Goal #1
A.        Preparation for Entry-Level, Generalist Practice
The faculty have examined each course in the foundation to identify the course assignments and learning activities used to measure student achievement of the knowledge, skills, and values learning objectives.  The measurements used are as follows: 

Knowledge
Students should understand:
   1.       The history of the social work profession and the development of a social welfare system   in the U.S.

• exams   (SW220, 345, 346, AO222)

• panel discussions about social problems and social systems in U.S.   (AO222)

  2.       The values and ethics of the social work profession and the profession’s positive regard for human diversity

  3.        The forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination that exist in our society and strategies of change that advance social and economic justice 

• exams   (AO221, 222, 347; HI114; AO347; SW345, 346, 353)

• quizzes   (SW335, 346)

• papers  (AO347;SW334,346,335,351,455)

• classroom exercises   (SW351, 346, 352, 353, 400)

• policy analyses   (SW345)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project   (SW346)

   4.       The theory of generalist social work practice with systems of all sizes 

• exams   (SW220, 351, 352, 353)

• quizzes   (SW335)

• papers   (SW220, 351, 443/455)

• classroom exercises   (SW351, 352, 353)

 5.        The bio-psycho-social variables that affect individual development and behavior and theoretical frameworks that explain the interactions among individuals and between individuals and social systems (families, groups, organizations, communities) 

• exams   (BI211, 212; PS201, 205; AO221, 222, 347; SW346, 334, 400)

• quizzes  (SW335)                                                                          

• papers   (SW334, 335, 346, 351, 400, 443/455) policy analyses   (SW345)

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project   (SW346)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• journal article analyses   (SW400)

  6.       The current structures for the provision of social welfare services 

• exams   (HI114; PO250; AO222; SW220, 345, 346)

• policy analyses   (SW345)

• papers   (SW443/455)

 7.       A scientific, analytic approach to gaining knowledge for practice and the evaluation of
practice and programs in all areas of social work practice 

• exams   (MA230; SW353, 400)

• papers   (SW220, 352, 353, 400, 443/455)

• classroom exercises   (SW351, 353)

• journal article analyses   (SW400)

• presentations   (SW353, 400)

Skills: 

Students should be able to: 

  1.       Apply critical thinking skills within the context of professional social work 

•  papers (SW220, 334, 335, 346, 351, 352, 353, 400, 443/455)

• classroom exercises (SW220, 334, 335, 351, 352, 353, 346, 345, 400, 443/455)

• exams (SW220, 334, 335, 352, 353, 346, 400)

• policy analysis (SW345)

• quizzes (SW335, 346)

• presentations (SW220, 334, 353, 400, 443/455)

• projects (SW220, 352, 353, 346, 443/455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• journal article analyses   (SW400)

 2.        Practice within the values and ethics of the social work profession 

• volunteer experience   (SW220)

• class exercises   (SW220, 334, 335, 345, 351, 352, 353, 400, 455)

• exams   (SW334, 352, 353, 400)

• papers   (SW334, 345, 351, 400)

• practicum evaluations   (SW443)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 353, 400)

3.         Demonstrate the professional use of self 

• classroom exercises   (SW351, 352, 353, 334, 335, 443, 400, 455)

• supervision, class discussion, process recording, evaluations   (SW334, 351, 400,  443,

•          455) 

• case study analyses   (SW351)

• presentations    (SW334, 400)

  4.       Apply strategies and skills of change that advance social and economic justice 

  5.       Apply the skills of generalist practice with systems of all sizes 

• classroom exercises, exams   (SW352, 353, 334, 335, 400)

• papers   (SW334, 346, 351, 400)

• small group exercises, process recording, theory/practice reports, evaluations (SW334,

•          351, 443, 455)               

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 353, 400)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

  6.       Use theoretical frameworks to understand the interactions between people and their environment (social systems) 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 353)

• papers   (SW351, 352, 334, 346, 400)      

• exam   (SW334, 353, 400)

• presentations   (SW351, 334, 353)

• simulated group work   (SW352)

• organizational and community profiles   (SW353)

• theory/practice report, evaluations   (SW443, 455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• quizzes (SW346)

  7.       Analyze the impact of social policies on clients, practitioners, and agencies 

• policy analysis   (SW345)

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 345, 351, 352, 335, 353, 400)

• exam   (SW334, 353, 400)

• quizzes   (SW335, 346)

• papers   (SW334, 335, 346, 351, 400)

• theory/practice report, evaluations   (SW443, 455)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

• presentations   (SW334, 345, 351, 353, 400)

 8.        Evaluate research studies and apply findings to practice and under supervision, evaluate their own practice interventions and those of other relevant systems 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• papers   (SW220, 334, 351, 352, 353, 346, 400, 443/455)

• presentations   (SW400)

• journal article analyses   (SW400)

• monthly self-reports, practicum evaluations   (SW443/455)

• videotaped simulated group/observations and evaluations   (SW352)

• organizational profile   (SW353)

 9.        Use supervision appropriate to generalist practice

• student-supervisor contract, supervision, evaluations   (SW443/455)

10.       Communicate and collaborate with clients, colleagues, and members of the community 

• role-plays, record-keeping exercises   (SW351)

• groupwork role-plays   (SW352)

• group presentations   (SW220, 334)

• small group exercises   (SW334, 335, 351, 353, 400)

• role-plays, process recording, supervision, evaluations   (SW351, 443/455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

11.       Function within the structure of organizations and service delivery systems and, under supervision, seek necessary organizational change 

• classroom exercises (SW334, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• papers (SW220, 351, 334, 400, 455)

• policy analysis (SW345)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• community and organization profiles (SW353)

• supervisor and self evaluation (SW220, 443

• monthly reports (SW455)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 353, 400)

Values: 

Students should understand and demonstrate positive regard for:

  1.       Individual worth and dignity

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 335, 345, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• role plays   (SW351) 

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• papers   (SW351, 334)

• presentations   (SW334, 345, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• process recording, evaluations   (SW443/455)

• simulated groupwork   (SW352)

• quizzes   (SW346)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

• policy analysis   (SW345)

2.         Human diversity and unique client characteristics 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 335, 351, 352, 353, 345, 455) 

• simulated groupwork   (SW352)

• evaluations   (SW443/455)

• quizzes, term paper, exams   (SW334, 346, 400)

• role plays   (SW351)

• papers   (SW351, 334)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• presentations   (SW334, 345, 351, 352, 353, 400)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

  3.       Client self-determination

• classroom exercises   (SW335, 353, 455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• role plays   (SW351)

• papers   (SW351, 334)

• presentations   (SW334, 345, 351, 353, 400)

• simulated groupwork   (SW352)

• exams   (SW334, 351, 400)

• evaluations   (SW443)

• quizzes   (SW346)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

• policy analysis   (SW345)

  4.       Confidentiality 

• case study analyses   (SW351)

• role plays   (SW351)

• exams   (SW334, 400)

• papers   (SW334, 351, 400)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 400)

• simulated groupwork   (SW352)

• evaluations, theory/practice reports, process recording   (SW443/455)

  5.       Equitable access to needed resources 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 351, 353, 455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• papers   (SW351, 352, 334)

• presentations   (SW334, 345, 351, 353, 400)

• simulated groupwork (SW352)

• community profile   (SW353)

• exams   (SW334, 345, 353, 400)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

• policy analysis   (SW345)

 6.        Humane and responsive practices by social institutions in the delivery of needed resources 

• classroom exercises   (SW353, 455)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• papers   (SW351, 334, 346)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 353, 400)

• exams   (SW334, 353, 400)

• mid/final evaluations   (SW443)

• quizzes   (SW346)

• policy analysis   (SW345)

 7.        Ethical conduct 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 351, 455)

• role plays   (SW351)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• papers   (SW334, 351)

• exams   (SW334, 353, 400)

• presentations   (SW351, 353, 400)

• quizzes   (SW346)

• simulated groupwork   (SW352)

• evaluations   (SW443/455)

   8.       Continuous professional growth 

• classroom exercises   (SW334, 351, 400)

• papers   (SW351, 334, 400)

• presentations   (SW334, 351, 400)

• role plays   (SW351)

• case study analyses   (SW351)

• journal article analyses   (SW400)

• self-evaluations; monthly progress reports; mid/final evaluations   (SW443/455)

  9.       Students should also develop an awareness of their own values and any conflicting personal and professional values 

• classroom exercises (SW220, 351, 352, 353, 334, 335, 455)

• role plays   (SW351)

• case study analyses   (SW351, 353)

• papers   (SW220, 351, 334, 400, 455)

• evaluations (SW443/455)

• transcultural experiential/simulation project (SW346)

The previous section identified measures used to evaluate course objectives.  Other measures are also used to assess the program’s student preparation for entry-level, generalist practice. 

  1.       The Social Work Program’s policy for continuance in the major is a 2.5 grade point

average (GPA) in courses required for the major. This policy  is a quantitative measure of the minimum standards of student competency expected for students admitted to the Practicum and for graduation from the program.  During the academic year 1997-98, six students were severed from the program because they failed to maintain this standard.  All of these students are working to improve their GPA’s in order to apply for readmittance to the program. 

 2.        Two qualitative measures are employed during the senior year in the Field Practicum. 

The first is a mid-semester field visit/evaluation conducted by a faculty liaison.  Student competency in the core knowledge, values and skills objectives specified in the student’s learning agreement is evaluated.  The second is a final evaluation conducted by the student’s field agency supervisor.  This is a comprehensive assessment of the student’s performance and achievement of learning objectives. 

In Spring 1998, one student was identified by a faculty field liaison as unable to meet the requirements of the initial field placement.  After extensive consultation with the student, field         supervisors, faculty field liaison, and Field Education Director, the student was assigned a new practicum and granted an extension.  This resulted in a successful outcome. 

3.         The Baccalaureate Program Directors (BPD) Outcomes Instrument is employed to assess the entry-level generalist practice competence of our alumni/ae.*
                     (*New and Revised BPD Surveys distributed again, beginning Spring 2002) 

In November of 1997, the BPD Outcomes Instrument was sent to all 48 alumni/ae who graduated from our program during the years 1995 through 1997.  Postcards were sent to graduates in January of 1998 to remind them to complete the Instrument.  A total of 11 graduates replied, and three Instruments were returned undeliverable, which resulted in a response rate of 24%.  The surveys from the 11 respondents were compiled with 27 surveys that were collected in the years 1994 through 1995, which resulted in a total of 38 respondents from which the results were analyzed. 

The rating scale used in the BPD Instrument is a 7 point ordinal level measurement.  For the question, “In general, how satisfied are you with your undergraduate social work degree?”, categories 1 - 3 (satisfied to very satisfied) were selected by 71.1% (n = 27) of our graduates compared to 82.7% of graduates nationally.  Although slightly lower than the national average, these statistics indicate that graduates from our program are, in general, satisfied with their undergraduate social work degree. 

With regard to professional activities since completion of our undergraduate social work degree, 90.3% (n = 28) had attended professional conferences and workshops compared to 89.8% nationally.  Further, 22.6% (n = 7) of our graduates had presented at a national conference, compared to 27.3% nationally.  These numbers indicate that graduates from our program are actively involved in scholarly activities and are concerned about developing their knowledge regarding social work issues.  Further, 41.9% (n = 13) of our graduates had been involved in community organization compared to 52.6% nationally, and 41.9% (n = 13) had been involved in volunteer work for social service organizations compared to 45.7% nationally.  Thus, graduates from our program appear to have learned the importance and value of involvement in their communities. 

The BPD Instrument includes items on which alumni/ae evaluate their own level of preparedness for practice in the areas of social work values, knowledge, and skills.  Below are listed selected items from each area and their respective ratings.  The responses for rating 1 (Excellently prepared) and 2 (Very well prepared) are summarized and compared to the national averages from the most recent (1997) BPD findings. 

Comparison of P.S.C. and National Percentages on Selected Social Work Values   

                                                                                                                       National
Selected values                                                       n                 PSU               Average

Confidentiality
               Excellent                                               21                    65.6                 52.7

Non judgmental attitude
               Excellent                                               17                    53.1                 41.7

Identification with social work
               Excellent                                               14                    43.8                 31.3

Acceptance of diversity
               Excellent                                               14                    43.8                 41.7
               Very well                                              13                    40.6                 33.3

Responsibility to client
               Excellent                                               15                    46.9                 37.4

Human diversity
               Excellent                                               14                    43.8                 38.6
               Very well                                              12                    37.5                 33.7

Respect for colleagues             
               Excellent                                               14                    43.8                 27.6

Objectivity in professional relations
               Excellent                                               10                    31.3                 26.5
               Very well                                              14                    43.8                 35.2

________________________________________________________________________ 

Regarding preparation in social work values, these outcomes suggest that graduates from our program have learned the importance of social work values, particularly in the areas of confidentiality, respect for colleagues, and objectivity in professional relations.  Specifically, our graduates’ scores exceeded national scores in these areas by 13 points, 16 points, and 13 points (categories one and two combined) respectively.  In all other areas of social work values, our graduates’ scores either were similar to or exceeded national scores.

Comparison of P.S.C. and National Percentages on Selected Knowledge Bases

                                                                                                                       National
Selected knowledge bases                                    n                 PSU               Average

Person in environment
               Excellent                                               11                    34.4                 28.3

Awareness of vulnerable populations
               Excellent                                               12                    37.5                 28.9

Social service systems                                        
               Excellent                                                 8                    25.0                 16.4

Ability to read research
               Excellent                                                 9                    28.1                 12.7

Social policy
               Excellent                                                 9                    28.1                 14.6
               Very well                                                9                    28.1                 24.6

Sociology
               Excellent                                                 8                    25.0                 18.4
               Very well                                              11                    34.4                 30.3

Psychology
               Excellent                                                 8                    25.8                 18.1
               Very well                                              12                    38.7                 31.3

Human Biology
               Excellent                                                 7                    22.6                 10.8

________________________________________________________________________ 

These data indicate that graduates from our program were more prepared than graduates nationally in several knowledge base areas.  Most notably, our graduates’ scores exceeded national scores in the areas of ability to read research (15 points higher), social policy (17 points higher; categories one and two combined), and psychology (15 points higher; categories one and two combined).  Further, knowledge base scores of our graduates either were equivalent to or surpassed all other knowledge base scores of graduates nationally.

 Comparison of P.S.C. and National Percentages on Selected Skills

                                                                                                                       National
Selected skills                                                        n                 PSU               Average

Setting intervention goals
                Excellent                                                 7                    22.6                 14.9

Organizing groups                                
                Excellent                                                 7                    22.6                 10.6
                Very well                                                7                    22.6                 18.8    

Conducting growth groups
                Excellent                                                 4                    12.9                   7.5
                Very well                                                8                    25.8                 15.0

Outreach                                                         
                Excellent                                                 6                    19.4                 12.1

Compiling information                            
                Excellent                                                 7                    22.6                 19.9
                Very well                                              12                    38.7                 28.3

Public speaking
                Excellent                                                 7                    22.6                 10.3

Participating in task groups                               
                Excellent                                              11                    35.5                 18.1

Program management                                                                          
                Excellent                                                 2                      6.3                   5.9
                Very well                                                7                    21.9                 12.3

Program evaluation
                Excellent                                                 4                    12.5                   8.7
                Very well                                                7                    21.9                 17.0

Influencing agency policy                                    
                Excellent                                                 5                    15.6                   6.8

Community intervention
                Excellent                                                 7                    21.9                 10.5

________________________________________________________________________ 

The results from this analysis suggest that graduates from our program have successfully developed and maintained skills needed for social work practice.  Our graduates’ scores in several skill areas exceeded those of graduates nationally, particularly in the areas of organizing groups (16 points higher; categories one and two combined), conducting growth groups (16 points higher; categories one and two combined), compiling information (13 points higher; categories one and two combined), participation in task groups (17 points higher), and community intervention (11 points higher).  In all other skill areas, our graduates’ scores either were similar to or exceeded national skill scores. 

In conclusion, the BPD Outcomes Instrument found our graduates’ scores to be equivalent to or above those of graduates nationally in the areas of social work values, knowledge base, and skills.  These results indicate that our students have achieved the learning objectives of our program and are competent entry level generalist practitioners. 

Our program developed a brief assessment tool to obtain feedback from employers about our alumni/ae.  Specifically, the Employer Survey asks employers to rate their satisfaction with the skills, values, and knowledge of our graduates.   The Employer Survey is a 12-item, 7 point Likert-type scale where 1 = Extremely dissatisfied and 7 = Extremely satisfied. 

The Employer Surveys were sent with the BPD Outcomes Instrument along with a self addressed, stamped envelope.  Alumni/ae were asked to give the Employer Surveys and envelopes to their employers to complete and send back to our faculty.  A total of 48 Employer Surveys were sent out in the November mailing described earlier; three surveys were returned as undeliverable.  Out of the 45 remaining surveys, five surveys were returned by employers, resulting in an employer response rate of 11%.   

The next table displays each item from the Employer Survey with measures of central tendency describing employers’ level of satisfaction. 

Level of Employer Satisfaction with Employees Graduating from

Plymouth State University’s BSW Program 

Item*	N	Mean	Median	SD
Skills in case management	5	6.6	7.0	.55
Skills in counseling clients	4	6.5	7.0	1.00
Skills in group work	2	7.0	7.0	.00
Knowledge of human development	5	6.0	6.0	1.22
Demonstration of values and ethics	5	6.6	7.0	.55
Skills in problem assessment	5	6.8	7.0	.45
Sensitivity to issues of human diversity	5	6.8	7.0	.45
Ability to develop trusting client relationships	5	7.0	7.0	.00
Ability to understand how social policies affect client services	5	6.4	7.0	.89
Ability to serve as a client advocate	5	6.8	7.0	.45
Ability to maintain proper record keeping	5	7.0	7.0	.00
Ability to present oneself in a professional manner	5	7.0	7.0	.00

*1=extremely dissatisfied, 7=extremely satisfied 

According to these results, employers were extremely satisfied with graduates’ performance in the workplace.  Most notably, employers were extremely satisfied with graduates’ abilities in group work, developing relationships with clients, record keeping, and presenting him/herself in a professional manner.  Moreover, 80% of employers were extremely satisfied with graduates’ abilities in problem assessment, advocating for clients, and demonstrating sensitivity to human diversity.  Employers also suggested that they were satisfied (40%) to extremely satisfied (60%) with graduates’ skills in case management and demonstration of values and ethics.  Finally, 60% of employers were extremely satisfied with graduates’ skills in counseling clients and knowledge of how social policies affect services. 

The BPD Outcomes Instrument and our Employer Survey are important measurement tools for our program.  In New Hampshire, social workers are not licensed; rather, there is professional certification for MSW-trained clinical social workers only.  Therefore, we cannot track BSW alumnie/ae through the state certification or licensing process.  To strengthen our data from the BPD instrument, we have volunteered to participate in piloting the revised BPD instrument. 

Goal #2

B.         Preparation for Graduate Social Work Education 

The results of the BPD Survey indicate that 66.7% (n=6) of our graduates had completed or were in the process of completing a MSW degree as their first post-BSW degree.  An additional 50% (n=3) of our graduates indicated they had completed or were completing a MSW degree as their second post-BSW degree.  In our Spring 1998 graduating class, two out of fourteen students applied to graduate school.  Both of these students were accepted and will be attending Smith University and Simmons College.

In the past few years, the program has responded to an increase in student interest in information about graduate school.  General information about selecting schools and the application process was provided this past year in the Social Work Seminar, Student Club Meetings, and selected courses.  An informational session with guest speakers from the University of New England and the University of New Hampshire were held.  The faculty assisted individual students with specific questions about their applications and provided feedback on their written statements.  Overall, there seems to be greater interest in pursuing advanced graduate study in social work. 

Goal #3

C.        Responding to New Hampshire’s Social Service Needs 

The BPD Outcomes Survey identifies graduates by primary field of practice and urban/rural locations.  The following is a comparison of our alumni/ae to the national distribution.

Primary Field of Practice	n	Plymouth State University %	National Average %
Child Welfare	9	33.3	19.8
Mental Health	5	18.5	16.5
Geriatrics	1	3.7	12.4
Medical	5	18.5	11.8
Developmental Disabilities	4	14.8	9.3
Family	3	11.1	8.1
Public Welfare	0	0.0	4.8
Chemical Dependency	0	0.0	4.2
Corrections	0	0.0	4.1
Other	0	0.0	9.0

 These results show that the majority (70.3%) of our graduates were practicing in child welfare, mental health, and medical fields at the time of the survey.  The percentage of our graduates practicing in these fields is higher (22.2 points) than the national average of graduates working in these fields.  Moreover, the percentage of our graduates working with families and persons with developmental disabilities is 25.9%, which is 8.5 points higher than the national average. 

Comparison of PSU and national Percentages on primary Practice Locations 

Primary Practice Locations	n	Plymouth State University %	National Average %
Urban	8	28.6	35.0
Combination	5	17.9	27.2
Suburban	5	17.9	13.6
Small Town	5	17.9	13.0
Rural	5	17.9	11.2

 

These results indicate that our graduates were working in a variety of geographical locations at the time of the survey.  This is in contrast to the majority of graduates nationwide who were working primarily in urban and combination settings.  Because Plymouth State University is located in a rural area and many of our graduates come from rural areas, it seems that many of our graduates understand and value the importance of practicing in rural areas, as well as in other, more urban areas. 

Finally, our Employer Survey suggests that employers have hired our graduates due to their strong performance during the field practicum.  For some of our students, the practicum is a pathway to direct employment.   

In addition to measuring employment contributions, the program reviews faculty and student participation in the New Hampshire Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers (NH-NASW), informs students about New Hampshire’s needs and services, provides forums for professional development, and offers faculty consultation training, and program evaluation.  The faculty and students of the Social Work Program have a strong relationship with the New Hampshire Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers (NH-NASW).  For example, both Dr. Moniz and Dr. Gorin are past-Presidents of NH-NASW; Dr. Gorin currently serves as part-time Executive Director of the Chapter.  In these roles, both have remained abreast of the pressing concerns of social workers in the state and have participated in numerous legislative, educational, and community efforts to address the needs of social workers.  Currently, Dr. Moniz serves as Chair of NH - NASW’s Social and Legislative Action Committee.   Dr. Marcus, who was with the program from 1995-97, served as a member of the Board of Directors of the Chapter in 1996-97.  Dr. Rogers, who replaced Dr. Marcus in 1997, serves as Chair of the Chapter’s Continuing Education Committee.   She is currently running for the Board of Directors for 1998-99.  Our students have also participated in NH-NASW leadership roles.  A number of our students have been elected to the Board of Directors as BSW Representatives.  Last year’s Student of the Year Award was given to one of our students.  This year, one of our students is working as a student intern for NH-NASW. 

Students in the program have had the opportunity to learn about social services in New Hampshire and the needs of the population in various ways.  Guest speakers from different fields of practice have presented information to students in many of the courses, particularly in SW220 Social Work as a Profession.  Students have had the opportunity to attend Advisory Board meetings and meet with individual members of the board.  Field supervisors have shared their knowledge of community needs to practicum students.  For SW400 Methods of Social Work Research, the students have conducted a needs assessment for the Whole Village in Plymouth, NH.  This has given them a special opportunity to gather information about service needs while learning research methodology.