St. Catherine University and University of St. Thomas School of Social Work. BSW Program Outcome Study Academic Year.

Transcription

1 St. Catherine University and University of St. Thomas School of Social Work BSW Program Outcome Study Academic Year Final Report Prepared by Kendra J. Garrett, Ph.D. and Carey Winkler, M.S.W.

2 2 Table of Contents Explicit Curriculum.4 Field Evaluations.4 COAT Survey..4 Outcomes for the Academic Year.5 Formative Results (Juniors).5 Summative Results (Senior Outcomes). 9 Field s.. 9 Field s of Senior Students Specific Competencies....9 Course Objective Assessment Tool (COAT).14 COAT s on Benchmarks.17 Summary of Field and COAT s for Seniors.18 Response to Outcome Results 20 Implicit Curriculum Academic Advising 26 Student Participation..26 Resources...27 Appendix A Junior BSW Fieldwork Evaluation 29 Appendix B Senior BSW Fieldwork Evaluation Appendix C COAT Survey 49 Appendix D Field s of Practice Behavior..68 Appendix E Field Self-Evaluations Differences Across Programs Field Instructor Evaluations Differences Across Programs...75 COAT Competency Differences Across Programs 76 Appendix F COAT s of Practice Behaviors..77 Appendix G Climate Survey (Implicit Curriculum)...80

3 3 Table of Tables Table 1. Overall of Competence by Field Work Instructors... 5 Table 2. Junior Field s for Table 3: Junior Field s Over Time...7 Table 4. Overall of Senior Students Competence by Field Work Instructors...9 Table 5. Mean s on 2014 Senior Students Curriculum Competencies Field Year-End s...10 Table 6. Senior Field s Percentages Above 4.2 for Table 7. Senior Field s Over Time Table 8. Comparison of Pretest and Posttest COAT Means for Table 9. Senior on COAT Over Time...17 Table 10. Field and COAT Senior Student s for Table 11. Diversity, Social Justice and Respect 22 Table 12. Addressing Diversity.23 Table 13. Demonstrating a Meaningful Commitment to Diversity...23 Table 14. Commitment to Diversity..23 Table 15. Respect...24 Table 16. Response to Harassment Table 17. Satisfaction with Admission Process.25 Table 18. Whom Students would Approach..26 Table 19. Advising 26 Table 20. Student Opportunities 26 Table 21. Participation...27 Table 22. Encouragement of Activities.27 Table 23. Support Systems Used by Students...27

4 4 BSW Program Outcome Study Academic Year The BSW outcome assessment is conducted annually. Explicit curriculum is evaluated in three parts, evaluation of competencies is rated in three ways. Students complete the year-end field evaluation and self-rate practice behaviors. Field instructors (FI) complete the same field evaluation for each student, rating them on the same practice behaviors. Students also self-rate on a course objective assessment tool (COAT), a measure of a number of skills that are compounded into practice behaviors at the beginning of their social work classes and again on the same survey right before graduation. The ratings of the various practice behaviors are averaged by competency to provide competency ratings for our 14 BSW competencies. Implicit curriculum is measured through a survey of graduating students perception of school climate. Explicit Curriculum Field Evaluations. The field evaluations are completed by students as a self-rating and by field instructors (FI) rating the same practice behaviors. This measure is given at the end of the academic year to both juniors and seniors (See Appendices A and B). The ratings of individual practice behaviors are averaged together to provide an aggregate rating on competencies. Formative information is compiled for junior students in field at the end of junior year. Because the BSW Program does not expect students to be competent at the end of junior year, the highest rating possible on that instrument is a 3 (student is gaining experience and meeting expectations in this area). The benchmark for junior field ratings is that at least 80% of the students will rate at 2.8 or above. At the end of the junior field placement, the FI also provides a summary rating that indicates whether the student has met the overall requirements for the junior year field placement on a four-point scale ranging from not being ready to move on to performing above expectations. The benchmark is that 95% of the juniors will be rated by FI as having met this standard. Summative field ratings are obtained on senior students before graduation. The benchmark for senior students is a rating of 4.2 or above by at least 75% of the students. There is also a final summary rating that the FI provides that indicates whether a student has met the overall requirements for the year s field placement on a four-point scale ranging from demonstrating serious problems in performance to performing above expectations. The benchmark is that 90% of seniors will be rated by FI as having met this standard. COAT Survey The COAT survey is a self-rating given to students in their first academic course and again just before graduation (See Appendix C). The COAT was derived from course objectives (which were, in turn, derived from practice behaviors that compose the competencies). It consists of 97 questions that measure 52 practice behaviors. These are averaged by competency to determine the ratings on the 14 competencies. There are two benchmarks related to the COAT survey. The first is that there will be a statistically

5 5 significant change in perceived competence ratings between entering and exiting the program. The second benchmark is that at least 75% of exiting seniors will rate themselves an average score of 4.2 or higher on each competency. Field Outcomes for the Academic Year Both students and field instructors (FI) rate students on the practice behaviors as part of the year-end evaluation (See Appendices A and B). In addition, field instructors rate students in an overall rating of their competence on a four-point rating scale. Formative Results (Juniors) The benchmark is that 95% of the juniors will be rated by FI as having met this standard. For the academic year, students were rated as having met this competency by 96% by field instructors in final overall ratings Table 1. Overall of Competence by Field Instructors Competency JR Students: 95% of students will receive an overall rating of MC or above. ( This student has met the expectations of the junior field placement. This student is ready for a senior field placement. ) % at MC or above 96% The ratings of FI and student self-ratings are aggregated into competencies. The benchmark for junior students is that 80% or more will be rated by FI and self-rate 2.5 or above on a scale of 3 at the end of junior year. The rating categories are: 1. The student has not met the expectations in this area, and there is not much evidence that the student will meet the expectations in this area in the near future 2. The student has not as yet met the expectations in this area, but there is evidence that the student will meet the expectations in the near future. 3. The student is gaining experience and meeting expectations in this area. Table 2. Junior Field s for Competency Jr. Field Student Jr. Field Self- % 2.5 or above * Jr. Field FI Jr. FI % 2.5 or above * (n=49) Status of Competency

6 6 (n=49) C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research- informed practice and practice- informed research. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well- being and to deliver effective social work. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and 100% 96% Met 94% 96% Met 88% 94% Met 96% 96% Met 82% 88% Met 77% 85% Partially met 86% 94% Met 80% 86% Met 84% 92% Met 100% 96% Met 94% 94% Met 94% 94% Met

7 7 communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). * Benchmark=80% 2.5 or above; 94% 94% Met 91% 96% Met Junior students partially met the following competency: C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. Table 3: Junior Field s Over Time Competency JR ST 2011 JR ST 2012 *JR ST C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research- informed practice and practice- informed research. JR ST 2014 JR FI 2011 JR FI 2012 *JR FI JR FI % 83% 95% 100% 87% 85% 98% 96% 69% 64% 92% 94% 83% 71% 98% 96% 77% 66% 84% 88% 77% 88% 92% 94% 93% 85% 95% 96% 94% 86% 98% 96% 66% 63% 79% 82% 77% 68% 92% 88% 58% 47% 76% 77% 76% 47% 85% 85% C2.1.7 Apply 77% 73% 84% 86% 79% 83% 89% 94%

8 8 knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy 69% 61% 73% 80% 75% 64% 81% 86% practice to advance social and economic well- being and to deliver effective social work. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. 60% 68% 63% 84% 66% 63% 80% 92% C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). 84% 86% 92% 100% 87% 88% 97% 96% C1.1.10B. Assess client 79% 71% 87% 94% 83% 81% 95% 94% systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide 68% 68% 77% 94% 67% 78% 94% 94% prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate 53% 58% 69% 94% 69% 66% 87% 94% practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). 73% 68% 70% 91% 82% 75% 85% 96% * = year benchmark changed because of changes in Council on Social Work standards

9 9 We track how our students do on the benchmarks over time. Table 3 above indicates that our junior students fared slightly better than the precious year. Summative Results (Senior Outcomes) Field s The evaluation of students by their field instructors (FI) includes a final summary rating that FI provide that indicates whether a student has met the overall requirements for the year s field placement on a four-point scale ranging from demonstrating serious problems to performing above expectations. See Appendices D and E for the evaluation instrument. The benchmark is that 90% of seniors will be rated by FI as having met this standard. For the academic year, students were at met competent and met standards or better by 100% of field instructors in final overall ratings, so this benchmark was met. Table 4. Overall of Senior Students Competence by Field Work Instructors SR Students: 90% of students will receive an overall rating of MC or above ( This student has met the expectations of the senior field placement. This student is ready for generalist social work practice. - MC = met competent and met standards) or better. 100% Field s of Senior Students Specific Competencies The ratings of FI and student self-ratings are aggregated into competencies. The benchmark for senior students is that 75% or more will be rated by FI and self-rate 4.2 or above 4.2 on a scale of 5 at the end of junior year. The rating categories are: 1. The student has not met the expectations in this area, and there is not much evidence that the student will meet the expectations in this area in the near future 2. The student has not as yet met the expectations in this area, but there is evidence that the student will meet the expectations in the near future. 3. The student is gaining experience and meeting expectations in this area. 4. The student is demonstrating beginning competency in this area. 5. The student is fully competent in this area for beginning generalist social work practice. Table 5 indicates the mean ratings of senior student self-ratings and the means of field instructor ratings of their students at the end of the academic year.

10 10 Table 5. Mean s on 2014 Senior Students Curriculum Competencies Field Year-End s Curriculum Competency A2.1.1 Identifying as a professional SW A2.1.2 Applying SW ethical principles A2.1.3 Applying critical thinking Field Instructor Assessmen t Mean (SD) N=54 Marked "N.A" Survey Field Student Assessment Mean (SD) N= (.427) (.275) ( (.464) (.453) (.395) 0 A2.1.4 Engaging diversity 4.75 (.323) (.295) 0 A2.1.5 Advancing human 4.54 (.461) (.519) 0 rights and justice A2.1.6 Engaging research (.504) 4.33 (.542) 0 informed practice and practice- informed research 1 A2.1.7 Applying knowledge of 4.63 (.499) (.460) 0 HBSE A2.1.8 Engaging in policy 4.53 (.472) (.646) 0 practice A2.1.9 Responding to 4.37 (.620) (.602) 1 contexts that shape practice A Engagement, assessment, intervention, and evaluation A (a) Engagement 4.82 (.414) (.228) 0 A (b) Assessment 4.63 (.467) (.484) 0 A (c) Intervention 4.59 (.550) (.495) 0 A (d) Evaluation 4.52 (.547) (.563) 0 A (e) 4.51 (.614) (.602) 0 Marked "N.A."

11 11 The benchmark was that at least 75% of graduating seniors mean ratings (self-ratings and field instructor ratings) would be equal to or above 4.2. The percentage rates are in Table 6 below. Table 6. Senior Field s Percentages Above 4.2 for 2014 Competency C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research- informed practice and practice- informed research. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well- being and to deliver effective social work. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). Sr. Field Student Sr. Field Self- % 4.2 and above 4.2 ** (n=60) Sr. Field FI % 4.2 and above 4.2 ** (n=60) 92% 90% Met 80% 80% Met 88% 92% Met 93% 90% Met 80% 77% Met Status of Competency 48% 46% Unmet 82% 82% Met 70% 76% Partially met 47% 56% Unmet 98% 90% Met C1.1.10B. Assess client 83% 82% Met

12 12 systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). **Benchmark=75% 4.2 or above 82% 82% Met 62% 69% Unmet 62% 67% Unmet In the year-end field ratings, students met the benchmark for nine of the fourteen competencies, partially met one, and did not meet four: Partially met competencies, meaning that these competencies were rated 4.2 or above by either the FI or the student but not by both: C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work. Unmet Field competencies: C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities).

13 13 Table 7 Senior Field s Over Time. Competency C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research- informed practice and practice- informed research. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well- being and to deliver effective social work. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, SR ST 2011 SR ST 2012 SR ST 2013 SR ST 2014 SR FI 2011 SR FI 2012 SR FI 2013 SR FI % 95% 89% 92% 87% 93% 87% 90% 84% 92% 87% 80% 84% 97% 89% 80% 90% 93% 87% 88% 86% 95% 85% 92% 84% 89% 89% 93% 82% 93% 89% 90% 82% 85% 78% 80% 76% 93% 83% 77% 55% 61% 53% 48% 47% 59% 51% 46% 84% 85% 83% 82% 76% 89% 80% 82% 71% 82% 72% 70% 78% 87% 80% 76% 59% 66% 69% 47% 57% 70% 74% 56% 98% 93% 93% 98% 94% 97% 94% 90%

14 14 families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). 90% 90% 85% 83% 86% 95% 87% 82% 86% 84% 80% 82% 82% 90% 87% 82% 76% 85% 80% 62% 73% 89% 83% 69% 59% 79% 72% 62% 67% 89% 78% 67% As we compare student field ratings over time, we find that students in previous class performed slightly better than the 2014 class on most measures. As we move forward in future assessments, we will be tracking trends and monitoring how students do on collective evaluations from year to year. Course Objective Assessment Tool (COAT) In addition to field assessments, the BSW program uses an instrument based on course objectives (which were, in turn, based on the 14 competencies comprised of 52 practice behaviors) to assess student outcomes. The COAT survey consists of 97 questions that ask students to self-rate their competence for each question using the following scale: 1. I am currently not competent in this area. 2. I am beginning my journey towards competence in this area. 3. I show evidence of progress towards competence in this area. 4. I am approaching full competence in this area. 5. I demonstrate full competence in this area for beginning generalist practice.

15 15 The questions are averaged by practice behavior and by competency. This measure is given at the beginning of the year to incoming students and at the end of the year to graduating seniors. One of our benchmarks is that the mean competency rating for exiting students is significantly higher than the mean competency rating for entering students. This benchmark was met for all competencies. The mean self-ratings of competencies on the COAT were statistically significantly higher on exit than on entry for every competency. Table 8 below summarizes the results.

16 16 Table 8. Comparison of Pretest and Posttest COAT Means for Competency Pretest Mean (SD) * N=68 Posttest Mean (SD)* N=51 C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly (0.54) 4.69 (0.31) C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice (0.67) 4.58 (0.49) C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments (0.57) 4.56 (0.47) C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice (0.68) 4.71 (0.37) C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice (0.64) 4.61 (0.45) C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research (0.52) 4.31 (0.58) C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment (0.47) 4.67 (0.38) C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work (0.59) 4.40 (0.60) C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice (0.68) 4.40 (0.52) C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) (0.73) 4.65 (0.41) C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) (0.59) 4.43 (0.57) C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) (0.61) 4.50 (0.52) C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) (0.56) 4.43 (0.63) C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) (0.56) 4.42 (0.62) All differences are statistically significant (p<0.001). % 4.2 and above

17 C2.1.1 C2.1.2 C2.1.3 C2.1.4 C2.1.5 C2.1.6 C2.1.7 C2.1.8 C2.1.9 C1.1.10A C1.1.10B. C1.1.10C C1.1.10D C1.1.10E Pretest Mean * Posttest Mean Figure 1. Pre and Posttest COAT s The second benchmark that the BSW program set was that at least 75% of students would rate their average competence at 4.2 or more, as measured by the COAT survey. The results are identified in the final column of Table 8 above. COAT s on Benchmarks Table 9 represents the COAT ratings since we implemented our revised outcome measures in 2011 Table 9 Senior on COAT Over Time Competency C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work COAT % above COAT % above COAT % above COAT % above

18 18 C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities) Benchmark is that at least 75% of our students will exceed 4.2 on ratings of competencies. Summary of Field and COAT s for Seniors Table 10 lists the ratings on the three outcome measures for senior students for the academic year. It is our goal that students will rate above 4.2 on all of the measures. Those competencies identified as met indicate that students either self-rated or were rated by FI as above the benchmark for all three measures. Partially met benchmarks indicate that student ratings were above the benchmark on at least one measure; not met benchmarks were below the benchmark on all of the measures. Table 10. Field and COAT Senior Student s for Competency C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. Sr. Field Student Sr. Field Self- % above 4.2 ** Sr. Field FI Sr. Sr. Field FI % above 4.2 ** COAT % above % 90% 92.2 Met Competency Status 80% 80% 74.5 Partially met 88% 92% 82.4 Met

19 19 C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic wellbeing and to deliver effective social work. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). **Benchmark=75% 4.2 or above 93% 90% 86.3 Met 80% 77% 78.4 Met 48% 46% 49.0 Not Met 82% 82% 84.3 Met 70% 76% 66.0 Partially Met 47% 56% 64.7 Not Met 98% 90% 82.4 Met 83% 82% 70.0 Partially Met 82% 82% 72.5 Partially Met 62% 69% 64.7 Not Met 62% 67% 66.7 Not Met Senior Students met the following benchmarks: C2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. C2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments C2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. C2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. C2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. C1.1.10A Engage with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). The following benchmarks were partially met this year: C2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. C2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work. C1.1.10B. Assess client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities).

20 20 C1.1.10C Provide prevention/intervention for client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). The following benchmarks were not met this year: C2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. C2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. C1.1.10D Evaluate practice with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). C1.1.10E End with client systems of all sizes (individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities). Response to Outcome Results Each year the BSW Program Committee studies the results and identifies changes to make in the curriculum in response. The committee was concerned by falling ratings over the last few years, particularly in the practice area (See Tables 7 and 9). This led to questions as to what might be happening with our students. One response was to break down the ratings by program to identify if there were differences in student ratings by program. We found, particularly in the COAT ratings, that there students in one program, the St. Catherine day program, many of whom are first generation college students, often rated themselves lower than their colleagues in the other two programs. This trend was present but a bit less consistent in field ratings, both by students themselves and field instructors. (See Appendix E). This led to a thought-provoking discussion regarding differences in learning styles of traditional and non-traditional students, different student bodies between St. Catherine and St. Thomas, and how to help first-generation students succeed in our program. So far we have responded by looking at two readings on first generation students. The discussion will continue as we move forward. We have recognized a challenge and we will be continuing to find ways to reach and empower first-generation students with awareness, teaching strategies and support. The practice curriculum committee met to discuss ratings that were lower than we hoped and came up with some strategies to address the concern. The committee determined that the objectives for two of the practice classes were similar enough to prevent students from building knowledge as they progress through the courses; the planned-change objectives for Communication and Interviewing and Generalist Practice with Small Client Systems were almost identical. We changed the objectives to build student knowledge from learn and understand in the early course to apply and demonstrate in the second class. This change helps instructors be aware of the developmental nature of learning. We are also beginning a discussion of the assignments in all practice classes to be certain that we are building assignments developmentally and explaining this progression transparently to students. We plan to look at the course objectives, assignments, and class learning activities in the other two practice courses as well in an upcoming retreat.

21 21 The BSW Field Committee took steps to address areas of concern as well. They have changed the expectations regarding how the Learning Agreement is to be written to assist the students in developing concrete and measurable learning goals that clearly reflect how the tasks they are engaged with in their placement bring the practice behaviors to life. Each junior-level section is now spending one class session in a computer lab actively engaged in the writing process with the hands-on assistance of the field faculty member in order to support student understanding of the writing of the learning Agreement. The reiteration assignment has been adjusted to be an in-class activity so that field faculty can provide more specific examples of how tasks students engage in in their placements relate to competencies and practice behaviors in order to help increase student understanding relationship between the two. Finally, The BSW Field Committee developed a brier theory guide for field instructors to assist field instructors in helping students connect theory and practice. The Curriculum Committee discussed the low ratings in research. One concern is that the COAT questions are worded in a way that makes it difficult for students to rate themselves highly if they are not actively involved in research in their field agencies. A long-term solution is to revise the questions when we next revise the COAT instrument. We hope to further integrate research concepts in practice classes to help students recognize research in their practice that they may not identify as research, such as systematic practice and program evaluation and data gathering within their agencies. A final response was a discussion about the benchmarks themselves. Some benchmarks were calculated by averaging only two or three competencies. When 4 and 5 ratings of two or three competencies were averaged, to achieve a rating of our 4.2 benchmark, the ratings all had to be 5 ratings ; there had to be at least four competencies averaged together to breach the 4.2 benchmark if one was rated below a top (5) rating. We realized that we had set a standard that we did not mean to set for these two- and three-practice behavior competencies. We have, therefore, decided to re-set the benchmark to a standard of 75% of students accomplishing an average rating of 4.0 or above in the future.

22 22 Implicit Curriculum In addition to evaluating our curriculum, the School of Social Work monitors student experiences through an annual climate survey (see Appendix G). Graduating seniors are surveyed to learn about their experiences in the School of Social Work. This climate survey includes questions examining the environment within which the BSW Program s teaching and learning occurs. The tool focuses on whether students feel that they and others have been treated with respect, the extent to which differences and diversity have been supported, advising, and the extent to which they feel they have access to faculty and administration to voice concerns. It also asks the extent to which they have participated in extra-curricular activities and used campus resources. We asked students to identify the extent to which they agreed with the following questions regarding the SCU/UST Social Work (SCU/UST SSW). Response categories ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). A high rating (4 or 5 agree or strongly agree) was desired for positively worded questions. A low score (1 or 2-strongly disagree or disagree) was desired for negatively worded questions. Table 11. Diversity, Social Justice and Respect Question 2011 % who agree or strongly agree I feel pressure to fit in at the SCU/UST SSW* 2012 % who agree or strongly agree 2013 % who agree or strongly agree 2014 % who agree or strongly agree 48.7* 66.7* 54.2* 70.6* The SCU/UST School of Social Work encourages discussions about issues of difference. I feel free to speak up about diversity issues that are important to me in my classes at SCU/UST SSW The SCU/UST SSW demonstrates commitment to social justice * Question recoded for analysis

23 23 We asked students their experiences in the classroom addressing diversity by providing a number of different diversity issues and asked students if they had discussed diversity in their classes the SCU/UST School of Social Work. Table 12. Addressing Diversity 2011%agree or strongly agree 2012 %agree or strongly agree 2013 %agree or strongly agree 2014 %agree or strongly agree 1. Sexuality % 2. Race and Ethnicity % 3. Religion and % Spirituality 4. Ability and % Disability 5. Social Class % 6. Age Issues % We polled students regarding their opinions that the SCU/UST School of Social Work (SCU/UST SSW) demonstrates a meaningful commitment to diversity. Table 13. Demonstrating a Meaningful Commitment to Diversity 2011 % that agree or strongly agree 2012 % that agree or strongly agree 2013 % that agree or strongly agree 2014 % that agree or strongly agree 1. Curriculum % 2. Field Education % 3. Faculty % 4. Administration and Staff Recruitment 5. Student Recruitment and Admission % % Student opinions regarding The SCU/UST School of Social Work s commitment to diversity can be seen in their responses to questions regarding the diversity of a number of groups. Table 14. Commitment to Diversity 2011 % that agree or strongly agree 4. Administration and Staff 5. Student Recruitment and Admission 2012 % that agree or strongly agree 2013 % that agree or strongly agree % that agree or strongly agree

24 24 Students were asked if they believed that they had been treated with respect in the SCU/UST School of Social Work. Table 15. Respect 2011 % that agree or strongly agree 2012 % that agree or strongly agree 2013 % that agree or strongly agree 2014 % that agree or strongly agree 1. By faculty % 2. By administration and % staff 3. By my fellow students at the School % In an attempt to learn if students experience harassment in the School of Social Work, a new question was added to the survey in When asked, 8 % of students indicated that they had experienced discrimination and/or harassment within the School of Social Work (n=4); 16% (n=8) were not sure. The remaining 76% (n=39) said that they had not. If students answered yes, they were asked if the School of Social Work made an appropriate response. Table 16. Response to Harassment The School of Social Work responded effectively to fix harassment and/or discrimination that I experienced 2013 %agree or strongly agree (n=6) 0% 25.0% 2014 %agree or strongly agree (n=4) Of the 4 students who felt that they had been harassed or discriminated, one agreed that the School had responded effectively to address the problem. The other three respondents, chose (1 each) strongly disagree, disagree, and neither agree nor disagree.

25 25 Students were asked to rate their satisfaction with the admission-to-major process. Table 17. Satisfaction with Admission-to-Major Process % that are % that are satisfied satisfied or very or very satisfied satisfied 4. Admission to Major Process 2013 % that are satisfied or very satisfied 2014 % that are satisfied or very satisfied %

26 26 Academic Advising In an attempt to learn how students negotiate difficulties with the program, students were asked whom they would feel comfortable approaching with a concern about the program at the SCU/UST School of Social Work. Table 18. Whom Students would Approach % that agree % that agree or or strongly strongly agree agree 2013 % that agree or strongly agree 1. Classroom faculty % 2. My advisor % 3. BSW Program % Director 4. Dean % 2014 % that agree or strongly agree Advising was assessed by asking students about their satisfaction with faculty advising. Table 19. Advising 2011 % that agree or strongly agree 2012 % that agree or strongly agree 2013 % that agree or strongly agree 2014 % that agree or strongly agree 2. Faculty Advising % Student Participation We asked students to rate the extent to which they were satisfied opportunities to participate in various activities. Table 20. Student Opportunities 2011 % that are satisfied or very satisfied 3. Opportunities for Student Research 4. Admission to Major Process 2012 % that are satisfied or very satisfied 2013 % that are satisfied or very satisfied % % 2014 % that are satisfied or very satisfied 5. Social Work Club % 6. Beta Epsilon Student % Honor Society We also wanted to identify what activities students had actually taken part in while they

27 27 were students at the School of Social Work. Table 21. Participation Social Work Club 41% 33.9% 28.9% 29.2% 2. Day at the Capitol 84.6% 88.1% 93.5% 98.0% 3. Service Projects 74.4% 35.6% 58.7% 60.4% 4. Salons 46.2% 6.8% 0% 12.8% 5. Justice Lecture 79.5% 66.1% 33.%3 64.7% 6. Room at the Table 26.5% 42.4% 20.0% 34.0% 7. Institutes (Group 59% 52.5% 55.6& 46.8% work, Supervision, Spirituality) 8. Licensure 30.8% 37.3% 63.0% 22.9% Preparation 9. Beta Epsilon Honor Society 38.5% 40.7% 55.6% 21.3% And we wondered if students perceived The SCU/UST School of Social Work to encourage them to participate in the above activities. Table 22. Encouragement of Activities 2011 %that agree or strongly agree 2012 %that agree or strongly agree 2013 %that agree or strongly agree 71.8% % Resources 2014 %that agree or strongly agree In an effort to determine what resources students found useful, we survey them as to which resources they had used. Table 23. Support Systems Used by Students Writing Assistance 35.9% 45.8% 21.7% 26.5% Accommodation for a 7.7% 6.8% 13.3% 6.4% Disability Tutoring 15.4% 15.3% 4.4% 12.8% Financial Aid 79.5% 86.4% 76.6% 87.8 Scholarships 79.5% 71.2% 68.1% 85.1% Faculty Recommendations or References 66.7% 67.8% 68.9% 81.3%

28 28 Informal consultation with faculty Parenting Supports (e.g. day care) University counseling services University Academic Advising (UST) 84.6% 81.4% 78.3% 84.3% 5.1% 8.5% 4.5% 8.5% 38.6% 38.3% 45.7% 39.1% O Neill Learning Center 26.2% 23.4% (SCU) Other (please identify) 5.1% 8.5% 4.0% 8.7% Under other, Students wrote in library and access and success. Questions on the climate survey regarding the use of support services were included to identify services most needed and used by our students, not to assess the quality of services. These questions help us to know where to direct students who express need and allow us to build collaborations with support staff in these areas so we can better advocate for our students Overall we found that students were generally happy with the climate at the school of social work. They identified a general satisfaction with commitment to diversity and respect, indicating that they feel valued by faculty, students, and staff.

29 29 Appendix A JUNIOR BSW FIELDWORK EVALUATION This evaluation covers the St. Catherine University/University of St. Thomas School of Social Work Junior Field Placement experience. This document allows both the student and the fieldwork instructor to assess, monitor and give feedback on the growth of a student s knowledge, values and skills to be applied to generalist social work practice. Purpose of Social Work Fieldwork Placements and Evaluation: The goals of each fieldwork experience differ slightly based on the outline of the Social Work program. The program employs a model of growth the senior field experience builds on the junior experience. As the goals of each year are different, please take into acount the following when completing the evaluations. When assessing a student s competence please consider this through the lens of their junior or senior context. (For this reason, we have given a range specific to each year see assessment scale.) JUNIOR FIELDWORK: The purpose of Junior Field is to introduce the students to the issues and practice of professional social work, complementing the student s academic work and allowing the student to explore his or her goodness of fit with the social work major. Students begin learning about social work knowledge, values, and skills and how to integrate them in practice through observation and beginning tasks. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FINAL EVALUATION Students: - Complete the cover page aligning with your field experience (i.e. Junior/Senior Field Placement Information) - Complete your self- assessment of all Core Competencies and Practice Behaviors - your Final Evaluation to your Field Supervisor for their completion Field Supervisor(s): - Find the mid- term evaluation to reference specific tasks student completed to demonstrate practice behaviors - Complete the Final Evaluation of your student - Review ratings and comments with your student Students: - Sign off on agreement/disagreement and add any additional comments needed - Collect all necessary signatures - Make a copy for yourself and for your Field Supervisor - Submit to your Field Faculty

30 30 JUNIOR PLACEMENT INFORMATION: Name of Student: Phone: Junior Placement Agency: Dates of Placement: to Fieldwork Instructor: Phone: Fieldwork Faculty Liaison: Briefly describe the assignments and learning experiences:

31 31 Instructions for Students on the 10 Competencies in the First Part of the Evaluation: The standard by which a student is to be compared is that of a new beginning- level social worker. The 10 competencies that are specified in this evaluation form are those established by our national accrediting organization (the Council on Social Work Education). Under each competency statement there are several items that we ask that you rate according to the following criteria. SENIORS JUNIORS 5 The student is fully competent in this area for beginning generalist social work practice. 4 The student is demonstrating beginning competency in this area. 3 The student is gaining experience and meeting expectations in this area. 2 The student has not as yet met the expectations in this area, but there is evidence that the student will meet the expectations in the near future 1 The student has not met the expectations in this area, and there is not much evidence that the student will meet the expectations in this area in the near future n/a Not applicable, as the student has not had the opportunity to demonstrate competence in this area Competency marks a threshold across which the student passes commencing a journey of career long learning. The notion of competence here is that the student has mastered the knowledge, values and skills i.e. practice behaviors which are necessary to commence entry level generalist practice. This represents his or her beginning of a professional rite of passage toward the eventual achievement of that sought after status of expert. As it is utilized here, competence is a threshold concept. That is, in demonstrating competence, one crosses the threshold separating the novice from the competent beginning practitioner. Competence, however, does not in any way connote expert (Holloway, Black, Hoffman & Pierce, 2009). Comments may be made under any competency statement, if desired. Please be sure to indicate those areas in which you think the student is particularly strong and those areas that need improvement. This evaluation is intended to give the student feedback about her or his performance. The agency supervisor s rating of these items will not directly be used to calculate the grade that is given to the student. The faculty supervisor has the responsibility of assigning the grade for the course. Please note that student s will also self- assess as part of this evaluation process. This gives the student the opportunity to reflect on her/his own learning as well as provides the student, the supervisor and faculty the opportunity to address any questions or differences in rating or understanding. Please note: though the student s rating is considered, the supervisor s rating is more heavily weighted.

32 32 Competency 2.1.1: Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS 1. Advocate for client access to the services of social work at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels. 2. Practice personal reflection and self- correction to assure continual professional development. 3. Attend to professional roles and boundaries. JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) 4. Demonstrate professional demeanor in behavior, appearance, and communication. 5. Engage in life- long professional learning. 6. Use supervision and consultation. Competency 2.1.2: Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS 1. Continuously recognize and manage personal values in a way that allows professional values to guide practice. 2. Make ethical decisions by applying standards of the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics (NASW, 2008), the International Federation of Social Workers/International Association of Schools of Social Work Ethics in Social Work, Statement of Principles (IFSW 2004), and the Minnesota Board of Social Work and as appropriate other codes of ethics. 3. Tolerate ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts. JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) 4. Apply strategies of ethical reasoning to arrive at principled decisions.

33 33 Competency 2.1.3: Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS 1. Distinguish, appraise, and integrate multiple sources of knowledge, including research- based knowledge, community and cultural resources, and practice wisdom. 2. Analyze models of assessment, prevention, intervention, and evaluation. 3. Demonstrate effective oral communication in working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, communities, and colleagues. 4. Demonstrate effective written communication in working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, communities, and colleagues. 5. Utilize skills and processes of critical thinking to guide communication and decision making. JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) Competency 2.1.4: Engage diversity and difference in practice. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS 1. Engage in cultural self- study. JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) 2. Recognize the extent to which a culture s structures and values may oppress, marginalize, alienate, or create or enhance privilege and power. 3. Engage in continuous self- assessment of one s social location within social power structures to minimize the influence of personal biases and values in working with diverse groups. 4. Recognize and communicate their understanding of the

34 34 importance of difference in shaping life experiences. 5. View themselves as learners and engage those with whom they work as informants. 6. Recognize and appreciate strengths across cultures. justice. Competency 2.1.5: Advance human rights and social and economic PRACTICE BEHAVIORS 1. Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination and the changing nature of those systems. 2. Advocate for human rights and social and economic justice. 3. Engage in practices that advance social and economic justice. 4. Engage in advancing social and economic justice by applying Social Work for Social Justice Principles, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and other perspectives on social justice. JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) Competency 2.1.6: Engage in research- informed practice and practice- informed research. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3) 1. Use practice experience to inform scientific inquiry. 2. Use research evidence to inform practice. Competency 2.1.7: Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. PRACTICE BEHAVIORS JR Student (n/a; 1-3) JR FWI (n/a; 1-3)