e68709caf959dee98e7029174f41b8a0.ppt
- Количество слайдов: 24
Analyzing the Impact of Social Work Education on Students’ Attitudes toward Poverty and Impoverished Persons Robert D. Weaver, Ph. D. Sung Hyun Yun, Ph. D. , MSW May 23, 2008
Literature Review § Several key studies have been conducted on social work students’ attitudes towards poverty, including Rosenthal’s (1993) New York MSW study, Perry’s (2003) California study, Limb & Organista’s (2003) multiethnic study, and Krumer-Nevo and Lev. Wiesel’s (2005) BSW study in Israel.
Literature Review § Noteworthy attitudinal studies outside social work include those done with nursing students (Meager-Stewart, Reutter, & Sword, 2004), psychology students (Cozzarelli, Tagler & Wilkinson, 2002), and Sun’s (2001) comparison of social work and non-social work students.
Literature Review § Cross-national comparisons of social work students (Macarov, 1981; Weiss, 2005; Weiss, 2006; Weiss, Gal & Cnaan, 2005; Weiss, Gal, Cnaan & Majlagic, 2002) yield similar findings, though perceptions of poverty vary between and within nations.
Literature Review § Social work curriculum may influence students’ attitude towards poverty and poverty policy (Schwartz & Robinson, 1991; Sun, 2001; Weaver & Nackerud, 2005; Weiss et al. , 2005), but more rigourous studies are needed, included those within a Canadian context.
Research Questions Q 1: Does level of social work education influence students’ attitude towards poverty? H 1: Students who complete an upper level social work course will demonstrate a more structural attitude towards poverty than those who complete a lower level social work course.
Research Questions Q 2: Does perception of financial situation influence students’ attitude towards poverty? H 2: Students who perceive their financial situation as insecure will demonstrate a more structural attitude towards poverty than those who do not.
Research Questions Q 3: Does political affiliation influence students’ attitudes towards poverty? H 3: Students who affiliate with the political left will demonstrate a more structural attitude towards poverty than those who do not.
Research Design l Quasi Experimental Design l Comparison Group Pretest Posttest Design l Convenience Sample l Survey Methods
Sample Characteristics (N = 166) Gender Female (84. 3%) Male (15. 7%) Age Mean S. D. (6. 31) Ethnicity Aboriginal African-Canadian/American Asian Caucasian Other Major Social Work Major (52. 5%) Psychology/Sociology/Political Science (31. 9%) Other (15. 6%) (21. 79) (. 6%) (9. 1%) (4. 2%) (73. 3%) (12. 7%)
Sample Characteristics (continued) Social Work Education Lower level Course Upper Level Course (74. 7%) (25. 3%) Financial Security Secure Insecure (78. 7%) (21. 3%) Ideological Affiliation Centre/Right Left None/Other (53. 0%) (13. 4%) (33. 5%)
Instrument Attitude about Poverty and Poor People Scale (Atherton et al. , 1993) l 37 -item Likert Scale l Reliability (Atherton et al. , 1993) l Internal Consistency Coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha): . 93 l The split-half reliability: . 87 l Validity l Construct validity “If poor people worked harder, they could escape poverty”. “Welfare mothers have babies to get more $$”.
Instrument (continued) l Revised Version (Internal Consistency Coefficient) l Pretest: α =. 83 l Posttest: α =. 92 l Revised Items Food Stamps Welfare benefits
Issues and Perspectives in Social Welfare l Text was “The New Structural Social Work” (Mullaly, 2007) l Examines various ideologies that shape social welfare l Value conflicts and their impact on policy Content includes: l Nature of capitalism (Laissez-faire, Keynesianism, neo-liberal)
Issues and Perspectives Cont’d Liberalism l Social Democracy l Conservatism l Feminism l Socialism & Marxism l Third way l Structural Social Work (Policy-practice) l
Lower Level Courses l l l l l Generalist & Specialist Social Work Practice Social Work History Ideological Foundations & Values of Social Work Roles & Fields of Practice Client-Social Worker Relationship Problem Solving in Social Work Practice Assessment of need The Strengths Approach Cultural Competent Practice
Lower Level Courses (continued) Social Welfare l Income Security l Homelessness l Professionalization of Social Work l Social Work with Children & Youth l Social Work and Health/Women/Aboriginal Peoples l
Estimated Marginal Means: Posttest VARIABLE MEAN SE SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION Lower level 129. 7 1. 56 Upper level 136. 0 2. 35 ____________________________ FINANCIAL SECURITY Secure 130. 0 1. 45 Insecure 136. 0 2. 38 ____________________________ IDEOLOGICAL AFFII IATION Centre/Right 130. 0 1. 80 Left 136. 2 2. 72 None/other 132. 3 2. 60 ____________________________
Social Work Education
PERCEIVED FINANCIAL SECURITY
IDEOLOGICAL AFFILIATION
Results: Three-way ANCOVA Source SS SUMPRETEST 10855. 772 SWKEDUC 697. 418 FINSECURITY 632. 376 IDEOAFFIL 497. 633 SWK*FS. 062 SWK*IDEOAFFIL 458. 246 FS*IDEOAFFIL 508. 193 SWK*FS*IDEOAFFIL 17. 053 **p <. 001 * p <. 05 Adj. R 2 =. 421 df MS_ ______F____ 1 10855. 772 78. 091** 1 697. 418 5. 017* 1 632. 376 4. 549* 2 248. 817 1. 790 1. 062. 000 2 229. 123 1. 648 2 254. 457 1. 830 2 8. 526. 061
IMPLICATIONS • • • Importance of focusing on structural and global influences and pressures on social policy/programming Promote more experiential learning regarding poverty and impoverished persons Create a culture in which research informs teaching and teaching informs research
THANK YOU FOR COMING!! References available upon request. Contact Dr. Robert D. Weaver at: rdweaver@uwindsor. ca or Dr. Sung Hyun Yun at: yshhsy@uwindsor. ca