YSU Branding: CV, PPT and Posters

2. YSU Branding: CV, PPT and Posters Azadeh Masalehdan Block, MSW, Ph.D.

3. Useful YSU websites Official Logos and Guidelines • http://web.ysu.edu/gen/ysu/Official_YSU_Trademarks_m352.html

4. Why FORMAT matters • Professionalism • Representative of YSU • Lead by example (for students)

5. Curriculum Vitae: Tips • Everything since your professional terminal degree (MA, MS, MSW) • Do not include from post college – pre grad school (looks like padding) • Create order • Date commonalities (use same format throughout) • Date, number, name on each page

6. Poster: Tips • Large enough font to be readable 3 feet away • Use approved YSU logo Basic Guidelines for “what to expect” from a poster session: http://web.ysu.edu/gen/coe_generated_bin/documents/basic_module/ERE_Poster_Submission_Guidelines.pdf

7. Poster creation TIPS How to make a poster using PPT: • http://web.ysu.edu/gen/ysu_generated_bin/documents/basic_module/How_to_Make_a_Poster_Using_PowerPoint_Article.pdf How to make a BEAUTIFUL poster website: • http://www.ischool.pitt.edu/sisint/studentservices/community/posters.pdf

8. BSW Student Competence in Critical Thinking and Engaging Diversity Introduction The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) accredits BSW programs in the US and Canada. CSWE’s 2008 Educational and Program Accreditation Standards stipulate 10 areas of competence for BSW education. Each academic year we evaluate our students across these 10 areas of competence in both classroom and field education. This year we reported on competencies 2.1.3: Applies Critical Thinking to inform and communicate practice judgments and 2.1.4: Engages diversity and difference in practice. We recognize the importance of measuring our student outcomes from a variety of angles and stakeholders. From the perspectives of the students AS students, AS alumni and from the perspective of their professors and field education supervisors. We strive to provide data that is meaningful to our students, faculty, college, university, advisory board and community partners. Social work is a profession that depends on us working effectively with and within the community. Method- Measure 2: Evaluation of students A Field Learning Evaluationis completed each semester of a student’s field education by the Field Educator to evaluate the student’s performance within their practicum placement. The data presented here is from the 2nd term of the student’s field education. The Field Evaluation assesses the students’ achievement of the mastery of Program Competencies (SLO’s) via operationalized Practice Behaviors, utilizing the same performance rating scale mentioned above. Overall, the Program has set a benchmark score of “2- Emerging Competence” or better for each competency/learning outcome, based on Program expectations that competency in each of the designated 10 CSWE competencies will be demonstrated by students in the BSW program. Discussion Our students are meeting the benchmarks set forth by our program. For Competency 2.1.3: “Critical Thinking”: The majority of our students feel confident in their ability to ability to apply Critical Thinking to inform and communicate practice judgments. Within each competency there are several “practice behaviors” – our students felt most confident (mean score 3.5) in their ability to distinguish, appraise and integrate multiple sources of knowledge, including research-based knowledge, and practice wisdom. A small number of students still struggle with their ability to apply Critical Thinking to inform and communicate practice judgments at this time. Within each competency there are several practice behaviors- our students lowest score, 3.14 (which still indicates competence) was of their ability to analyze models of assessment, prevention, intervention and evaluation. For Competency 2.1.4: “Diversity” The majority of our students feel confident in their ability to engage diversity and difference in practice. Within each competency there are several practice behaviors – our students felt most confident (mean score 3.4) in their ability to recognize the extent to which a culture’s structures and values may oppress, marginalize, alienate, create or enhance privilege and power. A small number of students still struggle with their ability to engage diversity and difference in practice at this time. Within each competency there are several practice behaviors – our students’ lowest score, 3 (which still indicates competence) was in their ability to view themselves as learners and engage those whom they work as informants. Results A total of 66 alumni returned the survey in the summer of 2013. Based on outcome data (using the 0-4 performance rating scale), for Competency 2.1.3: “Critical Thinking” a mean score of 3.33 was recorded; for competency 2.1.4: “Diversity” a mean score of 3.25 was recorded. A total of 32 students were assessed via Field Evaluations during the 2012-2013 academic year. Based on outcome data (using the 0-4 performance rating scale), , for Competency 2.1.3: “Critical Thinking” a mean score of 3.23 was recorded for the first term and a score of 3.36 was recorded for the second term; for competency 2.1.4: “Diversity” a mean score of 3.22 was recorded for the first term and a score of 3.32 was recorded for the second term. Method, Measure 1: Evaluation of alumni 66 BSW alumni mailed back a completed survey. Survey questions specifically focus on Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) competencies and practice behaviors. This is an indirect assessment measure. The rubric used by the alumnus to measure their self-assessed competence using a set performance rating scale (which students are familiar with since this same scale was used in their field placement in the BSW program), with “0” representing “Unacceptable Competence”, “1” representing “Insufficient Competence”, “2” representing “Emerging Competence”, “3” representing “Competence”, and “4” representing “Exemplary Competence”. Overall, the Program has set a benchmark score of “3- Competence” or better for each competency/learning outcome, based on Program expectations that competency in each of the designated 10 CSWE competencies will be demonstrated by graduates of the BSW program. Modifications to our program assessment As a result of these and other aspects of our assessment our department chose to modify the benchmarks for first semester and second semester field learning. Initially we had a benchmark of 3 or “competence” for both terms for all 10 areas of competence. We realized that our first semester students are just beginning their field experience, which is the signature pedagogy in BSW education, therefore a benchmark of 2, or “emerging competence” would be more appropriate for the first semester of their field, and that a score of 3 would be a more appropriate benchmark for the second semester of field. We hope that this results in a change in the scoring from the perspective of the field educators who will now see a “2” as an appropriate benchmark for students in the first semester. Presented by Azadeh Masalehdan Block, Ph.D., MSW and Karla A. Wyant, MSSA, LISW-S, Department of Social Work

9. PowerPoint: Tips • Only write main points on slides • AVOID reading slides verbatim • Engage audience • Appropriate pictures; audio, video

10. Assessing Cultural Humility (Competence) in a BSW Student PopulationAzadeh Masalehdan Block, MSW, PhDCouncil on Social Work EducationAnnual ConferenceTampa, FL

11. Presentation Objectives • Participants will be able to describe cultural humility (competence) in BSW education • Participants will be able to compare the pre-test and post-test cultural humility (competence) of participants at a community college located BSW degree completion program and a traditional university located BSW program. • Participants will be able to interpret the results from the study and determine if the CBMCS could be used in the learner’s own institutional setting.

12. Background • Census data forecasts the number of individuals identifying themselves as minorities will outnumber the majority by the year 2042 (US Census, 2012). • Individuals in social services must take into account the increasing diversity in client populations and ensure cultural humility to deliver those services competently and ethically (Gabbard 2011, Jackson & Samuels 2011, Jani, Ortiz, Pierce & Sowbell 2011, Krentzman & Townsend 2008, Davis 2007

13. Why the shift from competence to humility? • Recent training at YSU on Cultural Humility • Recognized that competence indicates completion: finality • Humility as a process, never complete, always striving to do more • Be more introspective • Learn more about others

14. Humility vs. Competence • Hook (2014) defines cultural humility as an ongoing process at both the interpersonal and intrapersonal levels, • as opposed to a skill that can be mastered as is implied with the term cultural competency • Research suggests that the construct of cultural humilitycan contribute to more effective therapeutic alliances (Hook, 2014; Hook, Davis, Owen, Worthington & Utsey, 2013).

15. NASW Code of Ethics on Cultural Humility • “Social workers should understand culture and its function in human behavior and society, recognizing the strengths that exist in all cultures” (Section 1.05.a) • “Social workers should have a knowledge base of their clients’ cultures and be able to demonstrate competence in the provision of services that are sensitive to clients’ cultures and to differences among people and cultural groups” (Section 1.05.b)

16. Key Components of Cultural Humility • Krentzman and Townsend (2008) examined what skills were needed and noted that cultural competence (humility) entails “…having the beliefs, knowledge and skills necessary to work effectively with individuals different from one’s self; that cultural competence includes all forms of differences; and that issues of social justice cannot be overlooked” (p. 8). • Exploring one’s own concepts of culture to include, for example, the elements of race, ethnicity, class, gender or sexual orientation encourages students to gain insight into their own perceptions of culture and the role they play in societal oppression.

17. Theory – Literature Review • Similarly, Critical Race theory describes the dilemma of how in the quest to “equalize oppressions under a multicultural umbrella unintentionally promotes a color-blind mentality the eclipses the significance of institutionalized racism” (Abrams & Moio, 2009, p. 245). • Colorblindness hurts our quest for cultural humility • Jani, Ortiz, Pierce and Sowbell (2011) emphasized the importance of nondiscrimination and establishing a safe learning environment in which students can learn to understand, appreciate and respect diversity.

18. Literature Review • Davis (2007) examined the reports of clients and providers in pediatric mental health settings and, through concept mapping, identified that often providers’ and clients’ perceptions of culture do not line up. • Understanding of the complexity of culture requires awareness on behalf of the therapist pertaining to the impact culture can have on client’s needs.

19. Literature Review • Tori and Ducker (2004) explored the potential to increase multicultural values within a graduate psychology program and to maintain these changes over time. • In addition, this study aimed to evaluate the programs ability to maintain advancements in long term gains in cultural humility. • Tori and Ducker (2004) highlighted that open communication between students and faculty is pivotal in addressing cultural issues in the classroom; this includes willingness to embrace necessary conflict pertaining to cultural differences

20. What we know about BSW students • We lack a literature specific to social workers or to social work students • This study aims to begin this work with students and then take this assessment to social workers in the field • In this study we used California Brief Multicultural Competence Scale (CBMCS) in its original form to see its strengths/places for improvement • Major weakness is focus on mental health to the detriment of other aspects of generalist education

21. CSWE 2008 EPAS Standard 2.1.4: Engages diversity and difference in practice and its related practice behaviors (PB), specifically students will be able to: • recognize the extent to which a culture’s structures and values may oppress, marginalize, alienate, or create or enhance privilege and power (PB 14); • gain sufficient self-awareness to eliminate the influence of personal biases and values in working with diverse groups (PB 15); • recognize and communicate their understanding of the importance of difference in shaping life experiences (PB 16); • view themselves as learners and engage those with whom they work as informants (PB 17) (Council on Social Work Education, 2008).

22. The Course • Cultural Diversity Practice • Upper division BSW course • Focuses on cultural awareness, bias and humility as well as understanding and empathizing with the experiences of diverse populations (racial, ethnic, socioeconomic status, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion and physical or mental disability).

23. The Course, cont’d • Students apply theory, differential assessment and learn intervention/and self-reflection skills • Skills are critical to effective social work practice with populations that may, or may not, differ from themselves.

24. Course Assignments • Standardized across all sections • Ethnographic case study (own family) • Religious diversity assignment • Research paper on an at-risk/vulnerable population group • TWO reflective journals about specific themes related to cultural diversity, oppression, discrimination, and social/economic justice • A personal plan for culturally “competent” social work practice

25. Method • (Baseline) Administer CBMCS within 2 weeks of course start date • (Follow up) Administer CBMCS AGAIN within 2 weeks of course end date • Administer to all BSW students (at main and CC campuses)

26. California Brief Multicultural Competence Scale (CBMCS) • 21 questions • Four Factors: • Multicultural Knowledge (MC) • Awareness of Cultural Barriers (AC) • Sensitivity and Responsiveness to Consumers (SRC) • Socio-cultural Diversities (SCD)

27. CBMCS • Internal consistency reliability, Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .75 to .90. • Criterion related validity is demonstrated by the predictable correlations between the MCI subscale and the questionnaire subscales (Gamst et al., 2004).

28. Participants • 77 consented; 54 completed both baseline and follow up • Table 1 (demographics, next slide) • Students at MC were significantly younger • Groups did not different in distribution of race, parental status or financial independence

31. Results • No significant interaction effects for ANOVA in regards to race, parental status and financial independence • Main effect for race on AC subscale such that African American students scored higher than Caucasian students (F[1,47] =13.96, p = 0.001). • Main effect for parental status on MK subscale such that parents with children scored lower than those without at both time points (F[1, 50] = 5.00, p = 0.030).

32. Results • Scores from all subscales increased at both campuses (Main effect of time point: ps < 0.001). • Significant campus x time point interaction on the SCD subscale. • Follow up t-tests indicated that for this scale, while students from both campuses showed increased scores over time, students at the CC campus scored lower than those at the MC at baseline, but this difference was gone at follow-up.

34. Discussion • Overall students saw a significant increase in their self-reported cultural humility after taking the Cultural Diversity Practice course • Gives course good standing in terms of university, departmental and CSWE assessment processes of cultural humility • Indicates students are doing work necessary to improve their cultural humility.

35. Discussion • African American students have more awareness in terms of multicultural awareness BEFORE the course; but after the course White student knowledge has caught up to them • Highlights experience of being a minority in the US and how racism, racial disparities, affect baseline perceptions of multicultural awareness • Indicates empathy building on part of Caucasian students • Demonstrates capacity of course to impart importance of multicultural awareness

36. Discussion • Being a parent seemed to buffer one’s multicultural knowledge, such that those students with children tended to demonstrate less attainment of such knowledge at both baseline and follow up. • Parents in young or middle adulthood are primarily focused on the tasks of raising their family, and perhaps are less focused on exploring or learning more about other cultures.

37. Discussion • Community college students did significantly worse on the multicultural knowledge subscale at the baseline time point but by follow up scored similarly to the main campus students. • Our community college sample is predominantly rural and Caucasian. • This rural population is more isolated and has less exposure to diverse populations than our more urban Caucasian students at the main campus. • Multicultural knowledge comes from exposure, experience and non-competitive relationships with those of a different racial, ethnic, religious, economic background

38. Strengths/Limitations • Sample size • Pedagogical differences in training (cultural humility) • Some questions in the measure focuses on mental health; which is not the exclusive or even primary focus of BSW education

39. Directions for Current/Future Research • Growing sample size • Conducted full day Cultural Humility training for adjunct and full time faculty (grant from YSU Office of Assessment) • Adapting CBMCS for use with social work population: Brief Multicultural Humility Scale – Social Work (BMHS-SW) • Including more sites- If interested in becoming a partner site please contact me at amblock@ysu.edu • Can lead to opportunities to assess data and explore other variables for publication

40. CV Sample • Open up CV template (YSU) • Open up my example