four basic areas for the demonstration of knowledge and integration:

1) First students will identify the theoretical and analytic frameworks that inform their understanding of the micro and macro forces involved in the chosen situation. Such knowledge is the foundation of sound assessment. They will also identify the practice literature that guided their selection of intervention methods in such situations.

2) Second, students will then provide an assessment of the problems and needs involved. The nature of the agreed upon goals and the contract with the client system will be described.

3) Third, the students will outline their chosen evaluation research project and describe its implementation. This will include any ethical challenges that may have emerged.

4) Finally, the student will outline the application of research knowledge by describing their results and what implications they have for social work practice.

The Capstone paper It will include ALL the following sections:

I. Title Page II. Abstract (1 pg)

III. Introduction to Presenting Problem/Situation to be Evaluated (2 pgs) 5 pts. IV. Theoretical Frameworks (10-12 pgs) 15 pts.

a) Literature Review of Substantive Area b) Frameworks for Bio-psycho-social-spiritual Assessment c) Core Classes as Applicable d) Practice Literature

V. Client System Description (4-5 pgs) 10 pts. a) Assessment b) Intervention c) Termination

VI. Research Methods (4-5 pgs) 20 pts. a) Research Design b) Data Collection Techniques and Procedures c) Sample Description d) Measurements

VII. Results (2-3 pgs) 10 pts. VIII. Discussion and Implications (2-3 pgs) 10 pts.

IX. References 5 pts. X. Appendices (if applicable)

AY 2014-15 Assessment Summary Bachelor of Social Work Program

45

The final paper should be typed, double-spaced, and formatted (structure, citation style, format, references) according to the most recent American Psychological Association manual. This assignment should be no less than 25 pages total, not including cover page, references or appendices. Each section will be assigned points based on clarity, organization, use of relevant references, and how well each part fits with the overall study.

Rubric used to assess Capstone Paper for benchmark achievement:


46

Senior Exit Survey

The Senior Exit Survey is sent out to all social work seniors at the end of the year via SurveyMonkey. The quantitative data is analyzed but the survey software and the qualitative data is combined into lists and analyzed by social work faculty. The Senior Exit Survey questions are:

1. Seattle University’s Social Work classes encourage discussions about diversity and difference. 2. I feel free to raise issues about diversity that are important to me in my social work classes. 3. Seattle University’s Social Work program demonstrates a commitment to diversity in its:

a. Curriculum b. Selection of field settings and their clientele c. Faculty d. Student cohort e. Co-curricular activities

4. I am treated with respect in Seattle University’s Social Work Program 5. Commitment to Diversity comments (qualitative measure). 6. I was able to access timely advising in the Social Work program and/or the College’s Advising Center. 7. I received accurate and helpful advising within the Social Work program and/or the College’s

Advising Center. 8. Comments on advising (qualitative measure). 9. Did you participate in service (i.e. service learning, international service, or volunteer, NOT field

practicum) while at SU? 10. If yes to #9, which types of service opportunities did you participate in?

a. Social Work Club, Lobby Day, Seattle University Youth Initiative (SUYI), Other Campus Club, Service Learning – sw class, Service Learning – other classes, Volunteer, International Service, Other.

b. What were the service learning sites? 11. Please select organizations or settings in which you demonstrated leadership capacity and

capabilities that helped improve human well-being. a. Campus Club, Residence Life, New Student Orientation, SUYI, Student Leaders for the

Common Good, DEEP or Peer Health Advocates, Student Governance, Field Practicum, Other Community, Other.

b. What was your leadership role? 12. Please identify the resources or supports you utilized while you were a student in the Social Work

program at Seattle University. a. Writing Center, Disability Services, Collegium, Career Center, Financial Aid, Scholarships,

Faculty Recommendations or Reference, Other (specify). 13. Did you apply to a graduate school of social work? 14. If yes to #13, please list where you were accepted. 15. Of the social work schools where you were accepted, where are you planning to attend? 16. If you have not applied to a social work graduate program, do you plan to in the future?


47

17. If you have secured work, are planning to work full-time, or engage in full-time service, please indicate below and identify the context.

a. Social work employment secured, Social work employment searching, Other employment secured, Graduate school other than SW, Volunteer program, Travel, Other.

b. Please specify. 18. Please describe the strengths of the social work program. 19. Please describe the weaknesses of the social work program. 20. What suggestions do you have for improving the overall social work program at Seattle University?


48

Senior Focus Group Questions

The focus group takes place in the final week of the year in the Social Work Research: Capstone course. Students conduct the focus group themselves in their peer consultation groups (usually about 4 students per group). There is a facilitator and a note taker. All notes are incorporated together and analyzed for themes. The focus group questions are:

1. How prepared do you feel to engage in generalist practice with diverse populations and settings?

What courses, assignments, experiences contributed most to that preparation?

2. How aware and knowledgeable are you with regards to the values and ethics that guide social work

practice? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?

3. How prepared are you in terms of advocating for policy change and policy analysis and macro social

work? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?

4. How knowledgeable and able are you to apply the knowledge gained about the consequences of

inequality, oppression, and injustice and advocate for change locally and globally? What courses,

assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?

5. How knowledgeable and prepared are you to use research to inform and evaluate your practice?

What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?

6. How prepared are you to engage in professional social work practice? To use supervision and

consultation? What courses, assignments, and experiences contributed most to that preparation?

7. How adequate was your advising?

8. What are the strengths of the social work program?

9. What are the areas for improvement?


49

Documents

Seattle University Bachelor of Social Work Program ...€¦ · Bachelor of Social Work Program . Assessment Report . AY 2014-15 . Faculty . Mary Kay Brennan, ... o 40% (2) of those