Student Assessment of Self-Efficacy and Practice Readiness Following Simulated Instruction in an Undergraduate Social Work Program

ABSTRACT

The use of simulated instruction is a growing trend in social work education. This study examined the effectiveness of simulated instruction with undergraduate social work students. In this mixed methods study, the extent to which simulated instruction improved self-efficacy and practice readiness was assessed. Results of the study suggest that simulated instruction helps improve key practice skills and increases recognition of diversity in practice. Moreover, students self-reported increased mastery in interviewing, managing emotions, and engaging in culturally competent practice.     

Assessment activities at large,research universities

Assessment and outcomes measurement is receiving considerable attention in higher education nationwide. But what are colleges and universities doing and calling assessment? To answer these and other questions, a telephone survey was conducted with a sample of large, research universities. Responses to the survey are presented and discussed in this paper. Results indicated limited university involvement in activities commonly associated with the current assessment “movement,” i.e., measures of added value or student progress and growth. Instead, much of the reported activities are “traditional” testing and evaluation activities such as placement testing and student evaluation of instruction. In sum, assessmentis evaluation at large, research universities.     

Teaching Trump: Student Recommendations to Ensure Safe Discussions in a Time of Polarized Political Divide

ABSTRACT

This article includes findings from a mixed method survey at a large, public midwestern university following the election of Donald J. Trump as the president of the United States. It examines student perceptions about effective engagement in political discourse within social work classes. Survey questions urged students to suggest how instructors might facilitate this dialogue fairly in the classroom given the passionate emotions and differing viewpoints surrounding the election, while acknowledging and educating about values espoused by the profession. Findings from this study illustrate the challenges that students face in having these conversations and outline their recommendations to social work educators for facilitating safe, sensitive, and inclusive classroom discussion about politics.     

The relationship of teacher ratings of executive functions to emergent literacy in Head Start

Reading and Writing - The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent relationships between selected teacher-rated executive function (EF) and a comprehensive array of emergent literacy...     

Selecting the Qualified: A Standards-Based Teacher Education Admission Process

A standards-based admission process for qualifying caring and competent candidates for teacher preparation is presented. The major elements of the admission process include prerequisite standards that address the knowledge, dispositions, and skills candidates should possess upon entrance to the teacher education program; multiple assessments that evaluate the prerequisite standards; and an admission interview process that involves collaboration of arts and sciences faculty, education faculty, undergraduate students, and professionals from the field. A unique aspect of the admission process is its strong focus on dispositional standards. Emphasis is placed on qualifying future teachers into teacher education programs based upon demonstrated evidence of their meeting defensible and education community supported admission standards.     

Writing evaluation: rater and task effects on the reliability of writing scores for children in Grades 3 and 4

We examined how raters and tasks influence measurement error in writing evaluation and how many raters and tasks are needed to reach a desirable level of .90 and .80 reliabilities for children in Grades 3 and 4. A total of 211 children (102 boys) were administered three tasks in narrative and expository genres, respectively, and their written compositions were evaluated in widely used evaluation methods for developing writers: holistic scoring, productivity, and curriculum-based writing scores. Results showed that 54 and 52% of variance in narrative and expository compositions were attributable to true individual differences in writing. Students’ scores varied largely by tasks (30.44 and 28.61% of variance), but not by raters. To reach the reliability of .90, multiple tasks and raters were needed, and for the reliability of .80, a single rater and multiple tasks were needed. These findings offer important implications about reliably evaluating children’s writing skills, given that writing is typically evaluated by a single task and a single rater in classrooms and even in some state accountability systems.