Countering Conservatism in BSW
Students
and
Rick Robinson, Ph.D.
Southwest
The
southwestern area of
SMSU is a medium-sized
university with around 4,000 students. The
vast majority of students are from
Surveys, of incoming freshmen
at SMSU, most frequently find that the reasons for deciding to go to college are
associated with getting better jobs; however, nearly a third responded that their parents
wanted them to go to college. When incoming
freshmen characterized their political views, more than half claimed that they are
middle-of-the-road (60% in the most recent data available) and slightly more students
identified as liberal or far left (22%) than as conservative or far right (18%). When somewhat or strongly agreeing to political
positions, however, SMSU freshmen were more conservative (bold) than national
responses on nine items and more liberal on six items (italics):
Student
agrees “strongly” or “somewhat”: There is too
much concern in the courts for the rights of criminals Abortion
should be legal The death
penalty should be abolished Marijuana
should be legalized It is
important to have laws prohibiting homosexual relationships The federal
government should do more to control the sale of handguns Racial
discrimination is no longer a major problem in Realistically,
an individual can do little to bring about changes in our society Wealthy
people should pay a larger share of taxes than they do now Colleges
should prohibit racist/sexist speech on campus Same-sex
couples should have the right to legal marital status Affirmative
action in college admissions should be abolished The
activities of married women are best confined to the home and family People
should not obey laws which violate their personal values Federal
military spending should be increased |
SMSU
60% 42% 39% 34% 33% 71% 31% 37% 67% 62% 53% 44% 27% 32% 38% |
Nat’l
64% 53% 29% 38% 27% 76% 24% 30% 54% 59% 59% 50% 24% 34% 41% |
SMSU offers a BS in Social Work; the program is part
of a larger, multi-discipline Social Sciences Department.
The Social Work Program averages 79 majors (this academic year = 81
students), and class sizes are usually small with fewer than 25 students. The demographics of social work majors, somewhat,
reflect the wider SMSU demographics:
Ethics and
Accreditation Standards
The Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards, copyrighted 2001 with revisions through 2004 by
the Council on Social Work Education, Inc., reflect the values and ethical standards of
the National Association of Social Work. Both
sets of standards contain several statements that run counter to prevailing conservative
political thought in the
For example,
the following are selective statements from the NASW Code of Ethics (www.naswdc.org)
that include a policy aspect:
Social
work practice promotes human well-being by strengthening opportunities, resources, and
capacities of people in their environments and by creating policies and services to
correct conditions that limit human rights and the quality of life. The social work
profession works to eliminate poverty, discrimination, and oppression…
Social workers pursue social change, particularly with and on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individuals and groups of people. Social workers' social change efforts are focused primarily on issues of poverty, unemployment, discrimination, and other forms of social injustice. These activities seek to promote sensitivity to and knowledge about oppression and cultural and ethnic diversity. Social workers strive to ensure access to needed information, services, and resources; equality of opportunity; and meaningful participation in decision making for all people…
1.
Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to Clients
1.05(c) Social workers should obtain education about and seek to
understand the nature of social diversity and oppression with respect to race, ethnicity,
national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief,
religion, and mental or physical disability…
4.
Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities as Professionals
4.02 Discrimination
Social workers should not practice, condone, facilitate, or collaborate with any form of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief, religion, or mental or physical disability…
6.
Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to the Broader Society
6.01 Social Welfare
Social workers should promote the general welfare of society, from local to global levels, and the development of people, their communities, and their environments. Social workers should advocate for living conditions conducive to the fulfillment of basic human needs and should promote social, economic, political, and cultural values and institutions that are compatible with the realization of social justice.
6.02 Public Participation
Social workers should facilitate informed participation by the public in shaping social policies and institutions…
6.04 Social and Political Action
(a) Social workers should engage in social and political action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services, and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully. Social workers should be aware of the impact of the political arena on practice and should advocate for changes in policy and legislation to improve social conditions in order to meet basic human needs and promote social justice.
(b) Social workers should act to expand choice and opportunity for all people, with special regard for vulnerable, disadvantaged, oppressed, and exploited people and groups.
(c)
Social workers should promote conditions that encourage respect for cultural and social
diversity within the
(d) Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief, religion, or mental or physical disability.
The CSWE Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards include the following selective statements that have policy implications (www.cswe.org):
1.1
Purposes of Social Work Education
The
purposes of social work education are to prepare competent and effective professionals, to
develop social work knowledge, and to provide leadership in the development of service
delivery systems. Social work education is grounded in the profession’s history,
purposes, and philosophy and is based on a body of knowledge, values, and skills. Social
work education enables students to integrate the knowledge, values, and skills of the
social work profession for competent practice
3.0
Foundation Program Objectives
The professional foundation, which is essential to the practice of any social worker, includes, but is not limited to, the following program objectives. Graduates demonstrate the ability to:
1. Apply critical thinking skills within the context of professional social work practice.
2. Understand the value base of the profession and its ethical standards and principles, and practice accordingly.
3. Practice without discrimination and with respect, knowledge, and skills related to clients’ age, class, color, culture, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.
4. Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination and apply strategies of advocacy and social change that advance social and economic justice.
5. Understand and interpret the history of the social work profession and its contemporary structures and issues.
6.
Apply the knowledge and skills of generalist social work practice with systems of all
sizes.
7. Use theoretical frameworks supported by empirical evidence to understand individual development and behavior across the life span and the interactions among individuals and between individuals and families, groups, organizations, and communities.
8. Analyze, formulate, and influence social policies.
9. Evaluate research studies, apply research findings to practice, and evaluate their own practice interventions.
10. Use communication skills differentially across client populations, colleagues, and communities.
11. Use supervision and consultation appropriate to social work practice.
12.
Function within the structure of organizations and service delivery systems and seek
necessary organizational change.
4.
Foundation Curriculum Content
4.0 Values and Ethics: Social work education programs integrate content about values and principles of ethical decision making as presented in the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics. The educational experience provides students with the opportunity to be aware of personal values; develop, demonstrate, and promote the values of the profession; and analyze ethical dilemmas and the ways in which these affect practice, services, and clients.
4.2 Populations-at-Risk and Social and Economic Justice: Social work education programs integrate content on populations-at-risk, examining the factors that contribute to and constitute being at risk. Programs educate students to identify how group membership influences access to resources, and present content on the dynamics of such risk factors and responsive and productive strategies to redress them. Programs integrate social and economic justice content grounded in an understanding of distributive justice, human and civil rights, and the global interconnections of oppression. Programs provide content related to implementing strategies to combat discrimination, oppression, and economic deprivation and to promote social and economic justice. Programs prepare students to advocate for nondiscriminatory social and economic systems.
4.4
Social Welfare Policy and Services: Programs provide content about the history of social
work, the history and current structures of social welfare services, and the role of
policy in service delivery, social work practice, and attainment of individual and social
well-being. Course content provides students with knowledge and skills to understand major
policies that form the foundation of social welfare; analyze organizational, local, state,
national, and international issues in social welfare policy and social service delivery;
analyze and apply the results of policy research relevant to social service delivery;
understand and demonstrate policy practice skills in regard to economic, political, and
organizational systems, and use them to influence, formulate, and advocate for policy
consistent with social work values; and identify financial, organizational,
administrative, and planning processes required to deliver social services.
The Problem
Most students in the first policy course – SWRK 101: Social Welfare in a Changing World – are freshmen and sophomores, and none are officially admitted to the social work program at this point. In lower-division, introductory courses, it is not unusual to hear or read student statements about social issues that effectively “blame-the-victim” and demonstrate dualistic cognitive development or, perhaps, an incomplete identify formation such as foreclosure. Some of the most notable and conservative statements – from a social work perspective – made by students include the following:
The above beliefs and attitudes are addressed through two processes: gatekeeping and further education/socialization into the social work profession. While gatekeeping is an ongoing activity, it is a critical part of the formal BSW admissions process. Most students apply for formal admission to the social work major during the second semester of their sophomore year. Some students self-select out of the social work major and do not apply; a few are counseled out during the admissions process; and others change majors at some point after they were admitted.
By the time students enroll in the second policy course – SWRK 402: Social Welfare Policy – most are first-semester seniors (which is strongly recommended but not required), have completed social work courses in diverse/at-risk populations, human behavior, and micro-level practice courses, and have completed almost all non-social work courses required by the program. As a result, it is expected that students will demonstrate relativistic cognitive development, will manifest identity achievement, and will embrace a social work perspective.
Neither gatekeeping nor further education/socialization into the profession are foolproof. Also, entrenched belief systems are difficult to change. Still, the majority of social work majors appear to achieve marked professional growth. However, it is not possible to know how many students advance through the major because they learned how to “say the right things” and went undetected. Undetected students are troublesome, but it is plausible that, after having learned to say the right things, these students will generate empathy and understanding with real-world practice. It is more disturbing when some SWRK 402 students or seniors in Practicum openly make statements that either directly oppose the official policy positions of professional social work or cause one to question how the student could uphold the NASW Code of Ethics in practice.
During three semesters of observing students in SWRK 402 and two semesters of observing students in Practicum Seminar, a few students verbally or in writing made the following and similar statements:
Though the above students were presented with anecdotal and statistical data to the contrary throughout the courses required by the major, they still clung to stereotypical myths and ingrained beliefs. It was believed that many of these students would benefit from an experience similar to that of a welfare recipient. SWRK 402 was redesigned, incorporating poverty- and TANF-related readings and a quasi-experiential exercise that simulated the demands and consequences placed on TANF recipients.
Social Welfare Policy as
“Welcome to Welfare Reform”
The quasi-experiential exercise, called “Welcome to Welfare Reform”, was conducted during fall semesters of 2004 and 2005. The course placed a major focus on poverty and poverty policy. The readings and quasi-experiential exercise were instituted to counter the prevailing conservative attitudes that many of our BSW students hold toward, often blaming, the poor. The intent was to assist students in developing greater recognition of the demands of welfare reform and empathy for welfare recipients.
The syllabus for SWRK 402: Social Welfare Policy contained the purpose and guidelines of the quasi-experience – a system of sanctions in the form of lost points or additional assignments. One major modification was made to the guidelines for fall semester 2005, due to student behaviors from 2004 – three students decided not to attend and present their final group projects. Number 10 was added to the list of behaviors and sanctions as a result; it is written in italics and within brackets below.
In both the 2004 and 2005 fall semesters, there were opportunities for students to “earn back” at least partial points lost to sanctions or low assignment/test grades. The caveat was that the students were not made aware of the opportunities until after they completed their debriefing papers. The types of opportunities to earn back points were changed from 2004 to 2005 in order to minimize diffusion between cohorts.
“Welcome to Welfare Reform” guidelines from SWRK 402
syllabus:
This course will be conducted in a quasi-experiential format,
creating an environment similar to that experienced by welfare recipients. The purpose of this class structure and
process is to instill in students not only an understanding of social welfare policy
development, implementation and analysis, but also empathy for the persons whom students
will serve in their professional careers. In
other words: WELCOME TO WELFARE REFORM!
Under the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, excuses are never accepted and exemptions are rarely, if ever, granted. Regardless of special circumstances and individual abilities, welfare recipients (for us, Social Welfare Policy students) must complete all requirements and obey all rules to receive full benefits.
Welfare cases (Social Welfare Policy students) are determined to be eligible and assigned specific requirements (SWP course activities and assignments) by a Caseworker (Professor ). The Caseworker provides information and assigns tasks that must be completed in order to receive welfare benefits (for us, this means grades).
Failure to comply with or adequately complete any of the requirements results in specified sanctions. Sanctions include loss of points and/or additional assignments. Additional assignments include written papers, participation in a selected event, or volunteer activity.
When you are sanctioned, you will be given a sanctions sheet and must report to the Sanctions Monitor (Professor ) within one week of receiving the sanctions sheet. The Sanctions Monitor will inform you of the specifics of your sanction and sign-off on the sanctions sheet, documenting that you have reported and have been provided with a specified sanction noted on the sheet. The signed sanctions sheet, with specified sanction, will be returned to the Caseworker. The Sanctions Monitor has no authority to advocate on your behalf.
For every third sanction (in any combination) you receive, you will be notified to report to the Social Worker (Professor ) for intervention, and you must report to the Social Worker within one week of notification. Think of this as a modified “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” policy. The Social Worker will examine the circumstances underlying the accumulation of sanctions and determine what interventions might ameliorate your failure to comply and/or satisfactorily complete requirements. The Social Worker has limited discretion in choosing interventions and/or advocating on your behalf to the Caseworker, in consultation with the Sanctions Monitor if deemed necessary. The action taken by the Social Worker will be attached or documented on the sanctions sheet that resulted in social work intervention and returned to the Caseworker.
Additional assignments, resulting from a sanction or social work intervention, must be completed and evidence turned in to the Caseworker within two weeks of assignment. Failure to turn in any sanction/intervention assignment will result in ten (10) points deduction from the total points possible for the course.
Only advocacy on the part of the Social Worker and with agreement by the Caseworker can remove individual sanctions, including loss of points in specific sanctions and/or additional assignments. However, each incident of social work intervention will result in thirty (30) points deduction from the total points possible for the course. For social work majors, this means you will receive no better than a C- if you accumulate three (3) required social work interventions, and you will have to repeat this course! Again, you may consider this a modified “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” policy. There is no procedure for restoring points lost due to any social work intervention requirement.
Below is a list of behaviors for which you will be sanctioned:
1. Arriving late for or leaving a scheduled class early by more than 5 minutes (NOTE: The first day of this class counts as a class! University closings and instructor’s time adjustments are exempt.) = loss of 5 points/incident.
2. Failure to attend an entire scheduled class (NOTE: The first day of this class counts as a class! University closings and instructor’s time adjustments are exempt.) = loss of 10 points/incident.
3. Losing more than 30 points due to attendance sanctions = additional assignment.
4. Scoring lower than 70% on any test = additional assignment.
5. Scoring lower than 70% on any written assignment = additional assignment.
6. Turning assignments in late (late is defined as after the scheduled class time of the due date) = loss of points equivalent to one letter grade.
7. Committing more than six errors in writing mechanics on any written assignment = loss of points equivalent to two letter grades and required writing center assistance.
8. Missing an in-class test = loss of that test’s points and an additional assignment.
9. Creating a disturbance in class that the instructor determines has impeded the process of instruction and learning = loss of 10 points/incident and asked to leave class; refusal to leave class will result in an additional loss of 10 points/incident.
10. [Missing the Final
Project Group Presentation = loss of presentation points plus loss of 10 attendance
points.]
As with welfare recipients, there are no means of earning additional benefits; i.e., there are no means of earning extra credit points.
The “clock” began ticking the first class session… Final grade for the course was based upon the following:
Assignment/Activities Points
Attendance 30
Legal Resources Exercise 20
Tests (4 at 20 pts.) 80
Midterm Examination 50
Final Project Group Statement 20
Debriefing Paper 30
Final Project Group Report 100
Final Project Group Presentation 20
TOTAL POINTS:
350.
The required readings:
The readings selected for SWRK 402 included selective chapters from David Gil’s Unraveling Social Policy (5th ed.) as the main policy analysis text. To broaden students’ knowledge of historical, moral, and constitutional views on welfare, Sotirios Barber’s text, Welfare and the Constitution, was assigned in its entirety. The Gil text is an upper-division level of reading difficulty; it was augmented with other models of policy analysis through class lecture. The Barber text would be considered graduate-level reading, especially for a student not sufficiently versed in the Constitution or Federalist Papers.
Students next read the Sharon Hays’ book, Flat Broke with Children: Women in the Age of Welfare Reform, in its entirety. The Hays’ book is a casual, yet serious, reading that summarizes the author’s study of welfare recipients and welfare office workers in two geographically distinct cities. This work is poignant in its description of recipients and in its presentation of the variable nature of welfare devolution to the States. Students, also, prepared their debriefing papers at this time. Sanctions were no longer applied after the debriefing papers were submitted and through to the final class session, and opportunities to “earn back” lost points were implemented.
The Hays’ book was followed with David Shipler’s The Working Poor: Invisible in America. Shipler’s book is another casual, yet serious,
reading of investigative journalism into the lives of the working poor and near-poor. Students were divided into groups which were
assigned three sections of the Shipler book. The
student groups presented summaries of their assigned readings to the class.
Lastly, students read selective chapters in William Quigley’s Ending Poverty as We Know It: Guaranteeing a Right to
a Job at a Living Wage and two chapters – the students’ choice – out of
MoveOn’s 50 Ways to Love Your Country: How to Find Your Political Voice and Become
a Catalyst for Change (by MoveOn.org). Quigley’s
book is a fairly casual reading that makes historical and constitutional references about
poverty, the lack of work, and the need for a Constitutional Amendment that guarantees a
right to a living wage. MoveOn’s book
provides brief descriptions of possible tactics for influencing social policy. Combined, the Quigley and MoveOn books summarize
and bring the course to its logical conclusion.
FALL 2004
There were 26 students
enrolled in fall 2004’s SWRK 402 of which 24 were social work majors.
Sanctions:
“Welcome to Welfare Reform” was implemented immediately on the first day of class. Students were dismayed and ruffled, with audible moans and groans. Student behaviors consisted of the following:
The following sanctions were dispensed over the remainder of the fall 2004 semester:
Debriefing Papers (guidelines were provided in class during Week 12 of semester):
Students were instructed to discuss their reactions to “Welcome to Welfare Reform” as a class experience and to discuss what the experience taught them about being a welfare recipient, power, privilege, and favoritism. Of 26 enrolled students, 25 submitted a debriefing paper.
· 9 students mostly vented emotions or disapproval of the class experience, expressed little if any insight, and made no references to welfare recipients. The following are sample statements from some of these papers:
o “I think the whole thing was a bunch of crap.”
o “As far as power is concerned, [the professor] abused hers. It was not her place to demand that people come to class no matter what.”
o “I know the government system isn’t fair and we are going to need to know that for later in life, but I don’t think that it should pertain to school work.”
o “I do not feel that it was right for the instructor to give sanctions to the individuals that came in late on the first day of class because they were not aware of the policy at that time.”
o “…we would be treated as if we were on welfare ourselves… [T]his made me upset. I have always been the type to work hard and make sure that I would never have to come to a point like that in my life.”
o “You said welfare reform was tough, so make it tough the entire semester… Let people think they are losing points for sanctions and interventions. Make them panic, until they receive their final grade… [S]tudents need to feel this until the bitter end.”
· 3 students vented some emotion, expressed little insight, and made only one vague or general reference to welfare recipients; for example:
o “It’s embarrassing enough, I assume, to receive a sanction but then having to report to another party must be doubly embarrassing.”
o “I hope if I see injustices in the world, even with the welfare organization, I hope I can stand up and defend people.”
· 13 students vented emotions (though not excessively), expressed insight into their own behaviors, and made several references about the treatment of welfare recipients:
o “Eventually I mellowed out… But welfare recipients do not have that luxury of thought. And they do not merely have a grade to worry about… How are they going to feed their children? …My problems over one class are small indeed.”
o “I really felt how overwhelming and frustrating regulations can be… They are cold and dehumanizing.”
o “I felt like a kid again… [T]here I was, almost 60 years old, and being punished for being seven minutes tardy… I admit I had a flash of anger… It certainly was a good introduction to Sharon Hays’ book.”
o “It gave those in the class the feeling of being ‘in the system’ of welfare and gave them an idea of what it was like to follow rules, even when they seemed absolutely ridiculous… when you are involved with the welfare system, especially as a recipient, you see who has the power, who has the privileges, and who gets the good and bad ends of favoritism.”
o “…I really did feel that this was a great way to run a class. The class proved how unfair the welfare system can be at times. I was able to relate everything I was going through in the class to the experience of a person on welfare.”
o “I think that the structure of the class was a great idea. I believe the symbolism, at least for me, was readily apparent. As social workers, we might not have the same experiences as our clients… Our clients are going to be in positions of powerlessness, but the big difference is that their problems are not as miniscule as ours are.”
o “Relating this aspect to real life welfare reform, one can see how wrong the system is... I felt helpless, stressed, worried, angry, and at the same time I felt I had to remain submissive… For me, it only meant a class, a credit, and a grade. For welfare recipients if means their entire life… Regulation keeps welfare recipients in their place within society.”
Student Course Evaluations:
The evaluation instrument for SWRK 402 was the BSW Program’s 20-item questionnaire, including 18 items with a 5-point Likert response scale (17 items with 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree; one item with 1 = much better than most, 2 = better than most, 3 = average, 4 = poorer than most, and 5 = much poorer than most) and two open-ended questions. Therefore, the lower the average of responses, the more positive the students’ evaluation of the course, and averages less than 3.00 are considered a positive evaluation.
Student evaluations, of SWRK 402, received an overall response average of 2.02. Individual item response averages ranged from 1.47 to 2.26. The three strongest, average responses were to the following items of the BSW Program instrument:
· “The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject matter” (1.47),
· “The instructor was available for consultation and help outside of class” (1.82), and
· “This course has increased my knowledge of social work” and “This course has identified and affirmed social work values” (both = 1.91).
The three weakest, average responses were to the following items of the BSW Program instrument:
· “The instructor promptly returned exams” and “I would recommend this course to other students” (both = 2.26),
· “The lectures have been interesting and useful” and “Compared to other instructors, I would rate this instructor:” (both = 2.21), and
· “This course was a valuable learning experience for me” and “The instructor’s attitude was fair toward all groups” (both = 2.17).
The open-ended question, “Please indicate what you liked best about this course. In other words, what are the strengths of the course?”, provided the following feedback:
· The welfare reform exercise was very valuable learning experience – looking back on how I reacted and my feelings about it, I got a better understanding of how it is to be on welfare; the welfare system/reform really makes you think; although most would disagree, the welfare reform project (3 comments)
· The speakers; really enjoyed the speakers, especially the woman on welfare (3 comments)
· Sanctions were good; sanctions were a good idea even though we were scared at first (2 comments)
· Enjoyed/liked the final project – helped me learn about different programs (2 comments)
· Video “The Gay Athlete” (1 comment)
· Debriefing paper (1 comment)
· The knowledge I gained about policy (1 comment)
· Good information & thought provoking material (1 comment)
· I loved Gil! (1 comment)
· N/A (1 comment)
· Learning about various aspects of social work (1 comment)
The
open-ended question, “Please share your ideas or suggestions for how this course
could be improved. In other words, what are
the weaknesses of the course?”, provided the following feedback –
smiling/frowning faces in originals:
· Hated the first book (not sure if student means the Gil book, which had the first reading assignment, or the Barber book, which was the first entire book read); that Barber book was useless to us if we can’t understand a word in it; Barber was hard for me to read and understand – I felt lost the whole time we talked about it; the Barber book!; Gil & Barber are difficult L; I hated Barber!; some books were hard to understand (8 comments)
· None or left blank; not sure; N/A (3 comments)
· Not so many books (1 comment)
· Slow down with the first two books (1 comment)
· It’s all good J (1 comment).
FALL 2005
There were 21 students enrolled in fall 2005’s SWRK 402 of which
16 were social work majors.
Sanctions:
“Welcome to Welfare Reform” was implemented immediately on the first day of class. The faculty member, who serves as the Social Worker for this experience, was on sabbatical. Therefore, the Sanctions Monitor also served as the SW. Students were dismayed, but their moans and groans seemed less apparent – perhaps due to their prior knowledge of the quasi-experiential format. No students received sanctions on the first day.
The following sanctions were dispensed over the remainder of the fall 2004 semester:
Debriefing Papers (guidelines were provided in class during Week 12 of the semester)
Of 21 enrolled students, 21 submitted a debriefing paper.
· 4 students discussed personal thoughts about the actual welfare reform program, but did not vent any emotions nor present any reactions to the class experience:
o “I think that welfare reform has helped a great deal in aiding people and getting the ones who are able to work out there doing something… in the beginning it was met with some skepticism because they thought that people getting off the program at the end of five years would steal or commit crimes… I’m sure there are some people out there like the “welfare queen”… but I think that welfare reform is a good start… much better than the way the welfare used to be.”
o “In ‘Flat Broke with Children’ families see ‘Welcome to Welfare Reform’… like they have won a prize… [I]t’s more like a reality check that they have sunk so low…sort of like pity.”
o “I would not say that I am happy with the current welfare system, but at least there is progress [welfare reform] being made to better the system…”
o “…having welfare reform…had helped people in the long run… I like how the program still lets people have the benefits even after they have a job.”
· 3 students vented some emotion but expressed little insight and made only vague or no references to welfare recipients:
o “It was a pain… I think it caused a lot of stress… this was the point… by having to deal with…the system in the classroom, we can understand what it would be like to deal with the American welfare system.”
o “The welfare reform in class was not a pleasant experience; however… [w]e need to understand how it feels and the extreme expectations.”
o “The biggest problem I have with your Welfare Reform is that everyone is treated like a number… another requirement that I do not really agree on is that of the tests…”
· 14 students vented some emotion, expressed insight into their own behaviors, and made several references about the treatment of welfare recipients:
o “The standards and expectations were set too high… [welfare] recipients get sanctioned even though they have a legitimate reason… Through taking this class, I believe it gives you an idea of what goes on with welfare recipients, on how they are shown no compassion.”
o “This class mocked the real world… students would get sanctioned… this happens in the real welfare system… benefited all students.”
o “When the class first started and I heard about the sanctions, I felt it was unfair. Then I realized the sanctions we received in class were nothing compared to the severity of a welfare recipient receiving a sanction. The student may lose points, but the welfare recipient could lose benefits.”
o “Welfare policies such as sanctions were implemented in the syllabus. There were several actions that students could be sanctioned for… students may receive an unfair sanction. This also occurs in the welfare system… [recipients are] sanctioned for circumstances they have no control over.”
o “[I]t’s unfair for persons [to be] sanctioned even though they…had logical excuses. …[C]lass has made me learn how to see myself as a welfare recipient… but this is not as serious as being sanctioned in the welfare program.”
o “I have some strong feelings on welfare reform, because not only have I had to endure your class, but I have also lived first hand these sanctions rules in dealing with welfare assistance. I do not care for yours or the state’s policy of sanctions.”
o “…put ourselves at risk for being sanctioned… Those behaviors were worthy of being sanctioned in this class, and taught us how serious the act of being sanctioned really is… It showed that one can’t expect to be dragged along through life. One must pull their own weight and get things accomplished on time in order to be successful.”
o “Truly, I now see many of the policies that are enacted presently need to be re-evaluated… I don’t want to live in a country in which you are either wealthy or poor. Not that I fear being poor, I just realize in order to obtain great amounts of wealth, I will inevitably to some degree oppress others, and that is something I want no part of.”
o “Looking at the syllabus filled everyone with fear… I came to class sick… I came to class when the weather was bad and stayed even though I had to travel over 30 miles. When my car broke, my boyfriend had to bring me to school because I could not miss policy… We all learned what it’s like to have a caseworker and be a welfare recipient… The rules of [PRWOA] have been proven in this class to be blaming the victim.”
o “Sanctions are a bit demeaning because you need to take up your mistake with someone else [sanctions monitor - SM]… I knew I did not want a sanction because I didn’t want to feel shame in front of [SM] and explain to him why… I would be embarrassed.”
Student Course Evaluations:
Student evaluations, of SWRK 402 for Fall 2005, received an overall response average of 1.99. Individual item response averages ranged from 1.57 to 2.33. The three strongest, average responses were to the following items of the BSW Program instrument:
· “The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject matter” (1.57),
· “This course has increased my knowledge of social work” (1.71), and
· “This course has identified and affirmed social work values” (1.86).
The three weakest, average responses were to the following items of the BSW Program instrument:
· “I would recommend this course to other students” and “Compared to other instructors, I would rate this instructor:” (both = 2.33),
· “The lectures have been interesting and useful” (2.19), and
· “The instructor’s attitude was fair toward all groups” (2.14).
The open-ended question, “Please indicate what you liked best about this course. In other words, what are the strengths of the course?”, provided the following feedback:
· Movies/videos, were very informational; liked the WalMart video (6 comments)
·
Interesting class
discussions and interacting during class; easy going; provided me with knowledge on
various social policies and how they affect the general welfare; opening of eyes to the
many social welfare issues in the
· Group assignment, group projects made assignment more fun; was hard but put together everything we learned in the semester (4 comments)
· The reality of being sanctioned; liked what the welfare reform exercise taught me (2 comments)
· The instructor was highly knowledgeable about the subject, etc. (1 comment)
· Lectures (1 comment)
· Textbooks were well tied into the class (1 comment)
· The 10 minute breaks (1 comment)
· Nothing (1 comment)
The
open-ended question, “Please share your ideas or suggestions for how this course
could be improved. In other words, what are
the weaknesses of the course?”, provided the following feedback – smiling faces
in originals:
· None or left blank; it’s all been good (4 comments)
· Long class period; should be shorter (2 comments)
· Gil & Barber J(1 comment)
· Make requirements clearer, it was hard to follow what we were supposed to have read for the next class period (1 comment)
· Speakers would be helpful (1 comment)
· More films – more interesting class – oh yeah, it’s policy J (1 comment)
· Sanctions should be stopped or better rules under certain circumstances (1 comment)
· Not a night class (1 comment)
· Tests were really hard and a lot of info to take in (1 comment)
· Try to cover all topics or cut back on some of the curriculum (1 comment)
· Less reading straight from the books (1 comment).
Survey of Incoming Freshmen – Characterization of Political
Views
Middle-of-the-road =
60%
Liberal or far left =
22%
Conservative or far right =
18%
When somewhat or strongly
agreeing to political positions, however, SMSU freshmen were more conservative (bold)
than national responses on nine items and more liberal on six items (italics):
Student
agrees “strongly” or “somewhat”: There is too
much concern in the courts for the rights of criminals Abortion
should be legal The death
penalty should be abolished Marijuana
should be legalized It is
important to have laws prohibiting homosexual relationships The federal
government should do more to control the sale of handguns Racial
discrimination is no longer a major problem in Realistically,
an individual can do little to bring about changes in our society Wealthy
people should pay a larger share of taxes than they do now Colleges
should prohibit racist/sexist speech on campus Same-sex
couples should have the right to legal marital status Affirmative
action in college admissions should be abolished The
activities of married women are best confined to the home and family People
should not obey laws which violate their personal values Federal
military spending should be increased |
SMSU
60% 42% 39% 34% 33% 71% 31% 37% 67% 62% 53% 44% 27% 32% 38% |
Nat’l
64% 53% 29% 38% 27% 76% 24% 30% 54% 59% 59% 50% 24% 34% 41% |
NASW standards that run
counter to prevailing
conservative political thought
in the
1. Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to
Clients
1.05(c) Social workers should obtain education about and seek to
understand the nature of social diversity and oppression with respect to race, ethnicity,
national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief,
religion, and mental or physical disability…
4. Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities as
Professionals
4.02 Discrimination
Social workers should not practice, condone, facilitate, or collaborate with any form of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief, religion, or mental or physical disability…
6. Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to the
Broader Society
6.04 Social and Political Action
(a) Social workers should engage in social and political action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services, and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully. Social workers should be aware of the impact of the political arena on practice and should advocate for changes in policy and legislation to improve social conditions in order to meet basic human needs and promote social justice.
(b) Social workers should act to expand choice and opportunity for all people, with special regard for vulnerable, disadvantaged, oppressed, and exploited people and groups.
CSWE standards that run
counter to prevailing
conservative political thought
in the
4.0 Values and Ethics: Social work education programs integrate content about values and principles of ethical decision making as presented in the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics. The educational experience provides students with the opportunity to be aware of personal values; develop, demonstrate, and promote the values of the profession; and analyze ethical dilemmas and the ways in which these affect practice, services, and clients.
4.2 Populations-at-Risk and Social and Economic Justice: Social work education programs integrate content on populations-at-risk, examining the factors that contribute to and constitute being at risk. Programs educate students to identify how group membership influences access to resources, and present content on the dynamics of such risk factors and responsive and productive strategies to redress them. Programs integrate social and economic justice content grounded in an understanding of distributive justice, human and civil rights, and the global interconnections of oppression. Programs provide content related to implementing strategies to combat discrimination, oppression, and economic deprivation and to promote social and economic justice. Programs prepare students to advocate for nondiscriminatory social and economic systems.
4.4 Social Welfare Policy and Services: Programs provide content about the history of social work, the history and current structures of social welfare services, and the role of policy in service delivery, social work practice, and attainment of individual and social well-being. Course content provides students with knowledge and skills to understand major policies that form the foundation of social welfare; analyze organizational, local, state, national, and international issues in social welfare policy and social service delivery; analyze and apply the results of policy research relevant to social service delivery; understand and demonstrate policy practice skills in regard to economic, political, and organizational systems, and use them to influence, formulate, and advocate for policy consistent with social work values; and identify financial, organizational, administrative, and planning processes required to deliver social services.
SWRK 101: Social Welfare in a
Changing World
“Conservative”
Statements
SWRK 402: Social Welfare
Policy and Practicum Seminar
“Conservative”
Statements
List of Behaviors for which
Students
Are Sanctioned:
1. Arriving late for or leaving a scheduled class early by more than 5 minutes (NOTE: The first day of this class counts as a class! University closings and instructor’s time adjustments are exempt.) = loss of 5 points/incident.
2. Failure to attend an entire scheduled class (NOTE: The first day of this class counts as a class! University closings and instructor’s time adjustments are exempt.) = loss of 10 points/incident.
3. Losing more than 30 points due to attendance sanctions = additional assignment.
4. Scoring lower than 70% on any test = additional assignment.
5. Scoring lower than 70% on any written assignment = additional assignment.
6. Turning assignments in late (late is defined as after the scheduled class time of the due date) = loss of points equivalent to one letter grade.
7. Committing more than six errors in writing mechanics on any written assignment = loss of points equivalent to two letter grades and required writing center assistance.
8. Missing an in-class test = loss of that test’s points and an additional assignment.
9. Creating a disturbance in class that the instructor determines has impeded the process of instruction and learning = loss of 10 points/incident and asked to leave class; refusal to leave class will result in an additional loss of 10 points/incident.
10.
[Missing
the Final Project Group Presentation = loss of presentation points plus loss of 10
attendance points.] -- added Fall 2005