Analyzing the Impact of Social Work Education on Students’ Attitudes toward Poverty and Impoverished Persons

1. 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

2. 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) multi-ethnic study, and Krumer-Nevo and Lev-Wiesel’s (2005) BSW study in Israel.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. Research Questions Q1: Does level of social work education influence students’ attitude towards poverty? H1: 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.

7. Research Questions Q2: Does perception of financial situation influence students’ attitude towards poverty? H2: Students who perceive their financial situation as insecure will demonstrate a more structural attitude towards poverty than those who do not.

8. Research Questions Q3: Does political affiliation influence students’ attitudes towards poverty? H3: Students who affiliate with the political left will demonstrate a more structural attitude towards poverty than those who do not.

9. Research Design • Quasi Experimental Design • Comparison Group Pretest Posttest Design • Convenience Sample • Survey Methods

10. Sample Characteristics (N = 166) Gender Female (84.3%) Male (15.7%) Age Mean (21.79) S.D. (6.31) Ethnicity Aboriginal (.6%) African-Canadian/American (9.1%) Asian (4.2%) Caucasian (73.3%) Other (12.7%) Major Social Work Major (52.5%) Psychology/Sociology/Political Science (31.9%) Other (15.6%)

11. Sample Characteristics (continued) Social Work Education Lower level Course (74.7%) Upper Level Course (25.3%) Financial Security Secure (78.7%) Insecure (21.3%) Ideological Affiliation Centre/Right (53.0%) Left (13.4%) None/Other (33.5%)

12. Instrument Attitude about Poverty and Poor People Scale (Atherton et al., 1993) • 37-item Likert Scale • Reliability (Atherton et al., 1993) • Internal Consistency Coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha): .93 • The split-half reliability: .87 • Validity • Construct validity “If poor people worked harder, they could escape poverty”. “Welfare mothers have babies to get more $$”.

13. Instrument (continued) • Revised Version (Internal Consistency Coefficient) • Pretest: α = .83 • Posttest: α = .92 • Revised Items Food Stamps  Welfare benefits

14. Issues and Perspectives in Social Welfare • Text was “The New Structural Social Work” (Mullaly, 2007) • Examines various ideologies that shape social welfare • Value conflicts and their impact on policy Content includes: • Nature of capitalism (Laissez-faire, Keynesianism, neo-liberal)

15. Issues and Perspectives Cont’d • Liberalism • Social Democracy • Conservatism • Feminism • Socialism & Marxism • Third way • Structural Social Work (Policy-practice)

16. Lower Level Courses • Generalist & Specialist Social Work Practice • Social Work History • Ideological Foundations & Values of Social Work • 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

17. Lower Level Courses (continued) • Social Welfare • Income Security • Homelessness • Professionalization of Social Work • Social Work with Children & Youth • Social Work and Health/Women/Aboriginal Peoples

18. Estimated Marginal Means: Posttest VARIABLE MEAN SE SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION Lower level129.7 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 ________________________________________________________

19. Social Work Education

20. PERCEIVED FINANCIAL SECURITY

21. IDEOLOGICAL AFFILIATION

22. Results: Three-way ANCOVA Source SS df MS_ ______F____ SUMPRETEST 10855.772 1 10855.772 78.091** SWKEDUC 697.418 1 697.418 5.017* FINSECURITY 632.376 1 632.376 4.549* IDEOAFFIL 497.633 2 248.817 1.790 SWK*FS .062 1 .062 .000 SWK*IDEOAFFIL 458.246 2 229.123 1.648 FS*IDEOAFFIL 508.193 2 254.457 1.830 SWK*FS*IDEOAFFIL 17.053 2 8.526 .061 **p < .001 * p < .05 Adj. R2 = .421

23. 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

24. 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