Spring 2006 Semester Assessment Report Form

Directions: Please complete a form for each of the programs within your department. This form was designed to provide a format for assessment reporting and should not be used to limit the amount of information provided. Each box that is attached to each of the sections is designed to adjust to varying lengths. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Bea Babbitt at x51506 or via email at: .

1. Program Information:

Program / BSW Program
Department / School of Social Work
College / Urban Affairs
Program Assessment Coordinator / An-Pyng Sun
Semester Data Collected / Spring 2006
Note: Some of the data were overlapped with data reported in the previous report. New data in the present report include the sections:
·  Results, conclusions, and discoveries_BSW Employer Survey Spring 2006;
·  Results, conclusions, and discoveries_BSW Field Practicum Evaluation Spring 2006;
·  Use of Results_2fg and 3fg; and
·  Dissemination of results, conclusions, and discoveries.
Report Submitted by / An-Pyng Sun
Phone/email / (702) 895-4349/
Date Submitted

2. According to the Assessment Plan for this program, what were the planned assessments to be conducted during the 2005-2006 Academic Year? You may want to copy and paste from this program’s assessment plan.

Which outcomes for this program were measured? / How did you measure the outcomes? / What results did you expect? If the students performed well what would their performance look like, i.e. percentages, means, or comparisons to a national standard?
____outcomes out of a total of ____ outcomes evaluated this semester.
BSW Program goals and objectives / Human Diversity
Questionnaire
BSW Employer Survey
BSW Exit Survey
BSW Field Practicum Evaluation

3. Results, conclusions, and discoveries. What are the results of the planned assessments listed above? What conclusions or discoveries were made from these results? Describe below or attach to the form.

Results, conclusions, and discoveries
Human Diversity Questionnaire (Pretest [Conducted Fall 2005] and Posttest [conducted Fall 2005 and Spring 2006])
The pretest and posttest data of the Human Diversity Questionnaire (HDQ) were compared. Note: the pretest data were collected from SWK 101 classes (beginning social work introduction classes) and the posttest data were collected from SWK 481 classes (capstone classes). To make the total number of subjects more equivalent, posttest data collected during Fall 2005 (N=16) and Spring 2006 (N=26) were combined and compared with the pretest data collected during Fall 2005 (N=78). Although the pretest and posttest data are not necessarily collected from the same people, the results can still show if there is a difference between the beginning social work students/students who take SWK 101 and the graduating social work students.
The results showed a significantly higher posttest than pretest mean score in six key areas (race, gay/lesbian, social-economic background, mental disability, physical disability, and religion). There was no significant difference between the pre- and post-data regarding the area of gender. Specific results are as follows.
1.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being around someone of another racial group? (1 being never; 2, hardly ever; 3, sometimes; 4, most of the time; and 5, all of the time)
The posttest score (mean=4.74; SD=0.50) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=4.50; SD=0.70)(t=2.163; df=108.93; p = 0.033).
2.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being around someone who is a homosexual?”
The posttest score (mean=4.64; SD=0.49) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=4.14; SD=1.02)(t=3.66; df=116.71; p < 0.001).
3.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being with someone who has considerably less money than you do?
The posttest score (mean=4.64; SD=0.58) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=4.36; SD=0.78)(t=2.23; df=106.15; p = 0.028).
4.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being around people with a mental disability?”
The posttest score (mean=4.12; SD=0.71) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=3.44; SD=0.90)(t=4.54; df=102.19; p < 0.001).
5.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being around people with a physical disability?”
The posttest score (mean=4.29; SD=0.60) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=3.87; SD=0.80)(t=2.95; df=117; p. = 0.004).
6.  “How comfortable are you associating with and being around someone who has a different religious belief?”
The posttest score (mean=4.55; SD=0.55) was significantly higher than the pretest score (mean=4.23; SD=0.79)(t=2.32; df=118; p. = 0.022).
7. “How comfortable are you associating with and being around the opposite sex?”
There was no significant difference between the pretest (mean=4.50; SD=0.62) and posttest (mean=4.62; SD=0.62) regarding the area of gender (t=1.00; df=118; p. = 0.32).
BSW Employer Survey Spring 2006 (N = 7)
Seven employers responded to the survey in Spring 2006. Five of the seven rated the BSW graduates’ performance good (2 missing values). Their qualitative comments are as follows.
Areas in which the BSW graduates performed well
Ø  Genuine empathy on geriatric clients
Ø  Strong ethical standards; good ethical values; ability to deal with and understand and respect diversity; respect cultural diversity; respect client rights and confidentiality
Ø  Excellent assessment, interview and documentation skills
Ø  Good people skills
Ø  Knowledgeable about resources
Ø  Willingness to learn
Areas in which the BSW graduates need improvement
Ø  Critical thinking
Ø  Boundary issues
Ø  Appropriateness of documentation content (what is and what is not); case notes
Ø  Interviewing techniques
Ø  Learning to do more thorough and complete psychosocial assessments
Ø  Writing measurable/individual treatment/case management plans
Ø  More knowledge of mental health and substance use issues (perhaps a substance abuse certification track)
Ø  Group work with clients
Ø  Impact of diseases and disabilities on an individual
Suggestions about better preparation of BSW students
Ø  Understand of fact that being a low income senior trying to live in Las Vegas, i.e., limited housing, rising costs, poor public transportation.
Ø  It is important that placement sites allows students spend time to interact with clients, perform assessments and document patient’s information. These are the skills a BSW graduate must possess.
Ø  Better more hands on experiences in field placements—as appropriate for bachelor level. Field placements should include real work experiences.
Ø  Training needed on professional boundaries
Ø  Presentations from local agencies to students from all areas of social work
Ø  Training needed on analysis social and health information
Ø  Students need formal assessment from school of SW prior to field placement on ability to continue with the program
BSW Exit Survey Spring 2006 (N=27)
The BSW Exit Survey measures BSW graduating students’ perceptions regarding how well they have achieved the BSW program objectives, including both their quantitative ratings and qualitative comments and suggestions. Rating for each objective includes five alternatives, ranging from 1 (exceptionally poorly), 2 (not well), 3 (satisfactory), 4 (very well), to 5 (exceptionally well). Overall, the BSW graduating students perceived they achieved the program objectives “very well” or “satisfactory.” Students’ ratings on their achievement on each specific program objective are as follows.
Mean SD
Ability to
1. conduct skilled generalist social work practice
with client systems at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels 4.11/5.00 0.58
2. demonstrate knowledge, critical analysis, and application
of the overarching frameworks such as social systems, problem
solving model and the strengths/empowerment perspective 4.00 0.68
3. conduct social work practice demonstrating the professional
use of self and supervision without bias and with respect and
appreciation for the dignity and unique characteristics of each
individual and for the diverse client groups present in the
urban Las Vegas area 4.11 0.58
4. identify, apply and critique bio-psycho-social theories
in factors which affect individual and family behavior
throughout the life cycle 3.93 0.73
5. identify, apply and critique group, organizational, community
and cultural theories and factors which affect human
behavior in these larger systems 4.07 0.47
6. understand research methodology and statistics and apply
them in an ethical manner, with supervision, for the
evaluation of professional practice at all system levels 3.74 0.76
7. seek out and link current social science research to practice
at all client system levels as well as critique current research
for scientific and ethical soundness 3.67 0.73
8. demonstrate understanding of social welfare institutions,
their history and development, and the impact of the social
welfare system on individuals, groups, families, organizations
and communities 4.07 0.68
9. analyze the social policy process from social problems to
policy implementation with a focus on the promotion of
economic and social justice, the forms and mechanisms
of oppression and discrimination, and the mechanisms
of change 4.04 0.65
10.  value life long learning and professional development
and to enter graduate studies 4.52 0.51
The students also rated the “classroom instruction” between satisfactory and good (mean=3.59, SD=0.69); “curriculum content” between satisfactory and good (mean=3.56, SD=0.75); “field practicum experience” above good (mean= 4.37, SD=0.74); and “administration of the BSW program” as good (mean=4.04, SD=0.90). (Note: 1 being poor; 2, fair; 3, satisfactory; 4, good; 5, excellent)
The BSW graduating students’ qualitative comments and suggestions are as follows.
Ø “I have had a wonderful experience in the BSW program.”
Ø “It was great I learned a lot.”
Ø “My practicum experience was excellent.”
Ø Instruction
· “Maybe have a meeting or something to get together with AFI’s to get to know them and their agency.”
· “The teachers are too easy on grading. Hard workers should be rewarded. People don’t do their readings but they still pass their test.”
· “The school should not hire instructors who have no experiences teaching.”
Ø Curriculum
· “I would like to see a more intense learning experience.”
· “There should be a mandatory culture competence class, instead of general topic that we know, such as ethics, we know ethics. We learn it in every class. We need to know more techniques besides ethics.”
· “There are some classes in which the curriculum of study should be changed, e.g., the capstone seminar.”
· “Besides the licensing exam, an exam to test students’ knowledge at the end of the year to ensure that the students are keeping on track with their education.”
· “Further explanation of the graduate program before last semester of BSW program.”
Ø Spanish
· “Need to require Spanish or foreign language to better serve the population.”
· “Instead of being taken economics, should be two semesters of Spanish.”
· “Economic class should be replaced with a Spanish or culture course.”
· “Economics of discrimination does not help us at all! We should be better off taking a conversational Spanish class.”
BSW Field Practicum Evaluation (Spring 2006, N=50)
The purpose of the BSW Field Practicum Evaluation is to evaluate BSW interns’ performance. Data are collected from field instructors once a year (usually during the end of Spring semester). The ratings include: 1, being unsatisfactory performance; 2, needs improvement; 3, acceptable progress; 4, mastery level competence; 5, outstanding performance; NO, No opportunity to observe; and NP, No opportunity to practice. The Spring 2006 data showed that the interns performed between the “mastery level competence” level and “outstanding performance” level in seven of the 10 areas. The interns performed between the “acceptable progress level” and “mastery level competence” in the other three areas. The following are the mean scores for each item.
Mean SD
1. Accepts responsibility for own learning and professional
Development 4.5 0.68
2. Identifies the effects of social and economic policies, and
the social welfare system, on clients and service delivery
(N=49, one “NP”) 4.06 0.72
3. Utilizes bio-psycho-social theoretical frameworks to assess
strengths, needs, human development, and interactions of
client systems. (N=48; one “NO” and one “NP”) 3.96 0.62
4. Is able to define the presenting problem(s) using the social
systems and person-in-environment perspective. 4.12 0.72
5. Utilizes critical thinking in the analysis of social policies
and programs. 4.02 0.71
6. Uses social research findings to select practice
Interventions (N=39; nine “NP” and two “NO”) 3.74 0.68
7. Employs basic research tools to gather data and evaluate
practice outcomes (N=46; four “NP”). 3.85 0.70
8. Written and oral communication demonstrate the ability to
analyze values, feelings and use generalist practice skills. 4.26 0.72
9. Accepts and integrate supervisor’s feedback for
professional development. 4.56 0.64
10. Demonstrates cultural competence, e.g., the ability to apply
social work theory and practice skills with people of color,
women, gays and lesbians, people with disabilities, and other
oppressed, disempowered, or at-risk populations. 4.42 0.67

4. Use of Results. What program changes are indicated? How will they be implemented? If none, describe why changes were not needed.

Some results were shared and discussed in the School’s September 2005 and March 2006 faculty meetings. Some newly acquired and analyzed data will be shared with faculty in the upcoming faculty meetings in Fall 2006. Overall, the program objectives have been well achieved. The following are some insights and suggestions for areas of program refinement:
1. Consistently, the undergraduate exiting students and alumni perceived that they have been very well prepared in the area of social work ethics and values. The BSW Employer Survey also reflected that social work ethics is one of the areas that the BSW graduates performed well. The pre- and post-test comparison of the Human Diversity Questionnaire data further verified that the exiting students received significantly better scores than the beginning students regarding the human diversity issues. It is without a doubt that the BSW program has done a superb job in enhancing students’ social work values and ethics. To aim at a higher goal in the future, the program may focus more on its “knowledge” and “skills” teaching. This is based on the alumni’s rating of their “knowledge preparation” between good and very good (mean=7.73/10.00), their “skills preparation” above very good (mean=8.15/10.00), but their “values preparation” between very good and superb (mean=9.30/10.00). In addition, suggestions regarding enhancing social work skills were also mentioned by students in the BSW Exit Survey.
2. Following are some directions for improving students’ knowledge and skills:
a. Enhancing students’ ability to “identify, apply and critique bio-psycho-social theories in factors which affect individual and family behavior throughout the life cycle.” (although above satisfactory, this program objective received a relatively lower score than other objectives in the BSW Exit Survey).
b. Enhancing students’ ability to “understand research methodology” (although above satisfactory, this program objective received a relatively lower score than other objectives in the BSW Exit Survey).
c. Enhancing students’ ability to “seek out and link current social science research to practice at all client system levels” (although above satisfactory, this program objective received a relatively lower score than other objectives in the BSW Exit Survey).
d. Teaching contents on professional boundaries; documentation; and skills and knowledge in developing learning agreements for practicum (reflected in the Employer Survey).
e. Offering classes on Spanish language and cultural competency in relation to serving client population (multiple students reflected this need in their BSW Exit Survey).
f.  Enhancing students’ knowledge and skills in the areas of substance abuse, geriatric practice, and group work.
g. Enhancing students’ ability to conduct psychosocial assessment and to develop a treatment plan.
3. Other
a. Hiring faculty with teaching experience.
b. Setting a higher bar in grading by instructors.
c. Strengthening curriculum.
d. Giving some type of comprehensive exam at the end of the program to ensure students have acquired necessary education.
e. Providing exiting students with graduate program information.
f.  Arranging presentations from various and all areas of local social work agencies to students.
g. Strengthening and maximizing the function of field placement.

5. Dissemination of results, conclusions, and discoveries. How and with whom were the results shared?