2010-2011 Results SW

The data collection for the 2010-2011 academic years was completed in July 2011. The Assessment Coordinator has prepared the data from all assessment instruments. The following summary highlights the raw findings from data analysis.

The data were collected from the following sources:

  • the Area of Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) completed by students;
  • the Internship Learning Agreement Evaluation (ILAE) completed by the Internship Site Supervisors; and
  • the Practice Behavior Competency Evaluation Instrument completed by instructors.

Area of Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT)

As ACAT is currently not aligned with CSWE core competencies and practice behaviors, the results of this assessment will not be reported here.

Practice Behavior Competency Evaluation Instrument and Internship Learning Agreement Evaluation (ILAE)

The following table provides summary data for SKC BSW student attainment of each core competency in 2010-2011. The level of competency was rated on a 10-point scale. The benchmark for success set by the SKC BSW is a minimum of 75% of students attaining an average score of 7 (70%) or higher in all practice behaviors and core competencies.h

Summary data for 2010-2011 academic year.

Core Competencies

Group Average Score

% of Students Achieving > 70%

Benchmark Met

2.1.1 Identify as a professional social worker and conduct oneself accordingly. 8.0 81% X
2.1.2 Apply social work ethical principles to guide professional practice.  7.76  78% X
2.1.3 Apply critical thinking to inform and communicate professional judgments. 7.44 74%
2.1.4 Engage diversity and difference in practice. 8.07 86% X
2.1.5 Advance human rights and social and economic justice. 7.71 82% X
2.1.6 Engage in research-informed practice and practice-informed research. 7.63 78% X
2.1.7 Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment. 8.34 86% X
2.1.8 Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work services. 9.02 87% X
2.1.9 Respond to contexts that shape practice. 7.81 61%
2.1.10 Engage, assess, intervene, and evaluate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities 7.86 81% X

 

Based on the data analysis, the BSW students achieved the benchmark in nine out of ten (90%) core competencies and 29 out of 41 (71%) practice behaviors. The lowest scores were found in core competency 2.1.9 (Respond to contexts that shape practice) and both of the practice behaviors in that category. Although the group average score was 7.81, only 61% of the students achieved the 70% benchmark. Students seemed to struggle with achieving a high level of competency in practice behaviors associated with core competency 2.1.10.b, Assessment. The benchmark was met in one of the four associated practice behaviors.

Although the group average scores for all but one practice behavior (2.1.10.c(b) with a group average of 6.83) were above 7.0, the percent of students achieving an average score of 7.0 fell below the 75% benchmark in 12 practice behaviors. The table below summarizes those practice behaviors:

 

Practice Behavior

Group

Average Score

% of

Students Achieving > 70%

2.1.1.b Practice Personal reflection and self-correction to assure continual professional development 7.63 68%
2.1.2.c Tolerance ambiguity in resolving ethical conflicts 7.41 69%
2.1.3.a Distinguish, appraise, and integrate multiple sources of knowledge, including research-based knowledge, and practice wisdom 7.61 74%
2.1.3.b Analyze models of assessment, prevention, intervention, and evaluation 7.38 65%
2.1.5.b Advocate for human rights and social economic justice 7.30 74%
2.1.9.a Continuously discover, appraise, and attend to changing locales, populations, scientific and technological developments, and emerging societal trends to provide relevant services 7.34 57%
2.1.9.b Provide leadership in promoting sustainable changes in service delivery and practice to improve the quality of social services 8.28 64%
2.1.10.b(b) Assess client strengths and limitations 7.56 71%
2.1.10.b(c) Develop mutually agreed-on intervention goals and objectives 7.52 70%
2.1.10.b(d) Select appropriate intervention strategies 7.64 71%
2.1.10.c(b) Implement prevention interventions that enhance client capacities 6.83 63%
2.1.10.d Critically analyze, monitor, and evaluate interventions 7.02 74%

It must be noted again that the small sample size (N=3 to 6, depending on the assignment) means that the successful attainment of this benchmark can hinge on a single individual’s score. Therefore, definite conclusions about the performance of the BSW program or student body as a whole can not be discerned from the presented data. It also became evident during the data collection and analysis process that in 2010-2011 the data was not fully collected or reported in several keystone assignments, resulting in only one data point for three and two data points for 10 of the practice behaviors. Moreover, the refinement and alignment of keystone assignments and their accompanying rubrics with 2008 EPAS has been an ongoing process throughout the year. With this and the newly implemented Practice Behavior Competency Evaluation Instrument on SurveyMonkey in mind, it can be noted that the data entered may not yet fully and accurately reflect student performance in the assessed practice behaviors.

Next Steps

Based on the 2010-2011 data analysis and the Assessment Specialist’s recommendations for improvement, the faculty will collectively articulate strategies for strengthening the curriculum content in the areas where student performance fell below the benchmark in the fall of 2011. The faculty will also continue to improve the keystone assignments and their accompanying rubrics, as well as the Practice Behavior Competency Evaluation Instrument and the data collection procedures. Several additional data points have already been added to the Research, APA, and Practice course keystones. Necessary improvements will be implemented during the 2011-2012 academic year.