Upload
voliem
View
214
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Table 1: Assessment Matrix Foundation Benchmark is met if 3 of the 4
Course Assignment
80% earn a B or better on the assignment
Advanced Stand Course
80% earn a B or better on the assignment
Self-Assessment
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale (Mean and % at 3 or
above reported)
Field Evaluation
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale (Mean and % at 3 or
above reported)
Assessment Results
2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly
● Advocate for client access to the services of social work
Social Welfare Policy II
Advocacy paper
99%
Advanced Standing
Critical thinking paper
98%
M = 4.67
100%
3, 40
M = 3.71
94.7%
Benchmark met
● Practice personal reflection and self-correction to assure continual professional development
HBSE: Small Systems
Reading reflections
94%
Advanced Standing
Critical thinking paper
98%
M = 4.64
100%
61, 64, 70, 73, 77
M = 3.96
95.8 %
Benchmark met
● Attend to professional roles and boundaries
SW Practice with Small Systems
Ethics group project
99%
Advanced Standing Critical thinking
paper
98%
M = 4.77
100%
1, 62, 68, 69
M = 3.99
98.4%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
1
● Demonstrate professional demeanor in behavior, appearance, and communication
Social Welfare Policy II
Advocacy paper
99%
Advanced Standing
Critical thinking paper
98%
M = 4.83
100%
63, 65, 67
M = 3.92
97.9%
Benchmark met
● Engage in career-long learning
Fundamentals of Research I
Article review
97%
Advanced Standing
Critical thinking paper
98%
M = 4.70
100%
41, 59, 71, 72
M = 3.75
94.2%
Benchmark met
● Use supervision and consultation
SW Practice with Small Systems
Ethics group project
99%
Advanced Standing Critical thinking
paper
98%
M = 4.58
100%
2, 60, 66
M = 4.06
98.6%
Benchmark met
2.1.2 Ethical Principles
● Recognize and manage personal values in a way that allows professional values to guide practice
SW Practice with Small Systems
Ethics group project
99%
Advanced Standing
Final Proposal
94%
M = 4.74
100%
74
M = 3.96
99.2%
Benchmark met
● Make ethical decisions by applying standards of the National Association of Social
SW Practice with Small Systems
Advanced Standing Final Proposal
M = 4.74
100%
75
M = 4.07
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
2
Workers Code of Ethics… Ethics group project
99%
94% 99.2%
● Tolerate ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts
SW Practice with Small Systems
Ethics group project
99%
Advanced Standing
Final Proposal
94%
M = 4.35
100%
76
M = 3.76
97.7%
Benchmark met
● Apply strategies of ethical reasoning to arrive at principled decisions
SW Practice with Small Systems
Advanced Standing
Final Proposal
94%
M = 4.56
100%
4
M = 3.92
98.4%
Benchmark met
2.1.3 Critical Thinking
● Distinguish, appraise,
and integrate multiple sources of knowledge, including research-based knowledge, and practice wisdom
Fundamentals of Research I
Literature review
97%
Advanced Standing
Article Critique
84%
M = 4.45
100%
78, 82
M = 3.59
92.7%
Benchmark met
• Analyze models of assessment, prevention, intervention, and evaluation
Fundamentals of Research II
Empirical article critique
100%
Advanced Standing
Article Critique
84%
M = 4.38
100%
79, 81
M = 3.95
98.4%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
3
● Demonstrate effective oral and written communication in working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, communities, and colleagues
SW Practice with Large System
Grant application
100%
Advanced Standing
Article Critique
84%
M = 4.58
100%
5, 6, 80
M = 3.77
96.2%
Benchmark met
2.1.4 Engage Diversity
and Difference
● Recognize the extent
to which a culture’s structures and values may oppress, marginalize, alienate, or create, or enhance privilege and power
HBSE: Small Systems
Presentations on chapters
94%
Advanced Standing
Final Proposal
94%
M = 4.58
100%
8
M = 3.37
87.3%
Benchmark met
● Gain sufficient self
awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in working with diverse groups
SW Practice with Small Systems
Ethics group project
99%
Advance Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.58
100%
84
M = 3.76
98.4%
Benchmark met
● Recognize and
communicate
their understanding of the
HBSE: Small Systems
Presentation on chapters
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
M = 4.70
100%
7, 83, 86
M = 3.92
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
4
importance of difference in shaping life experiences
94% 94% 98.1%
● View themselves as learners and engage those with whom they work as informant
Social Welfare Policy II
Policy analysis paper
97%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.64
100%
85
M = 3.61
94.4%
Benchmark met
2.1.5 Advance Human
Rights & Social and
Economic Justice
● Understand the
forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination
HBSE Large Systems
Integrative paper 1
97%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.43
100%
42
M = 2.72
70.6%
Benchmark Met
● Advocate for human rights and social and economic justice
Social Welfare Policy II
Advocacy paper
97%
Advanced Standing
Final Proposal
94%
M = 4.38
100%
9
M = 3.16
81.2%
Benchmark met
● Engage in practices that advance social and economic justice
Social Welfare Policy I
Group project
99%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.32
100%
10
M = 3.58
91.8%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
5
2.1.6 Research
Informed Practice/
Practice Informed
Research
● Use practice experience to inform scientific inquiry
Fundamentals of Research I
Literature review
97%
Advanced Standing
Logic model
100%
M = 4.29
100%
11, 43
M = 3.50
92.1%
Benchmark met
● Research evidence to inform practice
Fundamentals of Research II
Empirical article critique
97%
Advanced Standing
Logic model
100%
M = 4.29
100%
12
M = 3.42
93.3%
Benchmark met
2.1.7 Knowledge of Human Behavior and Social Environment
Benchmark met
● Utilize conceptual frameworks to guide the processes of assessment, intervention, and evaluation
HBSE Large Systems
Integrative paper II
97%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.4
100%
14, 44, 87
M = 3.64
91.8%
Benchmark met
● Critique and apply knowledge to understand person and environment
HBSE: Small Systems
“Think piece”
94%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.58
100%
13, 45, 88
M = 3.44
88.3%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
6
2.1.8 Policy Practice – Advance Social/Economic
● Analyze, formulate, and advocate for policies that advance social well-being
Social Welfare Policy II
Policy analysis paper
97%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.25
100%
16, 46, 47
M = 3.45
91.5%
Benchmark met
● Collaborate with colleagues And clients for effective policy Action
Social Welfare Policy II
Policy analysis paper
97%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.38
100%
15, 48, 49, 89
M = 3.33
84.3%
Benchmark met
2.1.9 Contexts that Shape Practice
● Continuously discover, appraise, and attend to changing locales, populations, scientific and technological developments, and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services
Social Welfare Policy I
Descriptive analysis of legislation
99%
Advanced Standing
Paper on learning group
100%
M = 4.35
100%
17, 50, 51, 90
M = 3.45
90.9%
Benchmark met
● Provide leadership in promoting sustainable changes in service delivery
SW Practice with Large Systems
Advanced Standing
Paper on learning
M = 4.35 18, 52
M = 3.49
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
7
And practice to improve the quality of social services
Agency/organization profile
100%
group
100%
100% 92.7%
2.1.10 Engage, Assess, Intervene & Evaluate
2.1.10(a) Engagement
● Substantively And effectively prepare for Action with individuals, families, groups, organizations, And communities
SW Practice with Large Systems
Agency/organizational profile
100%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.54
100%
19, 20, 22
M = 3.88
98.1%
Benchmark met
● Use empathy And other interpersonal skills
SW Practice with Small Systems
Therapeutic intervention plan
99%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.9
100%
21
M = 4.21
100%
Benchmark met
● Develop a mutually Agreed-on focus of work And desired outcomes
SW Practice with Large System
Grant writing
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.74
100%
23, 24
M = 3.72
93.6%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
8
100%s
2.1.10(b) Assessment
● Collect, organize, And interpret client data
SW Practice with Small Systems
Therapeutic intervention plan
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.54
100%
25
M = 3.53
92.2%
Benchmark met
● Assess client strengths and limitations
SW Practice with Large Systems
Community profile
100%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.77
100%
26
M = 3.63
93.2%
Benchmark met
● Develop mutually agreed-on intervention goals And objectives
SW Practice with Small Systems
Therapeutic intervention plan
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.64
100%
27
M = 3.58
91.6%
Benchmark met
● Select appropriate intervention strategies
SW Practice with Large Systems
Grant application
100%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.54
100%
28
M = 3.49
92.4%
Benchmark met
2.1.10(c) Intervention
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
9
● Initiate actions to achieve organizational goals
SW Practice with Large Systems
Agency/organization profile
100%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.46
100%
30, 33
M = 3.45
88.8%
Benchmark met
● Implement prevention interventions that enhance clients capacities
SW Practice with Small Systems
Methods paper
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.48
96.8%
29, 91
M = 3.68
93.4%
Benchmark met
● Help clients resolve problems
SW Practice with Small Systems
Methods paper
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.58
100%
35
M = 3.5
90.9%
Benchmark met
● Negotiate, meditate,
and advocate for clients
Social Welfare Policy I
Legislative action assignment
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.61
100%
31, 34, 56
M = 3.45
88.6%
Benchmark met
● Facilitate transitions
and endings
SW Practice with Small Systems
Methods paper
99%
Advanced Standing
Psychopathology overview
89%
M = 4.5
100%
32
M = 3.85
96.1%
Benchmark met
2.1.10(d) Evaluation
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
10
● Social workers critically analyze, monitor, and evaluate interventions
Fundamentals of Research II
Empirical article critique
100%
Advanced Standing
Final proposal
94%
M = 4.54
100%
36, 37, 38, 39, 57, 58, 92
M = 3.11
79.1%
Benchmark met
Table 2: Competencies and Practice Behaviors Distributed in the Social Work Full-Time MSW Micro Concentration Curriculum
Course Assignment
Course Assignment
80% earn a B or better on the assignment
Alumni Survey 80% at 3 or above on a 5-point scale
(Mean at 3 or above and %
Supervisor
Survey
80% at 3 or above on a 5-point scale
(Mean at 3 or
Field Evaluation
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale (Mean at 3
or above and % reported)
Assessment Results
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
11
reported) above and % reported)
2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly
● Demonstrate the professional use of self and critical consciousness in multiple micro practice context
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.52
100%
M = 4.6
100%
1, 32
M = 4.7
98.8%
Benchmark met
● Seek supervision and consultation appropriately and stay abreast of changes in social work practice through life-long learning
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
99%
M = 4.5
100%
M = 4.6
100%
3, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39
M = 4.24
97.8%
Benchmark met
● Communicate the purpose of social work practice with other professionals, clients and the community.
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
99%
M = 4.52
100%
M = 4.4
100%
2, 34
M = 4.11
98.8%
Benchmark met
2.1.2 Apply Social Work Ethical Principles to guide professional practice
● Apply the NASW Code of Ethics when making
Psychopathology M = 4.58 M = 4.8 40 Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
12
ethical decisions and resolving ethical dilemmas
Final paper
74%
100% 100% M = 4.17
97.1%
● Demonstrate and apply a professional understanding of personal and societal values in ethical decision-making with individuals, families and groups.
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
Cultural awareness
95%
M = 4.67
100%
M = 4.6
100%
4, 41
M = 4.09
97%
Benchmark met
● 2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform communicate professional judgements
● Demonstrate an understanding of and an ability to critically analyze a variety of theories and practice approaches in bringing about therapeutic change in individuals, families and small groups
Psychopathology
Final paper
74%
M = 4.29
97.1%
M = 4.2
100%
5, 42, 45
M = 4.01
97.1%
Benchmark met
● Communicate orally and in writing when working with client systems and complete documentation effectively;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
M = 4.58
100%
M = 4.4
100%
7, 43
M = 4.16
96%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
13
95%
● Draw upon a variety of sources to obtain knowledge and skills based upon scientific inquiry.
Program Evaluation
Literature review
95%
M = 4.47
100%
M = 4.4
100%
6, 44, 46
M = 4.24
97.7%
Benchmark met
2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice
Utilize knowledge and skills to address social structure and cultural values that may oppress, marginalize, and alienate some, while creating privilege and power for others;
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
Cultural awareness paper
95%
M = 4.38
100%
M = 4.4
100%
9
M = 4.17
92.6%
Benchmark met
● Demonstrate an understanding and valuing of one’s own culture that influences personal biases and values that may create prejudices in working with diverse groups;
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
Cultural awareness paper
95%
M = 4.61
100%
M = 4.2
80%
39
M = 4.04
97%
Benchmark met
•Integrate effectively into practice knowledge and skills of differences and similarities, as well as dimensions of diversity.
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
Final paper
95%
M = 4.55
100%
M = 4.2
80%
8
M = 4.21
100%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
14
2.1.5 Advance human rights and social economic justice
● Demonstrate abilities to promote strengths and competence in individuals, families and small groups;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
95%
M = 4.64
100%
M = 4.8
100%
23
M = 4.26
100%
Benchmark met
•Empower clients to overcome oppression and appreciate social and economic justice by developing client awareness of theories of justice and strategies to promote human and civil rights;
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
Final paper
95%
M = 4.5
100%
M = 4.4
100%
11
M = 3.66
91.2%
Benchmark met
● Advocate for social and economic justice on behalf of clients and to create social change.
Program Evaluation
Final paper
95%
M = 4.32
100%
M = 4.0
100%
10
M = 3.57
91.4%
Benchmark met
2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research
● Review practice research and select models appropriate to various client populations;
Program Evaluation
Literature review
M = 4.26
97.1%
M = 3.8
100%
29
M = 4.16
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
15
95% 98.5%
● Apply research methods and skills in the critical examination and evaluation of their own practice;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Family therapy paper
99%
M = 4.02
97%
M = 3.4
80%
12
M = 3.77
97.3%
Benchmark met
● Document practice experiences to provide data that reflects and builds upon evidence-based intervention.
Psychopathology
Weekly practice applications
85%
M = 4.24
96.9%
M = 4.0
100%
13
M = 3.31
84.9%
Benchmark met
2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment
•Apply a biopsychosocial conceptual framework, to understand human conditions that affect client behavior;
Psychopathology
Weekly practice applications
85%
M = 4.57
100%
M = 4.6
100%
47
M = 4.08
96.7%
Benchmark met
● Review, select and apply developmentally and culturally competent assessment, intervention and evaluation models;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention
M = 4.39
96.9%
M = 4.4
100%
15, 48
M = 3.88
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
16
project
95%
94.4%
● Integrate knowledge of individual and family life span development in the context of the environment to understand the client’s human condition.
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Family therapy paper
95%
M = 4.45
96.9%
M = 4.6
100%
14, 49
M = 4.04
96.7%
Benchmark met
2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work services
● Stay current with political, economic, social, and environmental trends that create policies that may have a negative impact on client systems;
Program Evaluation
Final Paper – political and ethics
95%
M = 4.33
100%
M = 3.8
80%
50
M = 3.93
96.6%
Benchmark met
● Collaborate with stakeholders who engage in policy making that affect program designs, program funding and service delivery;
Program Evaluation
Final paper – implications
95%
M = 4.06
97%
M = 3.8
80%
16, 51
M = 3.08
74.2%
Benchmark met
● Choose appropriate methods for advocating on
Dynamics of Race and Discrimination
M = 4.51 M = 4.8 52 Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
17
behalf of individuals, families and small groups.
Final paper
95%
100% 100% M = 3.84
93.3%
2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape Practice
● Respond effectively to the existing context that impact the nature of services with a continuum of care model that under gird relevant services;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.45
97%
M = 4.4
100%
17, 53
M = 3.83
94.5%
Benchmark met
● Act as change agents to provide leadership and promote stability in quality service delivery that address existing human needs;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
95%
M = 4.42
100%
M = 4.6
100%
53
M = 3.92
95.7%
Benchmark met
● Advocate for health and mental health, and promote resiliency factors that may contribute to the reduction of risk and vulnerability.
Psychopathology
Mental health in the news
95%
M = 4.48
100%
M = 4.8
100%
18, 55
M = 3.97
93.8%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
18
2.1.10 (a) Engagement
● Prepare for initial client contact by integrating their knowledge, skills and values with their preliminary understanding of the client’s human conditions;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Professional literature critique
95%
M = 4.60
100%
M = 4.4
100%
19
M = 4.53
100%
Benchmark met
● Develop an awareness of ethical dilemmas that may exist in preparation for client interaction;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
99%
M = 4.57
100%
M = 4.6
100%
20
M = 4.38
100%
Benchmark met
● Identify with the client’s anxiety inherent in initial interaction and purposefully use the professional self to demonstrate empathy, respect for worth and dignity of the client to facilitate the client’s sharing his/her human condition.
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.57
100%
M = 4.8
100%
21
M = 4.15
98.5%
Benchmark met
2.1.10(b) Assessment
● Communicate effectively with all client systems to obtain and analyze in-depth data to provide
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
M = 4.42
100%
M = 4.8
100%
22
M = 4.14
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
19
answers to issues, problems, needs, resources, client strengths and assets and collaboratively involve the client system in determining intervention strategies and goals;
99% 100%
● Conduct a developmental interview that enables the client to share his/her human condition and participate in determining the effectiveness of their support network that can be utilized to implement the planned change process;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.42
97%
M = 4.4
100%
23
M = 4.26
100%
Benchmark met
● Determine collaboratively a course of action which identifies those achievements and/or barriers to successful outcomes.
Psychopathology
Weekly practice application
85%
M = 4.48
97%
M = 4.8
100%
24
M = 4.09
99%
Benchmark met
2.1.10 (c) Intervention
● Enlist the client in the development of appropriate and mutually agreed-on intervention plan;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.51
97%
M = 4.8
100%
25, 56
M = 4.08
98.8%
Benchmark met
● Implement collaborative intervention
Psychopathology M = 4.48 M = 4.6 26, 57 Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
20
strategies that enhance client social functioning utilizing referral sources when indicated;
Final paper
74%
97% 100% M = 4.24
96.5%
● Utilize the client’s human condition to facilitate change through negotiation, mediation and advocacy;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.57
100%
M = 4.2
100%
27, 58
M = 4.21
96.5%
Benchmark met
● Seek supervision, consultation and literature review to enhance the client’s goal achievement;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Literature review
95%
M = 4.54
100%
M = 4.4
100%
59
M = 4.21
97.6%
Benchmark met
● Facilitate the client in developing and maintaining adaptive behaviors that provide stability within their environment.
Advanced Practice with Small Systems I
Therapeutic intervention project
95%
M = 4.45
97%
M = 4.4
100%
60
M = 4.00
96.7%
Benchmark met
2.1.10(d) Evaluation
● Monitor and evaluate interventions in collaboration with client systems
Program Evaluation
Final project
95%
M = 4.33
97.1%
M = 4.4
100%
28, 61
M = 3.91
96.2%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
21
● Utilize research skills to ensure best practices of evidence-based intervention;
Program Evaluation
Final project
95%
M = 4.21
97%
M = 4.0
100%
29, 62
M = 3.91
94.3%
Benchmark met
● Facilitate termination and separation of the client-worker relationship by assessing the goal attainment results, and the client’s readiness;
Advanced Practice with Small Systems II
Micro group simulation
95%
M = 4.33
97%
M = 4.4
100%
30, 63
M = 3.67
89.3%
Benchmark met
● Develop strategies for feedback on client’s maintaining adaptive functioning;
Psychopathology
Weekly practice applications
85%
M = 4.48
97%
M = 4.4
100%
31, 64
M = 3.76
93.2%
● Work collaboratively with evaluators/researchers to assess intervention efficacy and effectiveness.
Program Evaluation
Final project
95%
M = 4.18
93.9%
M = 4.0
100%
65
M = 3.62
86.9%
Benchmark met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
22
Table 3: Competencies and Practice Behaviors Distributed in the Social Work Full-Time MSW Macro Concentration Curriculum
Course Assignment 80% earn a B or better on the assignment
Alumni Survey
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale
(Mean and % at 3 or above reported)
Supervisor
Survey
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale (Mean and
% at 3 or above reported)
Field Evaluation
80% at 3 or above on 5-point scale (Mean and % at 3 or above
reported)
Assessment Results
2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly
● Facilitate access to services for client systems with human service organizations and communities
Strategies of Community Organization
Target plan for services
100%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 5.0
100%
2, 24
M = 4.23
98.7%
Benchmark Met
● Engage staff in career learning through staff training and orientation
SW Administration
Final paper and pres.
100%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 4.0
100%
26, 27, 28, 29
M = 4.32
100%
Benchmark Met
● Use staff supervision and consultation
SW Administration Final paper and
M = 3.5 M = 5.0 3, 23, 25 Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
23
in staff development pres.
100%
75% 100% M = 4.42
100%
● Demonstrate self-awareness in analyzing the effectiveness of service delivery systems when working with diverse populations in the student’s field placement and professional practice
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination
Cultural awareness
95%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 5.0
100%
1, 22
M = 4.35
100%
Benchmark Met
2.1.2 Apply social work codes of ethics to social planning, administration, and supervision with client involvement and staff participation in decision-making
● Distinguish how decisions are made with considerations of the political and organizational constraints and professional ethics and standards in HSOs
SW Administration
Final paper and pres.
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 5.0
100%
4, 30
M = 4.28
98.7%
Benchmark Met
● Recognize and manage personal and professional values in working with clients in community planning and administrative practice
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination
Cultural awareness
95%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 5.0
100%
31
M = 4.29
100%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
24
2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgements
● Demonstrate effective oral and written communication in working with groups, organizations, and communities and examining the ways colleagues and clients are involved in making decisions in organizations
Community Organization &
Planning
Leadership team development
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 5.0
100%
7, 33
M = 4.38
100%
Benchmark Met
● Apply community organization and social planning theories in working with individuals, families, groups, organizations, communities, and other professionals
Strategies of Community Organization
Power analysis of communities
100%
M = 3.0
75%
M = 5.0
100%
5, 6, 32
M = 4.46
97.3%
Benchmark Met
2.1.4 Engage diversity and differences in administrative practice and community organization
● Demonstrate an understanding of the importance of gender in leadership roles and styles in organization
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination
Weekly Quizzes
100%
M = 3.75
75%
M = missing data
%
37
M = 4.07
97.4%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
25
● Apply the value of diversity in society and promote competence in understanding the uniqueness of individuals within the environment
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination
Final Paper
95%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 5.0
100%
8
M = 4.3
97.5%
Benchmark Met
● Promote the dignity and self-worth of staff, clients, and consumers in administrative practices, staff supervision, and community planning
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination
Final Paper
95%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 5.0
100%
38
M = 4.89
94.5%
Benchmark Met
2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice through client empowerment and staff participation in design of service delivery systems
● Utilize the power and politics as they relate to strategic planning
Community Organization &
Planning
Defining Community
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 4.0
100%
40
M = 4.02
94.5%
Benchmark Met
● Assess strengths and weaknesses of the service delivery systems for clients/
Strategies of Community Organization
Community
M = 3.5
75%
M = 5.0
100%
10
M = 4.10
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
26
selection
100%
100%
● Advocate for staff participation and client inclusion in designing programs in HSOs
SW Administration Final paper and
pres.
100%
M = 3.0
75%
M = 4.0
100%
42
M =
%
Benchmark Met
● Engage clients/consumers in community planning practices that advance social and economic justice in grassroots level innovative programs
Strategies of Community Organization
Community selection
100%
M = 2.75
75%
M = 4.0
100%
9
M = 4.11
100%
Benchmark Met
2.1.6 Apply studies in organization and leadership to administration and staff supervision
● Engage in analyzing intervention effectiveness of the organization in which students are placed and recommend changes based on management theories
SW Administration Final paper and
pres.
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
34
M = 5.00
100%
Benchmark Met
● Engage in analyzing organizational effectiveness with an emphasis on organizational theory
SW Administration Final paper and
pres.
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
11
M = 4.10
100%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
27
● Provide a sound knowledge base of social planning, especially the assessment of community needs, rational decision-making, identification of alternatives, practical considerations and evaluation
Strategies of Community Organization
Strategies Logic model
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 4.0
100%
39
M = 4.27
100%
Benchmark Met
2.1.7 Recognize how the human service organizations are being influenced by the political and economic environments
● Apply organizational theory in understanding the ways in which services are coordinated and staff is supervised
SW Administration Final paper and
pres.
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
36
M = 4.00
100%
Benchmark Met
● Critique and apply policy changes in the environment as related to the adaptation of the organization in providing services to vulnerable populations
Community, Economic System and Policy Change
Final paper
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
12
M = 4.05
100%
Benchmark Met
● Utilize theories in power and politics in analyzing inter-organizational linkages
Community, Economic System and Policy Change
M = 3.5
75%
M = 3.0
100%
17
M = 4.05
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
28
Final paper
100%
97.2%
2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work services
● Advocate for services to advance the economic and social well-being of clients based on analyses of the service delivery systems
Strategies of Community Organization
Strategies logic model
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 5.0
100%
13
M = 4.14
97%
Benchmark Met
● Design an efficient service delivery system in order to better serve and to better reach out to the potential clients/consumers
Community, Economic System and Policy Change
Final paper
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 4.0
100%
41
M = 4.12
96.9%
Benchmark Met
● Engage in the examination of clients’/consumers’ difficulties in obtaining the needed services from HSOs
Community, Economic System and Policy Change
Final paper
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 3.0
100%
14
M = 4.12
96.9%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
29
2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice
● Continually discover, appraise, and attend to changing needs of clients and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services through community organizing and social planning
Community, Economic System and Policy Change
Final paper
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 5.0
100%
15, 43, 54
M = 3.93
96.9%
Benchmark Met
● Provide leadership in promoting organizational adaptation to improve the quality of social services
Dynamics of Racism and
Discrimination Final Paper
95%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 5.0
100%
45, 50
M = 4.06
98.4%
Benchmark Met
2.1.10 Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families,
groups, organizations, and communities
2.1.10(a) Engage with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
30
● Engage in interventions for change in organizations and communities
Strategies of Community Organization
Power analysis of communities
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
18
M = 4.08
97.2%
Benchmark Met
● Facilitate organizational and community change
Strategies of Community Organization
Final presentation
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 4.0
100%
48
M = 4.13
97.2%
Benchmark Met
● Establish a relationship with organizations and communities
Community Organization &
Planning
Development of leadership team
100%
M = 3.75
75%
M = 5.0
100%
19
M = 3.97
94.4%
Benchmark Met
● Negotiate mutually agreed-on strategies and desired outcomes
Strategies of Community Organization
Final presentation
100%
M = 3.25
75%
M = 5.0
100%
47
M = 4.26
100%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
31
2.1.10(b) Assess with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities
● Conduct needs assessment of organizations and communities including client/consumer strengths and weaknesses
Program Evaluation
Final paper
95%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
49
M = 4.31
100%
Benchmark Met
● Develop mutually agreed upon strategies to achieve goals and objectives for organization and community change
Program Evaluation
Final paper
95%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 4.0
100%
46
M = 3.96
97%
Benchmark Met
2.1.10(c) Intervene with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities
● Apply advanced knowledge and skills to achieve organizational and community goals
Strategies of Community Organization
Final presentation
100%
M = 3.5
75%
M = 3.0
100%
18, 52
M = 4.15
98.6%
Benchmark Met
● Utilize advocacy and change strategies that empower organizations and
Community Organization &
Planning
M = 3.25 M = 4.0 21, 53
M = 3.72
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
32
communities Development of leadership team
100%
75% 100% 91.4%
● Engage organizations and communities in integration of new innovations
Strategies of Community Organization
Final presentation
100%
M = 3.0
75%
M = 3.0
100%
20, 51
M = 4.03
98.7%
Benchmark Met
2.1.10(d) Evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities
● Empower organizations and communities in the evaluation of interventions
Program Evaluation
Final paper
95%
M = 3.0
75%
M = 3.0
100%
55
M = 3.90
93.5%
Benchmark Met
● 2015 CSWE MSW Overall Assessment
33