NCSSS has maintained an ongoing commitment to evaluating the outcomes of all of its educational programs and to using assessment findings to identify and sustain program strengths and inform program changes. The following sections provide information related to AS 8.0 (assessment plan and procedures) and AS 8.1 (plan implementation and use of assessment findings for continuous improvement) for the Baccalaureate curriculum and the Master’s foundation and advanced curricula. Presented separately, discussion of each program level includes: 1) an overview of each curriculum’s overall assessment plan, and b) a presentation of outcome measures and assessment findings. This is followed by a discussion of how assessment findings have been continuously used to improve program design and implementation in both the Master’s and Baccalaureate Programs.

AS 8.0: The program has an assessment plan and procedures for evaluating the outcome of each program objective. The plan specifies the measurement procedures and methods used to evaluate the outcome of each program objective.

The Baccalaureate Program has a comprehensive assessment plan that includes specific procedures for evaluating the outcome of each program objective. It uses a mixed-method approach for the purposes of triangulation of data, complementarity, initiation, development, and expansion (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The inclusion of uniform and standardized evaluation measures increases confidence in the reliability and validity of assessment findings. The inclusion of qualitative data allows more flexibility and depth. As a mixed-method design, the qualitative data augments the information gleaned from the quantitative measures, promotes the generation of new perspectives, and builds upon the previous findings. Beyond ongoing monitoring and evaluation of student progress that is part of normal course instruction, this assessment plan specifies the measurement procedures and methods used to evaluate the outcome of each program objective. Table 47 provides an overview of the quantitative outcome measures used to assess each program objective.

BA Program Objectives

Outcome Measures

1. Understand the history of professional social work, including past traditions and current issues.

• Field Student Self-Assessment Form

• Field Educator Assessment Form

• Student Field Evaluation Form

• Senior Thesis

2. Apply critical thinking skills to social work practice.

• Field Student Self-Assessment Form

• Field Educator Assessment Form

• Student Field Evaluation Form

• Senior Thesis

BA Program Objectives	Outcome Measures
3. Know the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers and apply social work values and ethics to social work practice within all work environments.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis
4. Engage in respectful, knowledgeable, skillful, and nondiscriminatory practice with particular attention to people who may have been discriminated against on the basis of age, class, color, culture, disability, national origin, ethnicity, race, religion, family structure, marital status, sex, and sexual orientation.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis
5. Develop knowledge and skills necessary for generalist practice with systems of all sizes, including individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis • Area Concentration Achievement Test
6. Apply a theoretical approach supported by empirical evidence to the helping process including relationship building, assessment, planning, and intervention with client systems of all sizes, with special attention to populations-at-risk.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis • Area Concentration Achievement Test
7. Develop the knowledge and skills necessary for professional practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form
8. Take personal responsibility for professional development through supervision and consultation.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form
9. Promote social and economic justice.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis
10. Prepare social work practitioners to critically analyze existing social policy, including global, federal, state, local, and agency polices and programs, in the context of American social welfare history and contemporary society.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Senior Thesis • Area Concentration Achievement Test
11. Apply knowledge of bio-psycho-social-spiritual development and theoretical frameworks of human behavior to an understanding of individuals, families, groups, and organizations across the life span using a person-in-environment approach.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Instructor Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form • Senior Thesis • Area Concentration Achievement Test
12. Participate in scientific inquiry through the development of research knowledge & skills to evaluate research studies, apply research findings to practice, and evaluate personal practice.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Instructor Assessment Form • Area Concentration Achievement Test • Senior Thesis
13. Function within the structure of organizations and service delivery systems and seek necessary organizational change.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form
14. Learn to use communication skills differentially across client populations, colleagues, and communities to affect change and to improve service delivery to agency clients.	• Field Student Self-Assessment Form • Field Educator Assessment Form • Student Field Evaluation Form

Baccalaureate Field Student Self-Assessment and Field Educator Assessment Forms

Implemented during 2006-2007, the “Field Student Self-Assessment” and “Field Educator Assessment” forms are new additions to the continuous improvement process at NCSSS, designed to allow targeted evaluation of all program objectives from two different perspectives: students in the senior year and Field Educators. The Field Student Self-Assessment form asks students enrolled in senior field placements to evaluate themselves on each of the 14 Baccalaureate Program Objectives. Students were instructed to assess their own abilities at this point in their education using a 5-point response format (1 = unsatisfactory; 2 = less than adequate; 3 = adequate; 4 = more than adequate; and 5 = excellent). A corresponding rating scale, the Field Educator Assessment form, was distributed to Field Educators, who were asked to rate their field student’s performance on each of the 14 program objectives. A rating of 3, or adequate, was set as the benchmark for all ratings by both students and Field Educators (see Appendix D for copies of these two assessment forms.) It should be noted that respondents were informed that this information would be used to provide feedback about the program as a whole; not as evaluation of any individual student’s performance. Therefore, both students and Field Educators were instructed to not place students’ or Field Educators’ names on the instrument.

All data were collected during the Spring 2007 semester. Assessment forms were administered to seniors in their Field Seminars. Students were given a copy of the Field Educator Assessment form to take to their Agency Field Educator, with a letter explaining the form, and a stamped, self-addressed return envelope. A follow-up email from the Director of Field Education encouraged Agency Field Educators to complete and mail back their forms. This assessment process will be used in subsequent years to allow for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of program objectives. Six seniors and five Field Educators provided ratings on these outcome measures, (100% and 83% participation rate, respectively).

Review of these data indicates that both students and Field Educators generally report attainment of expected competencies (see Table 48). Student self-ratings showed means of greater than the benchmark (3 or “adequate”) for 13 of the 14 program objectives, with only objective #7 (Develops knowledge and skills for practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations) receiving a lower mean rating of 2.83. Field Educators’ ratings of student competencies reached the benchmark for all program objectives. It should be noted that for 9 of the 14 program objectives, Field Educators rated students higher than students rated themselves.

Program Objective	Student Ratings			Field Educator Ratings
Program Objective	Mean	SD	Range (Min/Max)	Mean	SD	Range (Min/Max)
1. Understand the history of professional social work, including past traditions and current issues.	4.00	.63	3-5	3.80	.45	3-4
2. Apply critical thinking skills to social work practice.	4.33	.82	3-5	4.60	.55	4-5
3. Know the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers and apply social work values and ethics to social work practice within all work environments.	3.83	.98	3-5	4.20	.45	4-5
4. Engage in respectful, knowledgeable, skillful, and nondiscriminatory practice with particular attention to people who may have been discriminated against on the basis of age, class, color, culture, disability, national origin, ethnicity, race, religion, family structure, marital status, sex, and sexual orientation.	4.33	1.21	2-5	4.80	.45	4-5
5. Develop knowledge and skills necessary for generalist practice with systems of all sizes, including individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities.	4.33	.82	3-5	4.20	.45	4-5
6. Apply a theoretical approach supported by empirical evidence to the helping process including relationship building, assessment, planning, and intervention with client systems of all sizes, with special attention to populations-at-risk.	3.67	.82	3-5	4.00	1.00	3-5
7. Develop the knowledge and skills necessary for professional practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations.	2.83	1.33	1-5	4.25	.50	4-5
8. Take personal responsibility for professional development through supervision and consultation.	4.67	.52	4-5	4.80	.45	4-5
9. Promote social and economic justice.	4.33	.52	4-5	3.80	.84	3-5
10. Prepare social work practitioners to critically analyze existing social policy, including global, federal, state, local, and agency polices and programs, in the context of American social welfare history and contemporary society.	4.17	.75	3-5	4.00	0.0	4-4
11. Apply knowledge of bio-psycho-social-spiritual development and theoretical frameworks of human behavior to an understanding of individuals, families, groups, and organizations across the life span using a person-in-environment approach.	4.50	.55	4-5	4.20	.45	4-5
12. Participate in scientific inquiry through the development of research knowledge & skills to evaluate research studies, apply research findings to practice, and evaluate personal practice.	3.00	.63	2-4	4.00	0.0	4-4
13. Function within the structure of organizations and service delivery systems and seek necessary organizational change.	4.00	.63	3-5	4.00	.82	3-5
14. Learn to use communication skills differentially across client populations, colleagues, and communities to affect change and to improve service delivery to agency clients.	3.67	.82	3-5	4.50	.58	4-5

Further analysis included identification of the objectives that were rated as the “top three” among both students and Field Educators (highlighted in Table 48). The program objectives rated first and second by students were: program objective #8 (Takes responsibility for professional development through supervision and consultation, M = 4.67) and objective #11 (Applies theory and knowledge of development and human behavior of individuals, families, groups, and organizations across the lifespan, M = 4.50). The third highest rating was shared by three objectives: #3 (Knows and applies social work values), #4 (Practices without discrimination, with respect to a variety of differences), and #5 (Develops knowledge and skills of generalist practice with client systems of all sizes) (M = 4.33). Field Educators also rated program objectives #8 and #4 as two of the highest (M = 4.80 in both areas), but rated objective #2 (Applies critical thinking skills, M = 4.60) as one of their top three. Students and field instructors were not in agreement as to the two lowest rated objectives, with students rating program objective #7 the lowest (Develops knowledge and skills for practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations, M = 2.83), followed by #12 (Develops knowledge and skills to evaluate research studies, apply research findings to practice and evaluate own practice, M = 3.00), whereas Field Educators rated objective #1 (Understand history of social work) and #9 (Promotes social and economic justice) the lowest (M = 3.80 for both areas).

Additionally, percentages for each possible rating were examined to determine if the Baccalaureate Program was achieving the benchmark of “adequate” for the majority of students in all areas. Review of the student ratings for each of the program objective areas showed that the majority of students fell at or above the benchmark for most of the 14 objectives, with ratings most often falling between 3 (“adequate”) and 5 (“excellent”). However, a few students rated themselves as less than adequate in three areas: objective #4 (Practices without discrimination, with respect to a variety of differences; 16.7%, n = 1); objective #7 (Develops knowledge and skills for practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations and objective; 34.4%, n = 2); and objective #12 (Develops knowledge and skills to evaluate research studies, apply research findings to practice and evaluate own practice; 16.7%, n = 2). Of these, only one student rated themselves as 1 (“unsatisfactory”), which was for objective #7 (Develops knowledge and skills for practice with diverse religious and spiritual client populations). No Field Educator rated a student below 3 or “adequate” for any of the 14 program objectives.

These findings show that, based on student self-assessment, 100% of the students reached or exceeded the benchmark for 11 of the 14 Baccalaureate Program Objectives, with 83% of students achieving this target for two additional objectives and 67% for the remaining objective. Based on Field Educator ratings, 100% of the students demonstrated at least “adequate” attainment of all 14 objectives. Taken together, the mean ratings and the percentages of students meeting or exceeding the benchmark of “adequate” suggest that the Baccalaureate Program has been successful in achieving expected student competencies.

All seniors are evaluated by their agency Field Educators at the end of the spring semester after completing 480 hours of field education. This assessment is conducted using a comprehensive “Student Field Evaluation” form consisting of 47 items, which includes five different areas (Student Use of Self, Social Work Processes, Understanding of the Agency, Supervisory Process, and Professional Behavior). Field students and Field Educators also have the opportunity to include additional items to address skills unique to the student in a sixth area (Professional Skills). The first five areas include a total of 16 items that are identified as “threshold items” –

or items that are considered as essential for successful completion of the field placement and eventual social work practice. This assessment mechanism provides targeted information concerning how students demonstrate attainment of program objectives in a field placement setting. As such, this evaluative process contributes greatly to the program’s understanding of student competencies, especially as they relate to the real world of social work practice.

All items are scored using a 10-point rating system (1-2 = Unsatisfactory, performance is well below expectations; 3-4 = Fair, performance is below expectations; 5-6 = Satisfactory, performance meets expectations; 7-8 = Very good, performance exceeds expectations; 9-10 = Outstanding, performance far exceeds expectations). Beyond quantitative ratings, Field Educators are also asked to provide narratives concerning areas of strength and areas of educational gaps or difficulties; particularly, specific feedback is required regarding any area receiving a score of less than 5. (See Appendix D for a copy of this evaluation form.) Different areas of the Student Field Evaluation form allow assessment of various aspects of 12 of the 14 Baccalaureate Program Objectives. Table 49 provides an overview of evaluation areas, total number of items, number of threshold items, and objectives addressed in each area.

Baccalaureate Student Field Evaluation Form: Assessment Areas, Number of Total and Threshold Items, and Program Objectives Addressed

Assessment Area	Total Number of Items	Number of Threshold Items	Program Objectives Assessed
Student Use of Self	7	3	#3, #4, #7, #14
Social Work Processes	11	4	#2, #5, #6, #9, #11, #14
Understanding of the Agency	9	2	#1, #2, #13
Supervisory Process	9	3	#2, #13, #14
Professional Behavior	11	4	#2, #3, #5, #8, #13, #14
Professional Skills	varies	N/A	N/A

Data from the Baccalaureate Student Field Evaluation form have been compiled for the past seven years. NCSSS program faculty have set the benchmark for acceptable student performance as receiving a rating of 5 or more on each of the 16 threshold items included in the evaluation form. Table 50 shows the percentages of students who passed, withdrew, or failed field for academic years from 2000-2001 to 2006-2007. All of the students reached the targeted benchmark for five of the past seven years, but one student failed in each of the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 academic years. The Baccalaureate Program considers these outcomes to be reflective of the professional gate-keeping responsibility of social work education. An additional student withdrew from field in 2005-2006.