Running Head: CRITICAL THINKING ASSIGNMENT

Critical Thinking Assignment

Anuska Martins

Critical & Creative Thinking

PME 833-001

Professor Sarah McLean Knapp

Queens University

July 25th

2018

2

CRITICAL THINKING

Revised Lesson Plan: Workshop for Professionals and Students on Intimate Partner

Violence and the Experiences of Survivors

For this portion of the assignment I chose to rework a PowerPoint presentation that I have

used to facilitate presentations on the subject of intimate partner violence (IPV) in various

settings in the past. This presentation is primarily lecture-based, and consequently provides

minimal opportunities for participants to really engage with the material, thus hindering critical

thinking opportunities as Case argues often happens with this approach (2008). When I would

use this presentation, too much time would be spent on providing content without enough time

invested in engaging opportunities for participants to digest and learn how to apply the material

(Case, 2005). My approach was teacher-led and, in accordance with Case and Balcaens’

argument, may have consequently de-motivated students from following or absorbing the

presentation material as it may have sent a message that their views were insignificant (2008).

Furthermore, the questions posed within the original presentation invited participants to state

factual information regarding IPV or their personal views on the topic, similar to the level 1 and

2 questions Case identifies as lacking opportunity for critical thinking (2007).

For my new lesson plan design, I was inspired by the flipped classroom approach that

involves providing students with the theories and concepts to read and review prior to the lesson

so that class time can be focused on “homework” or activities that facilitate understanding and

application of the material (Sprouts, 2015). The new lesson plan involves sending participants a

richer version of my original power point presentation as material to read in preparation for the

workshop. The PowerPoint slides contain sufficient background knowledge for participants to

then be able to engage in the activities within the lesson itself without overwhelming participants

with too much material as Case specifies as an ideal approach in his discussion of how to teach

3

CRITICAL THINKING

understanding to students (2008). The lesson plan and activities promote a collaborative

engagement between the facilitator and the participants as Case & Balcaen identify as integral to

a classroom community (2008). The activity design, materials provided, and expectations of the

facilitator are made clear, while the activities themselves are open ended and require student's

active engagement to be successful. There is a collaborative component of every exercise as

Gini-Newman & Case express cultivates critical thinking; activities are either completed

altogether or in small-groups with a follow-up class discussion (n.d.). A safer space exercise

establishes ground rules which promote a respectful and purposeful exchange as described by

Gini-Newman (CSTI, 2011). The facilitator is also able to model an open-minded approach

towards the discussion that demonstrates respectful consideration of multiple standpoints (CSTI,

2011).

If we were to use Krathwohl’s revised taxonomy table to assess the learning objectives

for the workshop, we could identify the first as being focused on remembering and

understanding, the second in relation to analyzing and evaluating, and the third as addressing

application and creating (2002). As Case mentions in his critique of Bloom’s taxonomy, it is

possible to turn lower-order tasks into critical thinking opportunities, such as facilitating

comprehension by problematizing content, which is what the case scenarios on couple conflict

versus IPV aim to do (2013). The subject matter is current and relevant to participants practice as

they are either students or professionals in the field of human services, which serves as

motivational for participant engagement (Case, 2008).

The focus of the majority of questions posed throughout the lesson is to facilitate critical

thinking opportunities that invite participants to make reasoned judgements that are based on the

information given to them as Case describes as essential to critical thinking (2005). Many

4

CRITICAL THINKING

questions involve judging what the best possible solution would be in a complex situation, while

encouraging habits of mind that are open to understanding various perspectives as Gini-Newman

describes (CSTI, 2011). Each activity focuses on one aspect of critical thinking and examines a

specific portion of the material covered in the power point which is reviewed at the beginning of

the respective activity, in reference to Professor Judy Wearing's overview of teaching strategies

that require focus to be effective (n.d.). Through analyzing articles (critique the piece), role-

playing (perform to specs), and designing awareness-raising artifacts (design to specs),

participants are better able to engage with and translate the concepts covered into practice (Case,

2008).

With respect to assessment, from my experience, when facilitating these kinds of

workshops, it is not always appropriate to provide a form of formal assessment to the participants

since the workshops are often run independently or as separate from a course curriculum, with

voluntary participation, and a degree of free-flowing participation is therefore expected and

encouraged. I tried, therefore to be creative in terms of incorporating assessment tools within the

lesson plan design that would be appropriate to the context and objectives of the workshop. The

google doc activity students engage in prior to the workshop itself allows the facilitator to gauge

to what degree students understand the material as well as their specific interests or concerns,

prior to the lesson, and adjust the focus of activities or timeline accordingly in preparation. The

“safer space” activity includes a discussion on how to frame comments, suggestions, or feedback

so as to provide a framework and models tools participants can apply when invited to provide

feedback to each other during the main activities, as Gini-Newman states is essential to facilitate

constructive peer feedback (CSTI, 2011). Although the facilitator is not formally assessing

participants, they can provide feedback which both models positive habits of the mind in

5

CRITICAL THINKING

considering multiple viewpoints, encourages participants to push their thinking further, and re-

enforces guidelines for constructive peer assessment as Case & Daniels discuss as pertinent to

assessment (2008). The evaluation tool at the end of the workshop serves as an opportunity for

students to reflect on their learning journey while providing valuable feedback to the facilitator.

The additional application questions can also support the facilitator and participants in reviewing

how the workshop may have caused them to shift the perspective they had during the initial

google doc exercise. The facilitator also invites participants to contact them for individual

guidance and feedback following the lesson. As Case & Balcaen discuss, much of how these

kinds of lessons can unfold depends on the participants engagement and respective needs, and

every group is different (2008). This revised lesson plan and approach to assessment is designed

to encourage a classroom community that provides challenges and opportunities for participants

to truly digest the material with guidelines and tools to facilitate critical thinking, while also

being flexible enough to adapt to various groups and settings in the realm of human services.

Case Scenario Rewrite

I chose the following scenario to rework for this portion of the assignment:

Original Scenario

Julie hates staff meetings. They are always the same. They all gather around the lunch

room table and listen to their manager explain to them most, but not all, of the latest

plans from above about their latest programs. She can tell the words are carefully chosen

and articulated – guarded and designed for the “lower staff.” The news is read off a

sheet, the Health and Safety Officer gives a bland report, no doubt including one or two

new safety hazards they must add to the list of things to remember. Chris will yawn,

6

CRITICAL THINKING

Amber will play with her hands. Then the manager will ask if there are any questions.

There never are any as everyone is too afraid to question him. Then the meeting will be

declared over, and everyone will trudge back to their desks. Julie used to have ambitions

in her job, especially when she first started. The HR materials she was given talked about

valuing critical thinking and creativity, and how “employees are the heart of the

organization.” She knows she is a good worker, excellent analytical skills, not to mention

she can organize files and speak to the public like no one else in her department. She

used to talk to her boss about possible career opportunities. At first, he seemed quite

encouraging, but then it became clear he was more concerned about her staying right

where she was doing his bidding than actually giving her any opportunities of her own.

That’s when the micromanaging started. The “make work” tasks that filled her day and

detracted her from her legitimate tasks let alone considering what was best for the

department. And the subtle insinuations that her work could be much better had Julie

checking the job ads daily.

This example illustrates what is flawed about teacher-led approaches as identified by

Case & Balcaen; namely with respect to how the directive approach of the manager is inducing a

de-motivated and disengaged response from the staff (2008). The presentation of the material

indicates a lowered expectation of the staff and a mere desire to have staff memorize and recite

the facts presented, which contributes to Case’s argument in his critique of Bloom’s taxonomy of

how this approach hinders critical thinking opportunities (2013). The focus of the presentation in

these meetings is on providing general content that lacks focus and relevance to the employees,

as well as a lack of attempts to ensure that staff digest and understand the material as Case

7

CRITICAL THINKING

illustrates as essential to learning (2005). There is a disconnect amongst staff as no opportunities

for collaboration are provided. The unspoken message being sent by this managers approach, is

that the perspectives and needs of the staff are irrelevant. There additionally appears to be an

underlying message that any attempts to invite critical thinking are superficial (inviting questions

when staff are afraid to answer, promoting critical & creative thinking on paper but then

micromanaging mundane tasks, and expressing there will be opportunities for advancement

without any follow through) which is resulting in a distrusting relationship between staff and

management. This example reinforces the impact of hidden messages and classroom climate as

Case & Balcaen discuss (2008). The trivial and redundant tasks assigned to Julie serve as a

further source of de-motivation (Case, 2008). The only feedback being provided is critical and

seemingly unconstructive, which is the opposite of what Gini-Newman advocates as integral to

helping students advance (CSTI, 2011).

Scenario Re-Write

Julie considers staff meetings to be the best part of her work week and one of the many

reasons why she loves her workplace. While certain standard guidelines apply to every

meeting, there is always a unique aspect to each meeting itself with regards to the

material covered and activities for staff to engage in. The manager makes a point to send

any relevant preparatory materials that specifically relate to the staff’s roles beforehand

for staff to review, or, should they lack the time to do so, the manager will produce a

concise summary of updates to review at the meeting. The manager starts every meeting

with a check-in to give participants the chance to express any of their specific needs and

8

CRITICAL THINKING

to create a supportive community atmosphere. While the manager presents clear

guidelines and expectations of the staff with respect to their participation in the meeting,

criteria for peer-feedback, and follow-up tasks to be completed, they also invite feedback

which is incorporated into decisions made, and they facilitate collaborative and

constructive exchanges between the staff members. The manager encourages Julie and

her co-workers to maintain an open mind in hearing and understanding conflicting

standpoints while maintaining purposeful, respectful responses when providing feedback

to each other. Questions regarding the material are always presented by the manager

with specific factors to consider. Julie finds the questions challenging but they also help

her to push past her initial opinion and to examine the specific set of rules or standards

to consider, which strengthens her understanding of the material and how it relates to

her professional context.

At every meeting Julie and the staff participate in a ‘game’ or activity that allows them

to apply the new material relevant to their work. The game will always focus on one

specific area and set of information from the content covered. Activities include creating

artifacts together, or in pairs with a structured peer-feedback session to follow,

transforming a protocol or procedure to consider new health standards, role playing

customer service scenarios, or critiquing a procedure in light of new criteria to consider.

The manager will offer support and guidance as the staff engage in the activity. Through

the suggestions of her manager and collaborative exchanges with her peers in completing

the activity or solving the ‘problem’ presented, Julie is building a repertoire of tools she

9

CRITICAL THINKING

can use within her own work. These activities not only strengthen understanding of the

content but they also allow Julie and her colleagues to incorporate the content within

their practice while strengthening interpersonal relationships between them.

In addition to the engaging team meetings, Julie appreciates her working relationship

with her manager. Whenever Julie is experiencing a challenge, she can arrange a meeting

with her manager, during which time she notices they will often help her work through

the challenge by reflecting questions back to her, while guiding her to pinpoint the

criteria she needs to consider in order to reach the best possible solution on what to do.

She finds these sessions really helpful and, in the long term, they have facilitated her

ability to autonomously engage in these practices when addressing issues as they arise.

Julie also meets with her manager every six months for an evaluation process, which

involves a self-assessment and a formal assessment from her manager. These meetings

are constructive and validating for Julie as her manager demonstrates recognition of her

amazing work while providing constructive suggestions on how she can develop

professionally. These meetings also give them the chance to review and modify her tasks

to ensure that they are purposeful and in line with both her objectives and the objectives

of the company. Criteria and expectations with respect to opportunities for advancement

are made clear and Julie has already been rewarded for her efforts through salary

increases, which motivates Julie as she believes she can trust in the vision that has been

10

CRITICAL THINKING

established between her and her manager regarding her future with this company.

This re-write is intended to demonstrate the substantial positive impacts of centralizing

critical thinking approaches within a classroom or work environment on the motivation,

development, and performance of students or staff. The background knowledge provided is

specific, focused, and relevant to the employee's roles as well as communicated in a way that

reserves time for practical application, which Case states can facilitate greater understanding of

the material (2005). In line with Case & Balcaen’s perspectives, the manager’s efforts to create a

community atmosphere that is supportive, invites and incorporates feedback provided, as well as

creates critical thinking opportunities that problematize content and involve practical application,

enhance the staff’s motivation and engagement (2008). Expectations are made clear, appropriate

routines implemented, and guidelines for the meeting’s discussions are established, while

feedback provided from the staff influences decisions made (Case & Balcaen, 2008). Habits of

the mind, such as an openness and effort to understand varying perspectives, are encouraged in

the collaborative exchanges at team meetings, while tools and strategies used to address critical

thinking challenges are built on collaboratively as well as applicable to Julie’s individual work

(Case, 2005). As Wearing stresses, attention is placed towards maintaining focus by designing

each week’s activity to address a specific issue using a specific type of critical thinking challenge

(n.d.). Questions posed in the meetings as well as with Julie individually are centered on inviting

reasoned judgement in light of the criteria to consider (Case, 2005). Peer feedback is encouraged,

while being respectful and constructive (CSTI, 2011). The manager is ensuring that they

facilitate whole group discussions, interactions between colleagues, as well as make time for

individual meetings with staff, which builds trust and contributes to the shared purpose and

11

CRITICAL THINKING

responsibility that is established (Case & Balcaen, 2008). The importance of assessment is

acknowledged and translated towards effective evaluation practices (Case & Daniels, 2008).

Julie identifies a long-term effect of her manager’s approach and her efforts to engage with them

as she becomes able to engage in critical thinking processes autonomously over time (Case &

Daniels, 2008).

12

CRITICAL THINKING

References

Case, R. (2005). Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada, 45(2), 45-49.

Case, R. (2007). Critical Thinking as an Effective Way of Teaching Social Studies (part 3).

(Video File). Retrieved from:

http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/ssogrcp/html/summerinstitute_roland_case_3.html

Case, R. (2013). The Unfortunate Consequences of Bloom's Taxonomy. Social Education, 77(4),

196-200.

Case, R. (2008). Beyond inert facts: Teaching for understanding in elementary social studies. In

Case, R., & Clark, P. (Eds), Anthology of Social Studies, Volume 1: Issues and Strategies

for Elementary Teachers (pp.33-47). Vancouver, B.C.: Pacific Educational Press.

Case, R., & Balcaen, P. (2008). Supporting a community of critical thinkers. In: Case, R., &

Clark, P., (Eds.). The Canadian Anthology of Social Studies, Volume 1: Issues and

Strategies for Elementary Teachers (pp. 89-98). Vancouver, B.C.: Pacific Educational

Press.

Case, R., & Daniels, L. (2008). “Teaching the tools to think critically.” In: Case, R. & Clark, P.

(Eds.). The Canadian Anthology of Social Studies Volume Two: Issues and Strategies for

Secondary Teachers, pp.74-85. Vancouver, BC: Pacific Educational Press.

CSTI U Toronto. (Sept. 30th

2011). Critical Thinking, Assessment, and Intellectual Tools. (Video

File). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uizgl0DbwQ

CSTI U Toronto. (Oct. 3rd

2011). Peer Feedback to Support Critical Thinking. (Video File).

Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hnp_BeNMvLo

13

CRITICAL THINKING

Gini-Newman, G. & Case, R. “C3” thinking: Critical, creative and collaborative. Retrieved

from https://tc2.ca/uploads/PDFs/Critical%20Discussions/C3Thinking.pdf

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice,

41(4), 212-218.

Wearing, J. (n.d.) Teaching Strategies for Critical Thinking Learning Activities (Class Handout).

Department of Education, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.

Sprouts. (Sept. 28th

, 2015). The Flipped Classroom Model. (Video File). Retrieved from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdKzSq_t8k8

14

CRITICAL THINKING

Appendix A:

Revised Intimate Partner Violence Workshop Facilitation Guide

Learning objectives of the workshop:

To enhance participants knowledge and understanding of Intimate Partner Violence and the

experiences of survivors

To facilitate participants analyses of societal attitudes in relation to intimate partner violence as

well as relevant social and legal services pertinent to survivors ability/attempts to leave

To enhance participants capacities to appropriately intervene with clients or loved ones who are

or may be experiencing intimate partner violence

This workshop can be facilitated with:

Professionals working in various human services (such as health, legal, and social services)

Students and/or internship students enrolled in health or social services programs

Materials Required:

Equipment available within respective facilities to enable the display of digital materials, as well

as for recording participants’ responses in brainstorming exercises (Smart Board, laptop and

projector, whiteboard and markers, flip chart, etc…)

Power Point presentation notes

Banner sheets

Craft materials (markers, pencils, scissors, glue, construction paper, magazine cutouts)

Laminated scenarios to distribute for role-playing activity

Pens for participants

Printouts of Power Point slides with space for notes for participants

Evaluation forms

Participation Certificates

Prior to Workshop:

In collaboration with professors or supervisors, provide registered participants with the

PowerPoint presentation IPV and Support Services via email prior to the scheduled workshop

Advise participants to pay attention to the notes attached to each slide, and the suggested

information resources they can access for further reading

Express to participants that they are expected to have familiarized themselves with this material

in preparation for the learning activities to take place within the workshop itself, and that the

workshop will involve active participation and discussion.

Ask students to respond to reflection questions provided in the google doc Collaborative

Reflections on IPV Materials, as well as to note any additional questions to be examined during

the workshop.

Length of Workshop: Three Hours

Activities:

15

CRITICAL THINKING

Introduction (5 minutes)

Safer Space (10 minutes)

Google Doc collective brainstorming review (15 minutes)

Couple Conflict or Intimate Partner Violence? (15 minutes)

Examining systemic strengths and pitfalls (30 minutes)

Break (15 minutes)

The Roles of Professionals in their Approaches with Survivors (30 minutes)

Creating an Awareness Artifact (30 minutes)

Conclusion/Evaluation (15 minutes)

Introductory Activities (30 minutes)

Objective: To create a comfortable and collaborative climate for the workshop, and encourage

collaborative brainstorming and discussion, model respectful open-minded responses, as well as to

demonstrate value for the perspectives and needs of participants

Materials: Smart Board, or Whiteboard/markers, or laptop/projector depending on the facilities

resources, access to google doc, whiteboard or flipchart/markers to record collective responses,

Activities:

Introduction (5 minutes):

o Introduce self, objectives for today’s discussion, facilitation approach, as well as an

overview of the planned activities and the timeline.

o Ask participants whether they would like to make adjustments around the scheduled

break period.

o Ensure every participant has a copy of the Power Point printout, pens, and the

evaluation forms.

Create a safer space (10 minutes): On the smart board, white board, or flip chart, collectively

establish ground rules to support everyone’s learning experience in the lesson.

o Invite participants to state what they would need from each other, and the facilitator, in

order to feel comfortable in the class.

o Incorporate suggested points involving respect into the discussion as needed.

o Include a set of ‘criteria for peer feedback’ to consider when adding comments or

suggestions to the perspectives or proposals of their peers

o Mention that participants can step outside or follow up with the facilitator individually if

they experience any discomfort or emotional triggers.

o Ideally keep this list visible throughout the workshop

Review of materials and google doc (15 minutes):

o Open the google doc and ask students for feedback regarding their experience of

responding to these questions

o Review the points raised and invite feedback on each of these points

o Acknowledge the additional questions (if any) and collaboratively seek responses when

appropriate, making reference to criteria that can be considered for each question

Couple Conflict or IPV? (15 minutes)

16

CRITICAL THINKING

Objective: To facilitate comprehension and application of concepts covered regarding intimate partner

violence as well as identify the differences between conflict and violence.

Materials: Case scenarios displayed on the smart board, laptop/ projector or through distributed

photocopies, whiteboard or flipchart/markers to record collective responses

Activity:

Review the material from the PowerPoint slides to consider by asking participants:

o What was the most insightful aspect of the power point slides covering differences

between conflict and IPV?

o Which factors stood out to you the most?

o Was the summary chart helpful? Why/Why not?

Present the following case scenarios and discussion questions.

o The facilitator can refer back to the summary chart in the power point slides as needed.

o Ensure to present questions one at a time, and facilitate the discussion in a way that

promotes respect for varying responses.

o Record participants collective responses on the whiteboard or flipchart.

Case Scenario One

Sam is a chartered accountant and homeowner in his city of origin. Sam identifies as a gay cis-

gendered male. Sam and Brody have been in a relationship for two years. When they first started

dating, Sam felt swept off of his feet; Brody would take them out on exciting dates and make grand

romantic gestures to show his affection. They moved in together within a couple of months of

dating. Over time, Sam began realizing that Brody always decided what their plans would be and

would even order Sams meals for them when they’d go out to dinner. When Sam tried to talk to

Brody about this, Brody became upset and expressed feeling that Sam was criticizing his efforts to

do nice things. Sam then noticed that Brody would always find reasons not to see Sam’s friends.

Brody would say they felt uncomfortable because Sam’s loved ones didn’t seem to like them. Brody

would also point out ways they felt Sam was being mistreated or disrespected by his loved ones.

Whenever Sam would speak on the phone with someone, Brody would withdraw and give Sam the

silent treatment for the rest of the night. Sam started seeing friends and family less and less to

avoid getting in fights with Brody. Sam would try to do whatever they thought would help prevent

Brody from getting upset, but Brody would always end up either yelling insults at Sam or giving Sam

the silent treatment for days, leaving Sam apologizing over and over again. If Sam would try to talk

to Brody about these mood shifts or outbursts, Brody would deny having ever done these things,

and Sam eventually began questioning their own perception of events. If Sam would start to pull

away from Brody, Brody would come back with flowers and take Sam out on an exciting date,

reminding Sam of what it was like when their relationship began, and Sam would feel hopeful that

things would change. But the smallest event, such as someone liking a photo on Sam’s FaceBook,

would trigger a change in Brody’s behaviour.

1. Is this violence or couple conflict?

17

CRITICAL THINKING

2. Which types of abuse do we see playing out between Brody and Sam?

3. What factors can we identify that indicate a pattern of abuse?

4. What resources are available to Sam should he decide to leave Brody?

5. What systemic barriers could Sam face if he were to decide to leave?

Case Scenario Two

Jo and Rory have been married for six years and have two young children. Both maintained steady

jobs and would share household and childcare tasks that they would decide on together. Jo recently

got promoted at work and is traveling more often. Rory is trying to be supportive of Jo’s career but

is also feeling the strain of managing all the household and childcare tasks without their partner

during these work trips. The couple plans a family camping trip, and the week before they are

supposed to leave, Jo tells Rory an important work event came up and asks Jo to take the kids on

the trip without them. Rory gets angry and raises their voice at Jo, makes a sarcastic remark about

how Jo had might as well move away, and calls Jo selfish. This causes Jo to get upset as well, and Jo

replies that Rory is being unsupportive, and the traveling is hard for Jo too. The couple argues back

and forth, and then Jo withdraws, saying they don’t want to do this and will be stepping out for

awhile.

1. Is this violence or couple conflict?

2. Which factors distinguish this as conflict and not violence?

3. Given the described build up to and behaviours during their argument, how did either or both

partners contribute to the conflict? What would have been a better way to behave within the

conflict?

4. Given the context of their history and circumstances, what steps could they take to find resolve?

Case Scenario Three

Mia and Nancy have been best friends for most of their lives. Mia has been dating her partner

steadily for a year. At first Nancy found Mia’s partner to be very charming and social and felt happy

for Mia. Shortly after they started dating, Mia moved in with her partner. Soon afterward, Mia

started calling Nancy crying because she and her partner had fought. Nancy would offer Mia

support, and then within a few days Mia would tell Nancy everything was fine and her partner had

apologized. But over time, Nancy began noticing the crises were happening more and more often.

When Nancy would try to say this to Mia, Mia would get defensive, saying all couples have

problems. Mia and Nancy started seeing each other less and less often, and on the rare occasion

they did, Nancy would notice changes in Mia over time; she lost a lot of weight and became very

jumpy and anxious. One day Nancy noticed a few bruises on Mia’s arm and Mia casually said she

fell off her bike. A week later, Mia called Nancy crying heavily, saying her partner attacked her and

18

CRITICAL THINKING

she ran out of their apartment. Mia disclosed a few scattered details of what she has been living

with her partner, but seemed reluctant to say too much. While on the phone with Nancy, Mia

expressed that her partner was trying to call her and that she was feeling confused; she wants to

answer him but she’s also scared of what he will do.

1. Is this couple conflict or IPV?

2. What indicators of abuse are described before Mia disclosed the abuse to Nancy?

Given the information we have about supporting loved ones suffering abuse, and risks of escalation

of abuse following a departure, what is the best way Nancy can...

3. Intervene with Mia in this moment?

4. Offer to help Mia in this moment?

5. Respond should Mia state that she wants to return to the apartment to speak to her partner?

Examining Systemic Strengths and Pitfalls in Relation to IPV (30 minutes)

Objective: To engage students in an analysis and evaluation of systemic supports and barriers related to

intimate partner violence, in a way that examines multiple perspectives.

Materials: Power Point slides and article displayed on the smart board, laptop/ projector or through

distributed photocopies, whiteboard or flipchart/markers to record collective responses

Activity:

Review the Power Point Slides that discuss support resources and gaps in legal/social services

for IPV survivors,

Present the following article for students to read:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/1534510-girls-deaths-in-b.c.-prompt-debate-about-judges-

and-domestic-violence

Ask the following questions to discuss collectively as a group:

o How do you find the article presents information in relation to the varying roles and

perspectives? Is one perspective in the debate presented more strongly than the other,

and if so, how?

o What indicators of abuse were mentioned in the article?

o What systemic barriers and consequent needs are discussed in the article?

o Given the information provided in the article, as well as the information we have

reviewed on IPV in society, what factors do you think influenced the judge’s decision-

making process?

o Given our review of supports and limitations regarding IPV, what impact do you think

this article has on societal perceptions of IPV?

19

CRITICAL THINKING

o Given the information we have about the impact of IPV on survivors, what impact do

you think this article would have on the perspective of those currently living in an

abusive situation on the process of leaving?

o Of the solutions proposed in the article, which do you think are the most feasible? Most

necessary?

Coffee Break: 15 minutes

The Roles of Professionals Approaches with Survivors (30 minutes)

Objective: Building from the previous exercise:

to facilitate an examination of the roles and influences of professionals interacting with IPV

survivors as well as the significance of access to resources in a survivor's journey

To facilitate a greater recognition and understanding of the varying perspectives within a

situation

To engage participants in an interactive exercise that permits them to evaluate a situation and

propose solutions in light of the criteria presented as well as to experience the situation from

the perspective of the survivor and professional

Materials: Power Point slides displayed on the smart board, or laptop/ projector, laminated case

scenarios to distribute, whiteboard or flipchart/markers to record collective responses

Activity:

Review the slides on the power point that describe the experience and impact of abuse on

survivors, the resources available to survivors and how to approach a survivor

Divide participants up into groups of two and explain the activity

Distribute scenarios to each group (Depending on the class size and any time constraints, not all

scenarios may be used and it is possible to give every two groups copies of the same scenario)

Have participants read the scenario and role-play the interaction/jot down conclusions drawn

from the interaction in response to the questions provided for each scenario.

Have each group take turns presenting the conclusions drawn to the class. The facilitator can

write responses on the board (drawing together any responses from different groups on the

same scenario) and the class is invited to offer positive feedback and additional suggestions to

their peers.

Case Scenario One

Sally is a 25 year-old cis-gendered woman from Pakistan who was sponsored by her husband and

has been living in Montreal for three months. She is consulting a physician at a local clinic to

disclose that her husband has been physically abusing her and she just learned that she is pregnant.

She is petrified of the police, has no money and speaks limited English and no French. She does not

know that her husband cannot revoke her immigration status, and he has been threatening to

deport her if she asks for help. She has no family or social ties here as he has prohibited her from

accessing a phone. He only permitted her to consult the clinic because of the pregnancy but will be

picking her up shortly.

20

CRITICAL THINKING

-Considering the information Sally disclosed, what are her most immediate needs?

-Considering the review on resources available in this city, what options or reassurance can the

Doctor offer her?

-Role-play the conversation based on your responses to the questions above. As your role play

consider Sally’s fears and context, both in how the Doctor can approach her and how she can

respond

Case Scenario Two

A woman presents at a police station with two children, stating that her boyfriend threatened to

hurt her and her children last night and she wants to leave him and press charges. The woman is

insisting she believes her and her children are in danger, and that she is afraid of how her boyfriend

will react when he gets home to see she has left with their things. She explains that her children are

not his and she has full custody of them.

Although death threats fall under the criminal code, they can be hard to prove and reports filed by

police officers for such complaints are often rejected by the crown prosecutor's office (meaning

charges are not laid). The police officer's role, however, is primarily to ensure the safety of the

public. There is also a protocol in place stating police officers need to notify youth protection of any

situations of domestic abuse involving children.

-Considering the information provided regarding protocols and procedures, and the resources

available that we reviewed in the power point slide, what is the best decision the officer can make

to help the woman and her children?

-Once you have established this, role play the officer’s response to the woman and her reaction in

consideration of content reviewed about how to talk to survivors of abuse.

Case Scenario Three

A trans-identified woman calls the SOS crisis line seeking shelter. The intake worker at the shelter

she is referred to has one bedroom available that is reserved for women with children. The woman

explains that she has been refused from multiple shelters in the city because she is transgendered.

At this shelter, there is no official trans-inclusive policy, however workers are able to assess on a

case-by-case basis. The shelter workers intake process raises no other issues than the fact that the

woman is single, and the risk of shelter staff fumbling in their attempts to support a transgendered

woman with varying approaches and no consistent policy. At the same time, the risk assessment of

the woman's circumstances clearly indicates an urgent need to be sheltered.

-Considering the information provided and our review of services and systemic barriers for survivors,

what is the best possible choice the worker can make regarding whether to accept the woman

seeking shelter?

-Based on this decision, role-play the conversation between the worker and the survivor

Case Scenario Four

An English teacher is meeting the parents of her eight-year-old student following concerning

21

CRITICAL THINKING

behaviors displayed by the student, who has recently been withdrawing from activities, falling

asleep in class, and being reprimanded for rude or aggressive remarks to other students and staff.

The teacher notices the students’ mother has a bruise on her face, is looking down throughout the

discussion, while her husband is being both charismatic and persistent in explaining their child's

behaviors, while also seeming to dictate whether and how the woman can talk. The couple leaves,

and the woman returns to the meeting room to pick up her purse, stating her husband is waiting in

the car for her. The woman admits that their “fighting” could be causing strain on their child, but

explains that she does not have immigration status, and she is afraid if she tries to leave or their

situation is signaled to youth protection she will be deported and he (who is a citizen) will be able

to stay with their child. She begs the teacher not to say anything to anyone. The teacher has a legal

obligation to signal to youth protection if the child remains in the home where abuse is taking

place, but also knows it is likely that doing so could lead to the woman’s arrest. She knows that

shelter services could accept her and her child but feels conflicted about pressuring her to leave.

-Given our review of support services for survivors, and the factors mentioned above, what is the

best possible decision the teacher can make?

-Based on this decision, role-play the conversation between the teacher and the mother regarding

the teacher’s proposal or next steps

Case Scenario Five

A shelter worker is following a case involving a woman with a twelve-year-old child who is

experiencing a mental health crisis. The case worker accompanied the client to be evaluated at a

hospital, as well as supported the client in calling a crisis line, however both resources determined

that she poses no risk to herself or others and they therefore cannot offer or impose services. Youth

Protection Services were consulted and assessed there was no need to become implicated in the

family. The client’s case worker has consulted long-term supervised housing resources and the

client is on the waiting list but it is uncertain when she will obtain housing. The client is also on a

waiting list to receive free services from a psychologist. The client is having trouble functioning in

the shelter setting, is not following through on her steps to move forward, and has been instigating

conflicts with other residents as well as demanding a great deal of time from the staff. There are

conflicting viewpoints on the team as to whether the client should remain at their shelter, and the

team has asked the shelters Executive Director to make a decision as to whether or not to continue

sheltering the client. The Director and case worker are meeting to discuss the case and establish an

action plan.

-Role-play the conversation between the Director and the case worker regarding their process to

reach the best possible decision they can make.

Creating an Awareness Artifact (30 minutes)

22

CRITICAL THINKING

Objective: To conclude workshop by applying students understanding of IPV and supports/challenges

for survivors towards creating an awareness-raising artifact relevant to the classroom or professional

context

Materials: Banner, markers, construction paper, glue, scissors, magazine cutouts, other craft materials

Activity:

Divide students up into four groups and ask them to each come up with a slogan intended to

raise awareness regarding IPV based on what they think to be the most important aspect to

consider.

Each group creates a small banner to display in the classroom, around the school, or the

professional setting

Each group is invited to provide encouraging feedback to each other

Conclusion and Evaluation (15 minutes)

Objective: To provide participants with the opportunity to reflect and give feedback regarding their

experience in the workshop, and to support the facilitators assessment of whether the learning

objectives were met with participants

Materials: Evaluation Forms and Participation Certificates

Activity:

Facilitate a closing discussion on any final thoughts or reflections

Ask participants to complete the evaluation form if they have not already done so, and to return

it so as to receive their certificate.

Provide participants with contact information should they like individual support and feedback

in enhancing their understanding or applying the material to their context

23

CRITICAL THINKING

Evaluation Form

Thank you for your active participation today! Please complete the following form by the end of the

workshop to support our ability to improve this workshop.

Question Strongly

Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree

The content

provided before

the workshop

prepared me for

the workshop

activities

The facilitator’s

approach was

engaging

The activities

were

appropriate and

motivating

I felt secure in

contributing to

class discussions

The classroom

climate was

collaborative

and supportive

The content and

corresponding

activities

enhanced my

understanding

of the context of

IPV

The content and

corresponding

activities

enhanced my

understanding

of the

experiences of

24

CRITICAL THINKING

survivors

The content and

corresponding

activities

enhanced my

ability to

evaluate societal

attitudes on IPV

The content and

corresponding

activities

allowed me to

explore the

context of

varying

perspectives and

roles in relation

to IPV

My learning’s

from this

workshop are

relevant to my

studies or

professional

context

Given what I have learned through the material covered, my peers, and the course activities:

If I were to learn that a loved one was experiencing intimate partner violence, I would take the

following approach with them:

25

CRITICAL THINKING

I believe that the most pertinent resources that can influence a survivor’s ability to leave are

(indicate the reasons why):

I believe that the greatest systemic barriers that should be addressed are (indicate the reasons

why):

My most salient learning from this workshop is:

What I liked most about this workshop was:

26

CRITICAL THINKING

I would recommend the following changes or add-ons to strengthen the workshop:

Additional Comments or suggestions: