Nyack College BSW Self-Study Report (2014)

Transcription

1 Nyack College BSW Self-Study Report (2014) In order to assess students progress toward becoming professional social workers, the Bachelors of Social Work (BSW) program utilizes an assessment flow chart to help guide the social work faculty in assessing outcomes. The Nyack College Assessment Flow Chart (Figure 1.) below depicts the assessment process. The assessment flow chart describes how the social work competencies are used to help guide the development of the social work knowledge, values, and skills (the social work knowledge, values, & skills continue to be developed and refined by faculty members). The social work knowledge, values, and skills are then used as the framework for helping to link the social work practice behaviors (the practice behaviors are used to measure the social work competencies), student objectives, and assignments for each course. Also from the assessment flow chart you can see that the BSW program utilizes a variety of measurements to assess student progress that include both summative and formative assessments. Formative Assessment The formative (process) assessment is initiated when course syllabi are developed and student learning goals are designed to operationalize and support Nyack College and the program s mission statements, along with the established program goals, competencies, and practice behaviors for the BSW program. This process is ongoing with the modification of preexisting courses and the addition of new ones. Formative assessments are measured via Faculty Course Level Assessments (via course rubrics) that are developed by faculty members. For instance, BSW students need to complete a research proposal as part of their course work for Social Work Research Methods (SWK 328) class. Faculty members developed a research proposal rubric to assist in measuring each student s performance on this assignment. The research proposal rubric below (Table 4.1) explains how student performance is measured utilizing a Likert scale. Formative assessments help faculty to reflect on their own courses, and it becomes an important tool that facilitates communication among faculty members concerning their curriculum, teaching methods, and assignments. Social Work Faculty at Nyack College assessed their courses by completing the Faculty Course Level Assessment (FCLA) using an online assessment program called Learning Outcome Manager (LOM). Table 4.2 highlights the formative (process) assessment for the school year that focuses on the connections among the social work competencies, social work practice behaviors, and all of the BSW course rubrics/assignments. In the final column of the Table you can see the student averages for the combined BSW course rubrics/assignments, and their connection to each practice behavior. 1

2 Nyack College Assessment Flow Chart (2014) Figure 1 SW Knowledge SW Competencies SW Values SW Skills SW Practice Behaviors Course Objectives Course Assignments Summative Assessments 1. Field Instructor Evaluation 2. SASC 3. SWEAP- FCAI Report Results Annually to CSWE & Nyack College Formative Assessments FCLA via Course Rubrics (LOM) Report Results Annually to CSWE & Nyack College 2

3 Summative Assessments Summative assessments provide the overall performance of students in the BSW Program. The summative assessments include the Field Instructor Evaluation (from the field instructor s perspective), Assessment of Self Competency (SASC) (from the student s perspective), Social Work Education Assessment Project (SWEAP) Exit Survey, and the Alumni Survey. Field Instructor Evaluation The Field Instructor Evaluation is displayed in the Field Instruction Manual. From the inception of the program, field instructors have been required to submit evaluation reports at the end of each semester assessing students learning in the agency. These have been based on student achievement of an evolving set of educational objectives, and have been utilized by the faculty to guide ongoing student learning as well as to evaluate the learning resources available in field agencies. This input helps shape curricular choices and teaching strategies. They are also used to assist the student in making use of the field experience as well as evaluating the effectiveness of the experiences available in particular agencies to facilitate student learning. Field Instructor Evaluation reports submitted by field instructors are reviewed by field liaisons who, in turn, report to the Field Coordinator. The Program Evaluator analyzes the data and reports it to the Associate Dean and Social Work faculty during the annual assessment meeting. Assessment of Self Competency (SASC) The SASC is a quantitative tool for assessing student learning. The SASC is designed as a self-evaluation tool to measure student knowledge and skill development within the Social Work program. For each practice behavior, students must rate themselves on a 5-point Likert scale in terms of their ability to presently complete the practice behaviors. Purpose and Research Question of research (PB 6.1) Significance of Research (PB 6.1) 1 Unsatisfactory Generally unclear; Incomplete, unfocused, or absent. Does not show ability to develop research questions. No statement of purpose of study. 2 3 Developing Basic Introduction Needs to be more focused. Shows little ability to develop research questions. Significance and purpose of study are stated are not clear. Needs to be more focused. Shows some ability to develop research questions. Significance and purpose of study are stated, but needs to be more focused. 4 Proficient Clear but may sometimes digresses in the paper; stated in a single sentence Shows ability to develop research questions. Significance of study is stated and backed up with statistics, but focus could have been Table Exemplary Readily apparent to the reader; concisely stated in one sentence, which is engaging, and thought provoking. Shows excellent ability to develop research questions. Significance of study is appropriately focused and backed up with statistical data. 3

4 Amount, quality, and relevance of literatures (PB 6.2) Conceptual Framework.(PB 7.1) Operationalization (PB 6.1) Sampling (PB 6.1) Data Collection Method (PB 6.1) Research Instrument (PB 6.1) Reviews no literatures. Information has little or nothing to do with the main topic. Shows little attempt to identify a conceptual framework and connect it to the research. Shows no efforts to describe variables and measurements. Shows no attempt to describe its sampling method is rarely described. Shows little or no understanding on data collection method. Is neither consistent with the body of the text nor organized. Literature Review Reviews less than 3 literatures literatures to the topic are not relevant to the topic Describes a conceptual framework, but does not connect it to the research, or without consistency. Methods Shows little efforts to describe variables and measurements. Shows little attempt to describe its sampling method is rarely described, or is not correct. Describes the data collection method without consistency. Includes related variables in general, but many variables. Reviews 3 or 4 literatures with at least 3 empirical studies. More relevant literatures to the topic can be selected. Describes a conceptual framework, but does not connect it to the research, or without consistency. Describes variables and measurements without consistency. Describe its sampling method without consistency. Describes the data collection method, but need to be more consistent. Includes related variables in general, but misses one or two variables. sharper. Reviews 5 or 6 literatures including at least 4 empirical studies that are relevant to the topic. Describes a conceptual framework, and connects it the research. But the connection could have been clearer. Describes its variables and measurements, but could be more clear Describes its sampling method but could have been clearer. Describes the data collection described, but could have been clearer. Includes related variables in general, but could have been organized better Reviews at least 7 literatures including 5 empirical studies that are relevant to the topic. Use of references indicate substantial research. elaborates and clearly connects a conceptual framework to the research. Clearly describes its Variables and measurements with high validity. Describes its sampling method clearly and accurately. Describes its data collection method clearly. Includes related variables and well organized. 4

5 FCLA Course Rubric/Assignment Results Table 4.2 PBs Nyack Program Competencies COMPETENCY 1 PB 1.1 Advocates for client access to the services of social work Practices personal reflection and self-correction to assure continual professional PB 1.2 development PB 1.3 Attends to professional roles and boundaries 4.35 PB 1.4 Demonstrates professional demeanor in behavior, appearance, and communication 4.51 PB 1.5 Engages in career-long learning 4.42 PB 1.6 Uses supervision and consultation 4.49 Competency COMPETENCY 2 Recognizes and manages personal values in a way that allows professional values to guide PB 2.1 practice PB 2.2 Makes ethical decisions by applying standards of the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics and, as applicable, of the International Federation of Social Workers/International Association of Schools of Social Work Ethics in Social Work Statement of Principles PB 2.3 Tolerates ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts PB 2.4 Applies strategies of ethical reasoning to arrive at principled decisions COMPETENCY 3 Competency 2 PB 3.1 Distinguishes, appraises, and integrates multiple sources of knowledge, including researchbased knowledge, and practice wisdom 4.46 PB 3.2 Analyzes models of assessment, prevention, intervention, and evaluation 4.51 PB 3.3 Demonstrates effective oral and written communication in working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities 4.52 Competency COMPETENCY 4 Recognizes the extent to which a culture s structures and values may opposes, marginalize, PB alienate, or create or enhance privilege and power PB 4.2 Gains sufficient self-awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in working with diverse groups Recognizes and communicates their understanding of the importance of difference in PB 4.3 shaping life experiences 4.61 PB 4.4 View themselves as learners and engage those with whom they work as informants 4.7 Competency

6 Table 4.2 (continued) PBs Nyack Program Competencies COMPETENCY 5 Understands (sic: can identify and articulate ) the forms and mechanisms of oppression and PB 5.1 discrimination 4.47 PB 5.2 Advocates for human rights and social and economic justice PB 5.3 Engages in practices that advance social and economic justice Competency COMPETENCY 6 PB 6.1 Uses practice experiences to inform scientific inquiry PB 6.2 Uses research evidence to inform practice 4.37 Competency COMPETENCY 7 Utilizes conceptual frameworks to guide the processes of assessment, intervention, and PB 7.1 evaluation 4.03 PB 7.2 Critiques and applies knowledge to understand person and environment 4.4 Competency COMPETENCY 8 PB 8.1 Analyzes, formulates, and advocates for policies that advance social well-being PB 8.2 Collaborates with colleagues and clients for effective policy action Competency 8 COMPETENCY 9 PB 9.1 Continuously discovers appraises, and attends to changing locales, populations, scientific and technological developments, and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services 4.82 Provides leadership in promoting sustainable changes in service delivery and practice to PB 9.2 improve the quality of social services Competency COMPETENCY 10 substantively & affectively prepare for action with individuals, families, groups, 10(a)1 organizations, and communities; 10(a)2 use empathy and other interpersonal skills; and 10(a)3 develop mutually agreed-upon focus of work & desired outcomes 10(b)1 collect, organize, and interpret client data; 10(b)2 assess client strengths and limitations; 10(b)3 develop mutually agreed-upon intervention goals & objectives; and 10(b)4 select appropriate intervention strategies. 10(c)1 initiate actions to achieve organizational goals; 10(c)2 implement prevention interventions that enhance client capacities; 10(c)3 help clients resolve problems; 10(c)4 negotiate, mediate, and advocate for clients; and 10(c)5 facilitate transitions and endings 10(d)1 Social workers critically analyze, monitor, and evaluate interventions Competency 10 6

7 Social Work Education Assessment Project-Foundation Curriculum Assessment Instrument (SWEAP-FCAI) The SWEAP - FCAI provides a direct measure of how well a program`s curriculum prepared students for practice. The SWEAP-FCAI is designed to be used by students as they exit a social work program, with the explicit purpose of testing for knowledge gained throughout the program`s curriculum. The instrument consists of 64 multiple choice questions organized into the following curricular areas: practice, human behavior and social environment, policy, research, ethics and values, diversity and social and economic justice. These multiple choice questions are also connected to the 10 social work competencies and practice behaviors. The SWEAP - FCAI provides a post test for exiting BSW students, and assists programs by identifying areas for curricula improvement. The SWEAP-FCAI continuous use reflects the impact of the curricula changes made by faulty. An example of this instrument can be found at: Data Collection and Analysis The data is collected and analyzed by the program evaluator and Chair of social work and then presented at the first faculty meeting of each academic year and continually throughout the academic year. From these meeting, ongoing and periodic review of the course content and explicit and implicit curriculum is completed. During the Fall 2014 semester, the faculty had their first annual Faculty Curriculum Evaluation Meeting with the goal of making decisions based off the aforementioned assessments (especially survey results that do not meet benchmarks) about potential changes to their teaching methods, course material, and curriculum. A review of the assessment results will be discussed below. Presently, the Nyack College BSW Program publishes its program assessment outcomes on its website. Periodically, the results of the SWEAP-FCAI, Field Instructor Evaluation Survey, and Assessment of Self Competency are presented to the School of Social Work Community Advisory Committee. Competency and Practice Behavior Assessment The Competency and Practice Behavior Assessment Table 4.3 below details the average social work competency and practice behavior student scores via the Field Instructor Evaluation and SASC. The attainment of the social work competencies were measured individually and through their social work practice behaviors. The Field Instructor Evaluation and the SASC detail student averages for each Nyack College campus separately and combined (student averages for combined campuses was used for this assessment). The Table identifies student outcomes that were determined by a benchmark score of 3 or higher (the student answered questions on a 5-point Likert scale, with 5 being the highest score) for the Field Instructor Evaluation and the SASC. More specifically, the B.M columns define the percentage of students that scored on or above the benchmark. For the 5- point Likert scale on both the Field Instructor Evaluation and SASC, Nyack College faculty agreed on a benchmark of 3 because it represented student progress that was an average score of 3. Finally, the Table assesses the attainment of each Nyack program competency by detailing the average score for the Field Instructor Evaluation and SASC. 7

8 Field Instructor Evaluation For the Field Instructor Evaluation competencies, the student average scores were highest for social work competencies 1 (70%), 4 (67%), and 2 (57%). The student average scores were lowest for social work competencies 9 (43%) 6 (44%) and 3 (46%). As for the more specific social work practice behaviors, the student average scores were highest for 1.4 (85%), 4.4 (85%), 10(a)1 (85%), and 10(a)2 (70%). The student average scores were lowest for the social work practice behaviors 9.2 (29%), 3.1 (31%), 10(b)1 (40%), and 10(c)3 (40%). Assessment of Self Competency (SASC) Finally, for the SASC (via the Social Work Practice Behavior Scale), the student average scores were highest for social work competencies 2 (88%), 3 (88%), 4 (88%), 7 (88%), and 9 (88%). The student average scores were lowest for social work competencies 8 (69%), 6 (75%), and 10 (81%). As for the social work practice behaviors, the student average scores were 88% for 29 of 41 practice behaviors. The student average scores were lowest for 8.2 (63%) and 10(c)1 (63%). SWEAP-FCAI For the SWEAP-FCAI competencies, the student averages were highest for social work competencies 9 (87%), 3 (82%), and 1 (75%). The student averages were lowest for social work competencies 8 (35%), 6 (40%), and 4 (48%). As for the 28 of 41 (68%) of social work practice behaviors that were address on the Exit Survey, the student averages were highest for 3.2 (94%), 10(b)2 (94%), 1.1 (88%), 10(a)1 (88%), and 10(c)2 (88%). The student averages were lowest for the social work practice behaviors 4.4 (31%), 2.1 (33%), 8.1 (35%), and 6.1 (40%). Field Instructor Evaluation Summative Assessment Comparisons The Social Work Competency Comparison for Field Instructor Evaluation Tables 4.4a, 4.4b, and 4.4c below detail the average social work competency student scores for the Field Instructor Evaluation over the past three years (2012 to 2014). From Table 4.4a for the combined campuses, one can see a decline in student average scores on all 10 social work competencies from 2012 to The largest declines were for social work competencies 5 (-.83), 3 (-.68), and 7 (-.66). Although student average scores declined for all 10 competencies, the declines were only significant for social work competencies 4 (t=2.67; p<.020), 5 (t=2.98; p<.012), 7 (t=2.90; p<.013), and 10 (t=2.31; p<.040). From Table 4.4b for the Rockland campus, one can see an increase in student average scores for social work competency 2 (.10) from 2012 to However, this increase in student average scores was not significant (t= -.048; p<.990). From the Table one can also see a decline in student average scores on 9 of the 10 social work competencies from 2012 to The largest declines were for social work competencies 9 (-.48), 8 (-.35), and 10 (-.34). Although student average scores declined for a majority of the social work competencies, the declines were not significant for any of them. From Table 4.4c for the NYC campus, one can see that student average scores declined for all 10 social work competencies. The largest decline in student average scores were for social 8

9 work competencies 5 (- 1.61), 4 (- 1.41), and 6 (- 1.39), with 8 of the 10 competencies showing a significant decline. That is, competency 5 (t=4.29; p<.008), 6 (t=5.02; p<.037), 4 (t=4.49; p<.009), 2 (t=9.61; p<.000), 7(t=5.97; p<.002), 1(t=7.67; p<.001), 10 (t=3.74;.013), and 3 (t=5.53; p<.003). SWEAP-FCAI The Curriculum Area Scores for the Rockland campus (Table 4.5a) and NYC campus (Table 4.5b) below detail student average scores for each curriculum area. The tables also include the National average and how the student averages compare to the National average using the t-test and p-values. For the Rockland campus (Table 4.5a), one can see that the average student scores are highest for the curriculum areas of practice (72.5%) and ethics/values (67.8%). From the Table, one can also see that the average student scores are lowest for the curriculum areas of research (39.6%) and policy (47.6%). Lastly, one can see from the Table that the Rockland student averages are significantly lower than the National student average for the curriculum areas of HBSE (t= ; p<.03) and social and economic justice (t= -2.47; p<.01). For the NYC campus (Table 4.5b), one can see that the average student scores are highest for the curriculum areas of practice (66.6%), HBSE (62.2%), and ethics/values (61.1%). From the Table, one can also see that the average student scores are lowest for the curriculum areas of policy (35.7%) and research (39.5%). Lastly, one can see from the Table that Rockland student averages are significantly lower than the National student average for the curriculum areas of policy (t= ; p<.001) and research (t= ; p<.001). The Curriculum Area Scores by Year Tables 4.6a and 4.6b below detail the student average scores for each curriculum area over the past three years (2012 to 2014). From Table 4.6a for the Rockland campus, one can see that student averages increased for the curriculum areas of Policy (8.7), Practice (8.3), and Ethics/Values (.30) from 2012 to The increase in student average scores were significant for the areas of Policy (t=10.22; p<.000) and Practice (t=18.22; p<.000). From Table 4.6a, one can also see that the student averages declined for the curriculum areas of Social and Economic Justice (-8), Research (-6), HBSE (- 3.3), and Diversity (-2.2). The decline in student average scores were significant for the areas of Social and Economic Justice (t=15.67; p<.000), Research (t=7.39; p<.000), HBSE (t=5.53;p<.000), and Diversity (t=3.48; p<.000). 9

10 PBs Competency and Practice Behavior Assessment Nyack Program Competencies Field Instructor Evaluation B. M. * Table 4.3 B. M. * COMPETENCY 1 PB 1.1 Advocates for client access to the services of social work % % Practices personal reflection and self-correction to assure PB 1.2 continual professional development % % PB 1.3 Attends to professional roles and boundaries % % Demonstrates professional demeanor in behavior, PB 1.4 appearance, and communication % % PB 1.5 Engages in career-long learning % % PB 1.6 Uses supervision and consultation % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 2 Recognizes and manages personal values in a way that allows PB 2.1 professional values to guide practice % % Makes ethical decisions by applying standards of the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics and, as PB 2.2 applicable, of the International Federation of Social % % Workers/International Association of Schools of Social Work Ethics in Social Work Statement of Principles PB 2.3 Tolerates ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts % % Applies strategies of ethical reasoning to arrive at principled PB 2.4 decisions % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 3 Distinguishes, appraises, and integrates multiple sources of PB 3.1 knowledge, including research-based knowledge, and % % practice wisdom Analyzes models of assessment, prevention, intervention, PB 3.2 and evaluation % % Demonstrates effective oral and written communication in PB 3.3 working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and % % communities Competency % % COMPETENCY 4 Recognizes the extent to which a culture s structures and PB 4.1 values may opposes, marginalize, alienate, or create or enhance privilege and power % % SASC PB 4.2 Gains sufficient self-awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in working with diverse groups % % Recognizes and communicates their understanding of the PB 4.3 importance of difference in shaping life experiences View themselves as learners and engage those with whom PB 4.4 they work as informants % % % % Competency % % Benchmark (B.M)** = % of students who score 3 (level of skill [meets]) or higher on 5-pt. Likert scale

11 PBs Nyack Program Competencies COMPETENCY 5 Understands (sic: can identify and articulate ) the forms and PB 5.1 mechanisms of oppression and discrimination Field Instructor Evaluation B. M. * Table 4.3 (continued) SASC B. M. * % % PB 5.2 Advocates for human rights and social and economic justice % % PB 5.3 Engages in practices that advance social and economic justice % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 6 PB 6.1 Uses practice experiences to inform scientific inquiry % % PB 6.2 Uses research evidence to inform practice % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 7 Utilizes conceptual frameworks to guide the processes of PB 7.1 assessment, intervention, and evaluation % % Critiques and applies knowledge to understand person and PB 7.2 environment % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 8 Analyzes, formulates, and advocates for policies that PB 8.1 advance social well-being % % Collaborates with colleagues and clients for effective policy PB 8.2 action % % Competency % % COMPETENCY 9 Continuously discovers appraises, and attends to changing locales, populations, scientific and technological PB 9.1 developments, and emerging societal trends to provide % % relevant services Provides leadership in promoting sustainable changes in PB 9.2 service delivery and practice to improve the quality of social % % services Competency % % COMPETENCY 10 substantively & affectively prepare for action with 10(a)1 individuals, families, groups, organizations, and % % communities; 10(a)2 use empathy and other interpersonal skills; and % % develop mutually agreed-upon focus of work & desired 10(a)3 outcomes % % 10(b)1 collect, organize, and interpret client data; % % 10(b)2 assess client strengths and limitations; % % develop mutually agreed-upon intervention goals & 10(b)3 objectives; and % % 10(b)4 select appropriate intervention strategies % % 10(c)1 initiate actions to achieve organizational goals; % % implement prevention interventions that enhance client 10(c)2 capacities; % % 10(c)3 help clients resolve problems; % % 10(c)4 negotiate, mediate, and advocate for clients; and % % 10(c)5 facilitate transitions and endings % % Social workers critically analyze, monitor, and evaluate 10(d)1 interventions % % Competency % % Competencies 1 thru % %

12 From Table 4.6b for the NYC campus, one can see that student averages increased for the curriculum area of HBSE (4.7) from 2012 to 2014, with the curriculum area of Practice staying the same. The increase in student average scores was significant for the area of HBSE (t=7.59; p<.000). From Table 4.6b, one can also see that the student averages declined for the curriculum areas of Policy (-25.4), Ethics/Values (-20.2), Social and Economic Justice (-10.3), Research (-8.6), and Diversity (-2.8). The decline in student average scores were significant for the areas of Policy (t=30.30; p<.000), Ethics/Values (t=51.5; p<.000), Social and Economic Justice (t=17.77; p<.000), Research (t=10.93; p<.000), and Diversity (t=4.97; p<.000). Table 4.4a Social Work Competency Comparison for Field Instructor Evaluation (Combined Campus) Competency Avg. Diff t-test value p-value * * * * * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level Table 4.4b Social Work Competency Comparison for Field Instructor Evaluation (Rockland Campus) Competency Avg. Diff t-test value p-value * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level 12

13 Social Work Competency Comparison for Field Instructor Evaluation (NYC Campus) Competency Avg. Diff t-test value Table 4.4c p-value * * * * * * * * * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level Curriculum Area Scores for the SWEAP-FCAI (Rockland Campus) Table 4.5a Curriculum Area Primary National Competency t-test value p-value Practice 1 & HBSE * Policy Research Ethics/Values Diversity Social & Economic Justice * * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level Curriculum Area Scores for the SWEAP-FCAI (NYC Campus) Table 4.5b Curriculum Area Primary National Competency t-test value p-value Practice 1 & HBSE Policy * Research * Ethics/Values Diversity Social & Economic Justice * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level 13

14 Discussion Table 4.6a Curriculum Area Scores by Year for the SWEAP-FCAI (Rockland Campus) Competency Avg. Diff t-test value p-value Practice * HBSE * Policy * Research * Ethics/Values Diversity * Social & Economic Justice * * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level Curriculum Area Scores by Year for the SWEAP-FCAI (NYC Campus) Competency Avg. Diff t-test value Table 4.6b p-value Practice HBSE * Policy * Research * Ethics/Values * Diversity * Social & Economic Justice * * indicates a significant difference at the p<.05 level The above data was collected and analyzed by the program evaluator and Chair of social work and then presented at the Faculty Curriculum Evaluation Meeting during the Fall 2014 semester. The school of social work faculty reviewed the data results relevant to their teaching area and then discussed it with each other, the program evaluator, and Chair of social work. From these meetings, faculty identified several themes from the data results. For the Field Instructor Evaluation, a majority of the students are meeting the benchmark of 3. A majority of the competencies had at least 90% of the student meeting the benchmark. Only competencies 5 and 6 had benchmark rates that were slightly below 90%. For these two lowest benchmark rates, the school of social work faculty continues to corroborate with the agency field instructors on how to increase these benchmark rates for future students. School of social work faculty are also working on identifying and updating curriculum areas, teaching methods, and course material that will help future students be better prepared for their field experience. For the SASC, a majority of the students are meeting the benchmark of 3. A majority of the competencies had at least 90% of the student meeting the benchmark. Only competencies 3 and 6 had benchmark rates that were below 90%. For these two lowest benchmark rates, the school of 14

15 social work faculty continues to corroborate with each other on how to increase these benchmark rates for future students. School of social work faculty are also working on identifying and updating curriculum areas, teaching methods, and course material that will help future students be better prepared for their courses. For the SWEAP-FCAI, the student results are different depending on the campus. For the Rockland campus, the student scores are competitive with the national student averages in the curriculum areas of practice, policy, research, ethics/values, and diversity. In the area of practice, student performance scores have increased significantly from 2012 to This might be partly due to the curriculum change made to the 2014 cohort. For the NYC campus, the student scores are competitive with the National averages in the curriculum areas of practice, HBSE, ethics/values, diversity, and social and economic justice. Although our students from both campuses have similar averages when compared to the National average on most curriculum areas, there are curriculum areas that fell significantly below the National average. For the Rockland campus, the curriculum areas of HBSE and social and economic justice fell below the national average. For the NYC campus, the curriculum areas of policy and research fell below the national average. The school of social work faculty are in the process of identifying and studying the teaching methods and course material in these lower curriculum areas to make potential changes to the curriculum. The faculty also plan to focus on the teaching methods and course material in the curriculum areas with the highest student averages to see if there are any teaching methods or course material that are consistently effective at helping students become better prepared in these curriculum areas. Looking at the Ethics/Values curriculum area, it has decreased for the NYC campus over the past three years. The significant reduction in student scores might partly be due to the fact that faculty got rid of the Principles of Social Work Practice (SWK 316) course. This course had a section on ethics and values that was taken out of the curriculum and not incorporated into another course. Also, the policy scores have decreased significantly for the NYC campus. Conversely, the policy scores increased significantly for the Rockland campus. Comment [N1]: Kwi, still waiting to see if this was taught by an adjunct faculty. 15