RICHARD STOCKTON COLLEGE OF NEW JERSEY
MSW PROGRAM ASSESSMENT REPORT
ACADEMIC YEAR 2010-2011
Assessment Plan
Multiple measures are being used for the assessment of the attainment of MSW Program Objectives. These include:
Assessment of Attainment of Foundation Objectives
- Critical Thinking Assessment at Entrance to MSW Program (faculty assessment of students’ critical thinking abilities, as applied to a case study, at admission—in particular, students’ scores on the items of the Critical Thinking Assessment that are most closely related to the MSW Foundation Program Objectives)
- Foundation course evaluations (students’ self-assessments of how well they achieved stated course objectives—in particular the course objectives that are most closely related to MSW Foundation Program Objectives)
- Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluations of Field Performance (field instructors’ assessment of student achievement of MSW Foundation Program Objectives in field at the end of each semester of the Foundation Year)
- Summary of Faculty Service to College and Community (data collected from faculty members)
Assessment of Attainment of Concentration Objectives
- Critical Thinking Assessment at Exit from MSW Program (faculty assessment of students’ critical thinking abilities, as applied to a case study, at exit—in particular, students’ scores on the items of the Critical Thinking Assessment that are most closely related to the MSW Concentration Program Objectives)
- Concentration course evaluations (students’ self-assessments of how well they achieved stated course objectives—in particular the course objectives that are most closely related to MSW Concentration Program Objectives)
- Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluations of Field Performance (field instructors’ assessment of student achievement of MSW Program Concentration Objectives in field at the end of each semester of the Concentration Year)
- Exit Survey (students’ assessment of degree to which Program meets its stated objectives)
- Portfolio Project at End of Concentration Year (faculty assessment of degree to which students evidence professional competencies at end of concentration year)
- Licensure Pass Rates (% of those who take the New Jersey LSW Examination and pass on the first try)
- Alumni Survey
Assessment Data
At this point in our new MSW Program, we have collected and analyzed two years of data from students, field instructors, and faculty members. The following discussion will summarize our findings and how we are using those findings to affirm and improve the educational program.
Critical Thinking Assessment at Entrance to MSW Program
Our first project was to assess the educational needs of students at entrance to the MSW Program. This was accomplished by having all newly admitted students take a Critical Thinking Assessment at Entrance. This assessment was developed by a social work program faculty member who teaches research in the undergraduate program, Dr. William Reynolds. He had attended a week-long faculty development program at Stockton during the summer preceding the beginning of the MSW Program. During that week, collaborating with a member of Stockton’s Philosophy Program, Dr. Reynolds developed an instrument that was originally designed to be a pre- and post-test of students’ mastery of knowledge and critical thinking to be given at the beginning and end of their senior year in the undergraduate social work program. Upon examining the instrument, Dr. Diane Falk, the MSW Program Director, saw its potential as an instrument to assess MSW students, both at entrance to and exit from the MSW Program. Dr. Falk modified the instrument, adding items that would assess MSW Program Goals and Objectives, and then developed a rubric to be used in evaluating the results. The Critical Thinking Assessment at Entrance asked all entering students to read a case study, several research articles pertaining to similar cases, and several sections of the NASW Code of Ethics. Students were challenged to examine the case material, then apply the findings of studies and select elements of the Code of Ethics to the case in a written recommendation to a judge who would be making a decision about appropriate placement of the adolescent boy central to the case. Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Falk then reviewed the students’ essays, applying the rubric to come up with a percentage score for the group on each subscale. (The subscales were designed to reflect the MSW Program Goals, and particular items under each subscale were designed to measure MSW Program Objectives.) Results of the analysis of this Critical Thinking Assessment are presented in Table 17below.
We first used this instrument to get a beginning assessment on our MSW Program Goals by examining the scores that the group achieved on the subscales, which as a whole reflected Program Goals. This gave us a very general idea of where our first class of students was at the very beginnings of their journey through the MSW Program. Most of them came into the Program with some experience in the human services, so it was not surprising that they scored highest in the area of having some knowledge about generalist social work practice. Their scores on the ability to apply this knowledge to working with diverse populations were dramatically lower and only somewhat better in the areas of having some knowledge about the social contexts of practice or the values and ethics that guide social work practice. Their ability to think critically, write effectively, and use quantitative and qualitative research methods were only very slightly higher, although it would seem reasonable to expect such abilities in college graduates, no matter what their academic background had been.
Although we administered the second part of the Critical Thinking Assessment to the graduating students, we have not yet had a chance to score it. Results will be reported at a future MSW Program meeting.
Foundation Course Evaluations
The following tables report students’ self-assessments of their mastery of course objectives in the first three semesters of the Program. Linkage between the course objectives and Program Objectives will be summarized in the summary tables, Table 35: “Implementation of Plan for Assessment of Foundation Year Program Objectives, with Results” and Table 36: “Implementation of Plan for Assessment of Concentration Year Program Objectives, with Results” at the end of this section.
Table 20
HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT I
SOWK 5101
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5= “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I can identify how social systems promote or deter people in maintaining or achieving well-being.
- I can define “theory” and the connection between theory, research, human behavior, and social work practice.
- I can identify how variations in human situations (due to the transaction of bio-psycho-socio- cultural, spiritual, political and economic forces) may either encourage or impede self-determination and the individual’s worth and dignity.
- I can demonstrate knowledge of biases and cultural limitations in theories relating to human behavior in the social environment.
- I can demonstrate the ability to think critically.
- I am able to explore personal biases and stereotypes that can affect my understanding of human behavior.
- I can demonstrate how biological, psychological, socio-cultural, spiritual, and physical forces affect the functioning of diverse individuals, families, groups, and communities.
- I can examine and critically evaluate the values underlying human behavior theories and their relevance to social work values and principles.
- I can identify the importance of understanding physical, social and psychological human development in assessing and planning practice interventions.
- I can identify and understand the developmental stages of the life span from conception through childhood.
As this Table 20 shows, students in both cohorts of the Foundation Human Behavior course felt fairly confident that they had mastered the course objectives. Every rating was at least 4.10 on a scale of 1 to 5.
Table 21
SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTS
SOWK 5120
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5 = “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I understand the extent to which social work services are delivered through at least one complex organization and can describe how the organization was established, is funded, and managed.
- I can articulate the potential power of social service organizations to enhance human well being, advance social justice and human rights, and support ethical and culturally competent practice.
- I can describe how complex organizations can both implement social policies and communicate unmet social service needs to policy makers.
- Using systems theory, I can develop an organizational analysis of one social service agency.
- I understand the extent to which social work has become a global profession, working within intergovernmental, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations worldwide to create a more humane world.
- I can articulate strategies for working effectively within organizational structures to carry out social work purposes, even when those structures are imperfect.
- I understand the dynamic interaction between social service organizations and their environments and can describe several environmental factors currently affecting the functioning of one such organization.
- I am able to analyze the functioning of one social service organization and understand the impact of organizational functioning on practice.
- I am able to identify areas of less than effective organizational functioning and suggest creative approaches to enhancing organizational functioning.
In the Social Organizations and Environments course (both cohorts), students were equally confident, with no score falling below 4.00.
Table 22
FOUNDATION SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY
SOWK 5130
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5 = “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I understand the historical, social, economic and political development of social welfare policy in the United States.
- I understand how social welfare policy is an expression of multiple and competing societal goals, values and social philosophies of a society.
- I understand the roles that social workers can play in development, implementation, and evaluation of social welfare policy.
- I have explored how social policyis implemented and some of the intended and unintended consequences of policy on client populations, with particular attention to oppressed and/or disadvantaged populations (including racial and ethnic minorities, women, disabled persons, gays and lesbians, children, older persons, and other groups with distinctive needs).
- I am able to plan and implement at least one change strategy on an organizational, local, state or federal level.
- I am familiar with debates and developments in key social policy arenas and have explored one social policy area in more depth.
- I have explored potential professional social work roles, including advocacy and policy practice.
- I can apply class material to live situations.
In the Foundation Social Welfare Policy course, the 2009-2010 cohort students’ self-assessment yielded a mean score of less than the desired 4.0 in Objective 5. Students may have felt that they understood most of the material of this course, but they apparently felt a bit unsure of their ability to plan and implement at least one change strategy on an organizational, local, state or federal level. This is understandable for students in their first semester of an MSW Program. We may have to consider whether this is a reasonable goal for the foundation-level course in social welfare policy.
In the second cohort, students’ self-assessment yielded a mean score of less than the desired 4.0 in Objective 6. Reasons for this are being explored by the professor who teaches this course. It should be noted that in the second cohort there was one student who rated her level of achievement of every course objective as “1,” indicating that she felt she had achieved no mastery at all of any of the course objectives. It appears likely that this student misread the scale, rather than felt she learned absolutely nothing. If this hypothesis is true, then the results for the second cohort would be significantly higher.
Table 23
FOUNDATION SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
SOWK 5160
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5= “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I can identify the historical context, purpose and objectives of social work practice.
- I can identify professional values and ethics that direct and guide practice; I also am able to practice with an understanding of human rights and social justice.
- I have developed self- awareness and understand the professional “use of self” in social work practice consistent with professional values and ethics.
- I can understand, clarify and interpret interventive roles in working with varied sizes, levels, and contexts of client systems.
- I can apply the advanced generalist practice model to working with diverse individuals, families, and groups.
- I can demonstrate skills in engagement, problem identification, goal setting, data collection, assessment, contracting, planning and implementing interventions, evaluation, and termination.
- I can apply ecosystems, strengths-based, and empowerment perspectives of practice in working with client systems.
- I understand cultural competence standards and can demonstrate beginning competency in applying those standards in work with diverse individuals, families, and groups.
- I can use supervision appropriately in a practice setting.
- I am able to write effectively using a variety of formats.
- I am able to evaluate research and practice interventions, including evidence-based practice models, to assess their strengths and limitations for use in practice.
In both cohorts of the Foundation Social Work Practice course, students were quite confident, with no score falling below 4.00.
Table 24
Field I
SOWK 5901
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5= “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I am able to practice with an understanding of core social work values, and ethics, and can use ethical guidelines and critical thinking to resolve ethical dilemmas.
- I am able to practice with an understanding of the effects of oppression, discrimination, respect for diversity, human rights, social and economic justice.
- I have developed self- awareness and an understanding of the professional “use of self” in social work practice consistent with professional values and ethics.
- I can demonstrate skill in applying the advanced generalist practice model in work with diverse individuals, families, and groups as well as the varied roles and functions of a generalist social work practitioner.
- I can effectively apply skills in engagement, problem identification, goal setting, data collection, contracting, assessment, treatment planning, evaluation and termination with client systems.
- I am able to practice with an understanding of the connection between theoretical, conceptual frameworks, evidenced-based research methodologies, and the evaluation of practice outcomes.
- I am able to apply ecosystems, strengths-based and empowerment perspectives of practice in work with client systems.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of cultural competence standards and barriers to ethical and cultural competency in practice settings.
- I am able to use supervision appropriate to professional development and autonomous practice.
- I am able to write effectively using a variety of formats.
Finally, in both cohorts students’ self-assessment of their mastery in the first semester field course were fairly strong. The only area that failed to reach to desired minimum of 4.0 on a scale of 1 to 5 was their ability to use ethical guidelines and critical thinking to resolve ethical dilemmas encountered in the field. The program needs to examine reasons for the decrease in confidence between cohorts 1 and 2 and find ways to ensure that students are gaining an understanding of ethical dilemmas and how to resolve them.
Table 25
HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT II
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5= “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
1. I understand the effects of oppression on human behavior based on, social class, race, ethnicity, culture, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, and disability status. / 4.78 / 4.38
2. I am able to examine critically the variations in human situations due to the transaction of bio-psycho-socio-cultural, spiritual, political and economic forces that may either encourage or impede self-determination and the individual’s worth and dignity. / 4.50 / 4.46
3. I am able to think critically as evidenced in class discussions and written assignments. / 4.56 / 4.46
4. I am able to explore personal biases and stereotypes that can affect my understanding of human behavior. / 4.72 / 4.46
5. I know how biological, psychological, socio-cultural, spiritual, and physical forces affect diverse individuals, family, groups, and community functioning. / 4.56 / 4.38
6. I am able to examine and critically evaluate the values underlying human behavior theories and their relevance to social work values and principles. / 4.11 / 4.23
7. I am able to identify contributions of physical, social, and psychological development in assessing and understanding human behavior and their relevance to practice interventions at all levels. / 4.22 / 4.23
8. I am able to identify and understand the developmental stages of the life span from middle childhood through elder development. / 4.61 / 4.54
9. I am able to articulate the interconnections between early and later life experiences and how inequities in early life and across the life span become related to older adults. / 4.56 / 4.31
Students in the second semester of Human Behavior in the Social Environment also felt quite confident of their mastery of the topics.
Table 26
RACE, ETHNICITY, DIVERSITY
MEAN SCORE (5-POINT SCALE, 5= “VERY MUCH AGREE”)
ITEM / MEAN SCORESACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / 2010-2011
- I am able to demonstrate an understanding of the historical and contemporary significance of racial, ethnic, cultural and socially diverse groupings in the U.S and the global community.
- I am able to demonstrate an understanding of key concepts which shape perceptions of human differences, including race, class, gender, ethnicity, national origin, culture, language, immigration status, sexual orientation, marital status, age, political ideology, religion, and disability status.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of the impact of social and cultural forces on identity formation and human behavior.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of the negative effects of racism, discrimination, social exclusion and oppression on socially-designated minority groups.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of the ways in which racism, prejudice, and stereotyping are embedded within American culture, and affect the distribution of power within the social structures of the society.
- I am able to demonstrate a commitment to the values and ethics of the social work profession in working with diverse client populations.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of how diverse communities are impacted by the unequal distribution of social resources.
- I can demonstrate an understanding of social policy, organizational and social service programming interventions and how they affect different client populations in diverse communities.
- I can demonstrate an appreciation of the relationship between one's own socialization and one’s interactions with others whose backgrounds are different.
- I can demonstrate knowledge about how our sociocultural attitudes can influence our judgments about clients' strengths and vulnerabilities.
Similarly, students in Race, Ethnicity, Diversity were quite confident of their mastery of the competencies.