Re-Visioning GW\'s Human Services Program: Proposed Changes Emerging from a Comprehensive Program Assessment

14
















Re-Visioning GW's Human Services Program:

Proposed Changes Emerging from a Comprehensive Program Assessment




Submitted to Chair Greg Squires and the faculty of the Sociology Department
by Dr. Emily Morrison, Director of Human Services,
and in consultation with and support from the Human Services faculty




The George Washington University

Washington, DC

August 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………...3
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………...4
What is Human Services?.............................................................................................................4
History of GW's Human Services Program………………………………………………….....4
The Need for Program Assessment……………………………………………………………..5
Key Insights from the Literature………………………………………………………………..5
Program Assessment Methodology…………………………………………………………….6
Renewed Program Purpose……………………………………………………………………..7
Major Proposed Changes……………………………………………………………………….8
1) Program name………………………………………………………………………..8
2) Sequence of learning experiences……………………………………………….…...9
3) New course offering…………………………………………………………….……9
4) Major degree requirement changes……………………………………………….….9
5) Minor degree requirement changes……………………………………………….....11
6) University designations……………………………………………………………...12
7) Internal Program revisions….……………………………………………………….12
How do the proposed changes affect the Sociology Department?..............................................12
How do the proposed changes support GW's new strategic plan?..............................................13
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………………..14
References………………………………………………………………………………………15

Appendix A: Proposed Changes to GW's Human Services Program……………………….....17
Appendix B: Current Human Services Major Requirements……………………………… ….19
Appendix C: Sequence of Proposed Human Services and Social Justice
Academic Requirements………………………………………………………………..20
Appendix D: High Impact Practices and the Human Services and Social Justice
Curriculum………………………………………………………………………………22
Appendix E: Sample Course Map……………………………………………………………....23







Acknowledgements

With deep gratitude to the Human Services faculty, without whom this work would not exist.
Ms. Karyn Cassella
Dr. Michelle Kelso
Dr. Peter Konwerski
Professor Emeritus Honey W. Nashman
Ms. Sarah Pula
Mr. Jared Roberts
Ms. Elizabeth Shrader
Dr. Roger Whitaker

Each of you has played a vital role in providing our students with meaningful learning experiences, as well as offering key insights into how our Program can be even more resilient and successful. Thank you for sharing your work and who you are with the GW Human Services Program.

Thanks to Dr. Michelle Kelso for allowing the graduate-level qualitative research class project to focus on the Human Services Program. The class provided additional data and an outsider's perspective, which were both helpful.





Re-Visioning GW's Human Services Program

The George Washington University is in the midst of renewal and innovation, facing a critical juncture in its evolution as an educational entity. Recent changes in university leadership opened up new opportunities to reflect, assess, and develop a strategic plan for the third century of GW. This new strategic plan calls for programs to build on strengths and to embrace an educational vision that "educates the next generation of citizen leaders and shapes the future" (GW, February 2013, p. 5). GW's Human Services Program aspires to fulfill this vision and like the larger university is at a unique point in its own evolution. In 2010, one of the original founders and beloved leaders of GW's Human Services Program retired. Hence, a natural opportunity emerged for the Program to reflect and assess its strengths, as well as identify ways that it could provide an even stronger educational experience, meeting the challenge put forth by university leaders and responding to the changing needs within the field of Human Services. What follows are the description and outcomes of the Program's comprehensive assessment. Results from the assessment informed the proposed changes, which ready the Program to educate graduates to be the citizen leaders that our communities and field need.


What is Human Services?

"The field of Human Services is broadly defined, uniquely approaching the objective of meeting human needs through an interdisciplinary knowledge base, focusing on prevention as well as remediation of problems, and maintaining a commitment to improving the overall quality of life of service populations. The Human Services profession is one which promotes improved service delivery systems by addressing not only the quality of direct services, but also by seeking to improve accessibility, accountability, and coordination among professionals and agencies in service delivery." (National Organization for Human Services, Accessed November 3, 2012, http://www.nationalhumanservices.org)

The profession of Human Services emerged in the 1960's during President Johnson's Great Society. The primary emphasis of the field was initially on mental health, working with marginalized communities that included people of color, women, and people living with mental illness (Neukrug, 2008). The intellectual roots of Human Services drew from Social Work and Psychology, but over time expanded to include theories, research, and best practices from Education, Sociology, and Non-profit Management to better address the systems and contexts in which individuals and communities live, learn, and grow. By adapting and broadening its knowledge base, the field became more resilient and effective in fostering individual, organizational, and systemic well-being.


History of GW's Human Services Program

Recognizing the emerging field of Human Services, needs on both the local and national level, and strengths of the university, GW created a Human Services Program with its first graduates in 1982 as part of the School of Education and Human Development (SEHD). Dr. Martha Burns led the Program and the first students were nurses who wanted to learn how to address issues of individual and community mental health. In 1989, Professor Honey Nashman became the director and with her leadership the Program evolved in stride with the field of Human Services. In addition to addressing mental health and well-being, the Program's mission was refined to "prepare undergraduate students to assume effective leadership roles in non-profit and government agencies supporting or serving people and communities who are experiencing need." With this broader aim, the Program moved from the SEHD to the Sociology Department within the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences in December 1995, where it has remained since. Professor Nashman retired in May 2010 and Dr. Emily Morrison became the interim (9/2010-5/2012) and then permanent director (9/2012-Present).


The Need for Program Assessment

Periodic assessment is needed to assure a program's continued health and vitality. Since the Program's last revision more than 20 years ago, only a few minor modifications have been made to the Human Services Program mainly in the form of class offerings. No comprehensive assessment was conducted until Fall 2010 when the Program leadership changed. This transition in leadership created a natural moment to re-view the Program with fresh, critical eyes to discern which dimensions of the Program serve students, communities, and our profession well, which areas are less effective, and where opportunities may exist to strengthen and grow the Program. In addition, it was important to see how the Program continues to align with the "National Standards for a Baccalaureate Degree in Human Services," as well as how the Program affiliates with and complements the academic offerings within the Department of Sociology as called for by the Department's Self-Study.

Conducting an initial assessment of this magnitude is a time and energy intensive process; yet, the outcome matters and the process is worthwhile. We want to build on our strong foundation and ensure that we are offering the highest quality and relevant education that prepares our graduates to adeptly meet the demands they will face as Human Services professionals, as well as provide an education that anticipates and responds to the needs of the field and our communities. With this aim in mind, we have intentionally developed this proposal, which is informed by the literature and the findings from our data analysis. This proposal provides the requisite foundation from which we can build a culture of ongoing assessment where we continuously learn, adapt, and apply the results of our inquiry.


Key Insights from the Literature
This work is situated within participatory action research traditions and social change theory (Hale, 2008). Employing a partnership model, we looked at all stakeholders invested in the program (Israel et al., 1998, 2003). We also drew from the scholarship on service-learning. Over the past 30 years, research reveals that high-quality service-learning engagement can enhance academic learning, writing and critical thinking, and citizenship engagement (Astin, Vogelgesang, Ikeda, & Yee, 2000; Eyler & Giles, 2000; Novak, Markey, & Allen, 2007; Simons & Cleary, 2006). While the benefits of service learning are clear, less attention has focused on how these experiences connect on an academic program level.
Kuh's (2008) scholarship on engaged learning offers insights on how to bridge the gap between individual courses and the overall curriculum. Based on essential learning outcomes research, he identified ten high-impact practices that enable colleges to create educational contexts that encourage students to develop and thrive. The practices include: service-learning, first year seminars and experiences, learning communities, common intellectual experiences, writing-intensive courses, collaborative projects, undergraduate research, diversity/global learning, internships, and capstone courses and projects. Student success can be increased by "mak[ing] it possible for every student to participate in at least two high-impact activities during his or her undergraduate program, one in the first year, and one taken later in relation to the major field." The benefits of these practices, however, are limited by the quality of engagement.
Therefore, it is important to recognize the principles of excellence (O'Neill, 2010) that underlie these high impact practices. Effective practices embody the following principles: 1) they are effortful; 2) they help students build substantive relationships (i.e., faculty, staff, peers, community leaders, mentors); 3) they help students engage across differences; 4) they provide students with rich feedback; 5) they help students apply and test what they are learning in new situations; and 6) they provide opportunities for students to reflect on the people they are becoming.
Building on Kuh and O'Neill's respective work, the US Department of Education (2012) gathered experts from around the country to synthesize and advance the scholarship of engagement. In January 2012, the Department and the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) released "A Crucible Moment," which issued an urgent call to colleges and universities around the country to design, implement, and assess student learning and preparation for democratic engagement.
Taken together, the empirical and theoretical literature offer insights into how to enrich the Human Services Program at GW, while "A Crucible Moment" reinforces the timing of this effort and reflects the importance of this work to the health of our communities and democracy. Hence, the process and outcomes of this assessment may in-form and transform our existing scholarship on Human Services and engaged learning, as well as better serve our students, community, and world (see Appendix D to learn where the Program incorporates the different high impact practices).

Program Assessment Methodology

Starting in Fall 2010 and extending through Spring 2013, Program Director Emily Morrison, with input from the Human Services faculty, designed, initiated, implemented, and evaluated multiple sources of data as part of a comprehensive assessment of GW's Human Services Program.

 
The Program assessment included data from the following:
Four faculty working retreats between Spring 2011 and Fall 2012, where the Human Services faculty dialogued about the mission, vision, curriculum (including course requirements and learning objectives), programmatic aims, and needs of the profession.
Dr. Michelle Kelso taught SOC 6232: Qualitative Methodology in Spring 2011 and as part of the class, they conducted the following:
2 focus groups with current Human Services students
37 individual interviews with alumni (14 total), faculty (7), and students (16)
Individual exit interviews with all graduating Human Services students in 2011, 2012, and 2013.
Review of teaching evaluations.
Classroom observations.
Course mapping, which involved faculty identifying for each of their courses: the knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitude needed; level of learning (i.e., foundational, skill-building, theory-building, or demonstrating mastery); implicit and explicit goals; learning objectives; assignments; service-learning requirements; and high-impact practices. (See Appendix E for an example of what the map included.)
Curriculum mapping, which involved synthesizing and reviewing the course maps to see if and where any overlaps or gaps existed, especially to align with the National Standards for Human Services Programs and the Department of Sociology.
Literature review on Human Services and the scholarship of teaching and learning.
Ongoing notes and anecdotal data from academic advising appointments, noting concerns, questions, and needs of prospective, current, and former students.
Meetings with alumni and local leaders in the non-profit sector.
Periodic, individual meetings with all Program faculty.
Consultations with an engaged learning expert from AAC&U to ensure the integrity of the process and to guard against assumptions and biases.

After evaluating the data and critically reflecting on the findings, the Human Services faculty dialogued informally and formally during periodic retreats, identifying ways to make the program more robust and coherent. The outcome of the analysis resulted in a renewed purpose and the proposed changes presented, respectively.


Renewed Program Purpose

GW's Human Services Program prepares graduates to be scholar-practitioners who are ready to more fully participate in and contribute to our interdependent and diversifying communities. We achieve this by offering students educational experiences that cultivate the following:

-Strong knowledge base to innovate and successfully solve complex, unscripted problems while working with and in diverse communities to promote social justice, self-sufficiency, inclusivity, and well being;

-Skills to reflect and integrate theoretical and empirical knowledge with authentic real world issues through socially just practices that recognize the interplay between individual, group, organizational, societal, and global dynamics;

-Ability to engage in critical inquiry, research, and assessment, to create and appropriately apply new knowledge, as well as act in ethical, informed, and effective ways that demonstrate awareness, respect, creativity, and wisdom; and, an

-Attitude of lifelong learning and collaboration, embodying curiosity, compassion, and a service ethos.

Human Services' scholarship is situated at the nexus of individual, group, organizational, and global dynamics, which all interact in ways that shape and are shaped by one another. Given the complexity at this nexus and the nature of Human Services in general, one hallmark of GW's Program is the incorporation of service-learning and community based research in core classes as a means to deepen student learning, address community-identified issues, and to weave theory, research, and practice together in relevant ways.


What are the major changes?

In order to take the Program to the next level, several changes are needed. The proposed changes are grounded in the findings from the assessment and evaluation process with the aim of strengthening the coherence and rigor of GW's Human Services educational experience. Major proposed changes are described and include: 1) the Program name; 2) sequence of learning experiences; 3) new course offering; 4) major degree requirement changes; 5) minor degree requirement changes; 6) university designations; and 7) internal course revisions. Appendix A presents a summary of all of the proposed changes. Appendix B shows the current Program requirements. Appendix C outlines the sequence of the Program if all of the proposed changes are passed.


Program Name
Starting with the big picture, the first major proposed change is in name from Human Services to Human Services and Social Justice. First and foremost, the new name more accurately reflects the essence of the Program. By adding Social Justice, we make an implicit value and aim in Human Services explicit. Social Justice means the "full and equal participation of all groups in a society that is mutually shaped to meet their needs" (Bell, 2007, p. 1). This vision of
Social Justice recognizes the importance of human agency (i.e., self-determination) coupled with a sense of social responsibility (i.e., interdependency), democratic participation in the life and well being of a society, and the capacity to critically reflect, understand, and intervene in changing oppressive patterns and behaviors in themselves and the organizations to which they belong. Together, Human Services and Social Justice complement and enhance one another by offering an even stronger theoretical base and lens through which to critically analyze the interplay of individuals, organizations, societies, and global systems.

Second, the name change differentiates Human Services from Human Resources, for which it is often confused, as well as Human Sciences, providing greater clarity to students, community partners, and employers. In fact, when seeking student feedback on potential names for the program, there was clear consensus amongst current students for the name Human Services and Social Justice and several seniors not in the Program said they would have majored in the Program had they understood what it was about earlier in their careers.

Third, the name change allows Human Services to align itself more closely within the Department of Sociology. In his address to the American Sociological Association (ASA), Former ASA President Joe Feagin (2001) called for Sociology "to recover and celebrate its historical roots in a sociology committed to social justice in ideals and practice" (p. 10). Sociology has a long tradition of social justice within the discipline. Thus, by incorporating Social Justice more explicitly into the Program, there can be greater synergy between the Program and the Department.


Sequence of Learning Experiences
In order for students to understand what they are taking and when they should take it, several courses need to be renumbered and renamed (see Appendix A points 2 and 3 for a full list of all of the proposed course number and name changes). Revised course names and numbers reflect more accurately the nature and content of the respective courses. Moreover, new course numbers sequence the courses in meaningful ways that allow for scaffolding of student learning, which prepares students for more complex reasoning and development as they progress through their academic training. To this end, the proposed course numbers now correspond with the approximate level of study. A course at the1000 level reflects a primary focus on foundation building ideal for first-year students. A 2000 or 3000 level course is intended to develop theory, research, and/or practical skills ideal for sophomores and juniors. A 4000 level course reflects an opportunity for senior students to demonstrate mastery. Currently, there are four special topics courses currently listed at the 4000 level (i.e., they are all numbered 4198) that need to be converted to regular course offerings with a course number that actually reflects the intended level of study. Often first and second year students shy away from the 4000 courses because they assume the course will be too advanced for them. Hence, these four courses need to be incorporated into the regular curriculum offerings.


New Course Offering
Based on the Council of Standards in Human Services, one area that GW's Program is in need of greater focus, depth, and training is a course on professional Interpersonal Relationships that is specific to the field and context of Human Services. This course would address starting and ending professional relationships; basic helping skills; intake interviews; case management; working in, through, and with difference; strengths-based models of individual change; group facilitation; conflict resolution; team management; cultural competence; and, supervision. These interpersonal skills are vital to the success of the Human Services scholar-practitioner. Moreover, graduate programs in education, counseling, and social work expect students with a degree in Human Services to have at least a foundational knowledge in this area.


Major Degree Requirement Changes
To increase the coherence and rigor of the Program, the following changes should be implemented:

First, based on individual interview data, exit interview data, faculty interviews, curriculum mapping, and the guidelines for the Council of Standards in Human Services, we need to require an introductory course to the field. In 2012, we offered an elective special topics course HMSR 4198: Introduction to Human Services, which should be revised in line with the new Program and converted into a regularly offered required course called HSSJ 1100: Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice. The new HSSJ 1000 course would provide a clear foundation for the theories, research, practices, and policies central to Human Services and Social Justice. In addition to the foundation in HSSJ, students need an introduction to the scholarship and practice of community based work to prepare them for more meaningful and deeper levels of service-learning and community based research. Moreover, given the nature and context of Human Services and Social Justice work, key concepts from sociology such as race, class, gender, power, voice, advocacy, and social inequalities will be introduced. Overall, this course offers an introduction to this field of study and a framework from which students can see the relevance between courses, connecting their academic experiences with the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes needed by Human Services scholar-practitioners. Hence, the proposed change is to require HSSJ 1100 to provide a stronger foundation and context for the study of Human Services.

Second, the new specific course entitled HSSJ 2170: Interpersonal Relationships in Human Services should replace the Communication course requirement (currently students choose one of the following courses: Public Communication, Interpersonal Communication, Business and Professional Speaking, or Small Group Communication). As described above, this course requirement ensures that students will develop the competencies needed for the field of Human Services and brings the Program in line with the Council of Standards in Human Services.

Third, another gap revealed during the assessment was a lack of focus on leadership and ethics within the non-profit and social services sector. We developed a special topics pilot course entitled Principles of Ethical Leadership to address this gap, which should now be converted into a regular standing course (HSSJ 2200). Moreover, this course should replace the previous requirement of PHIL 2135: Ethics in Business and the Profession. Data revealed that students were not synthesizing, connecting, or applying the learning from PHIL 2135 to the context of Human Services. In addition to the scholarship on ethics, leadership, and ethical leadership in HSSJ 2200, the service-learning requirement shores up this gap left with PHIL 2135 by requiring students to actively learn, engage, reflect, and bridge theory, practice, and research.

Fourth, given the complexity of the work Human Services professionals do and the issues faced in working towards social justice, graduates need more concentrated attention on race, ethnicity, class, and inequality. While there are a number of inequities and boundaries worthy of study, race and class are two of the most prevalent dimensions affecting the field of Human Services in subtle and overt ways. In order to work towards more inclusive communities, students must understand the systems, structures, and practices that perpetuate inequity, as well as recognize how their own identity—real or perceived—affects their interactions and ability to appropriately serve another or evoke change on a larger level. Sociology excels in its scholarship in these areas. Therefore, the proposed requirement change is for students to take two out of four approved courses. Students will be required to take at least one course from Category A which includes: SOC 2170: Class and Inequality and SOC 2179: Race and Minority Relations. For the second upper-level Sociology course requirement, students may choose the other course from Category A or choose a course from Category B which includes: SOC 2104: Contemporary Sociological Theory (a current requirement in the Program) and SOC 2175: Sociology of Sex and Gender. While the reasons for including SOC 2170 and SOC 2179 are evident by name, the Contemporary Sociological Theory course addresses issues of inequality in post-Marxian times with a broader perspective and an eye towards class, race, and gender. Moreover, the Sociology of Sex and Gender course examines the dynamics of inequality in such areas as families, the workforce, culture and mass media, politics, and in fields such as health, education, and law, which many Human Services students pursue after graduation. By expanding the sociology course options, students gain a richer framework for HSSJ. Meanwhile, students may be able to contribute their learnings from HSSJ and their service-learning experiences to the class discussions in SOC 2170, SOC 2175, and SOC 2179, as they currently do in SOC 2104. By providing more opportunities for students to interact across disciplinary boundaries, greater insights and applications may be discovered.

Fifth, a solid understanding of research methods is needed to evaluate the meaning, merits, and contributions of a particular research study. Data from the individual interviews, faculty interviews, and curriculum map reveal that students are expected to understand the basics of research design, to critique and evaluate empirical work, and to conduct and write research starting their junior year. SOC 2101: Social Research Methods is a requirement for all HSSJ majors and a prerequisite for upper-level HSSJ courses. However, current course restrictions for SOC 2101 prevent any freshmen or sophomores to take this course. The course is normally only taught once a year, which further compounds the issue if a student happens to study abroad the Fall of their junior year. Therefore, the proposed change is to modify the course restriction, allowing sophomores to take the course, which also exposes students to the principles of sound research earlier in their careers and prepares them to engage in research their junior and senior years. This change would also help the criminal justice students as the GW Bulletin states that both "SOC 2101 and SOC 2102 be taken by the junior year."


Minor Degree Requirement Changes
While many current Human Services students want to pursue a career in non-profit management, not all of our students do. For example, a student in psychology who wants to go into counseling may emphasize the courses on child and adult development courses and interpersonal relationship in Human Services. Meanwhile, a student in the Elliott School may choose the "Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance" course along with HSSJ 2176 (Program Planning and Evaluation), and HSSJ 1177 (Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services). Yet, the courses currently required for the minor are all directed towards non-profit management. Therefore, the proposed change is to require all students in the minor to take the Introduction to HSSJ course (HSSJ 1100) and the Fact, Field, and Fiction: Intersections in HSSJ (HSSJ 3152) course. Then, students may choose a blend of non-profit management, human development, social justice, and research courses within the Program that meet their interests. By changing the minor requirements, students have greater flexibility and choice in developing a concentration that better aligns with their needs and career goals. The two required courses combined with some flexibility makes the minor more attractive to students, allowing them to craft an academic experience that best serves their needs.


University Designations
All of the required courses in the Program integrate service-learning into the curriculum and foster civic engagement. Recognizing GW's desire to cultivate a spirit of civic engagement amongst the student body at large, the Program is prepared to propose three courses for GPAC designation. The Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice course and the Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services course will both be submitted for consideration of the Social Science and Civic Engagement GPAC designations. The Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance course will be submitted for Social Science, Global/Cross-cultural Perspective, and Civic Engagement GPAC designations.


Internal Program Revisions
Throughout the assessment of the Program, the data revealed several ways that individual courses could be strengthened. For example, the current HMSR 1177: Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services course can easily change a few readings and modify some class assignments to bring greater depth to the scholarship on social justice, as well as embody three high impact practices (i.e., service-learning, collaborative projects, and first year experiences; Kuh, 2008). Another example is adding a focus in the development courses (currently HMSR 2171: Child and Adolescent and HMSR 2172: Adult) on how to apply helping skills to the particular age group with whom students are working in the community, which reinforces and extends the learning beyond the proposed HSSJ 2170: Interpersonal Relationships in Human Services course. Creating the curriculum map allowed us to see where and how we can shift readings and assignments between the required courses in an effort to better achieve our Program purpose by introducing, emphasizing, reinforcing, and advancing learning in a way that scaffolds learning and development. Since these courses are already required for students in the major, no formal action is needed.

In addition to internal course revisions, the idea of concentrations or "tracks" within the Program emerged from the gathered data and the assessment process. Recognizing that graduates pursue a range of career paths upon graduation, the Human Services faculty is committed to exploring ways to offer more choice within the Program. Creating tracks could provide students with the opportunity to tailor their studies to fit their career needs. Thus, this idea is being actively developed by the Human Services faculty with the goal of developing tracks by the end of the 2014-2015 academic year.


How do the proposed changes affect the Sociology Department?
As stated earlier, one of the goals of the assessment was first, to see how the Program relates to the Department of Sociology and second, to identify ways that the connection could become stronger. By adopting the proposed changes, the Program will be more closely aligned with Sociology. This alignment is most visible in the new name of the Program—Human Services and Social Justice. The new name makes the implicit value of Social Justice explicit, creating an opportunity to bridge the scholarship from Sociology with that of Human Services and to bolster the visibility of our entire department. Moreover, the changes offer greater opportunity for HSSJ, SOC, and CJ students to interact and exchange perspectives on persistent social issues. The changes also play to the strength of our faculty, allowing HSSJ students more options to learn from our faculty expertise. In general, the proposed changes offer an opportunity to increase overall enrollment. First, if the proposal is approved, there is a net gain of three courses to the Program and the Department. Second, there is one additional Sociology course required, bringing closer alignment between the programs. Third, three additional HSSJ courses will be submitted for GPAC designation. If approved, our students will not be forced to look beyond the department in order to fulfill their social science, civic engagement, or global/cross-cultural perspective requirements. Moreover, SOC and CJ students will be presented with more opportunities for service-learning. The GPAC designation may also welcome students from outside of the department to our programs and as a result, some of these students may declare or change their major to HSSJ. Finally, the proposed changes tighten the preparation for the profession and position the Program to embody the spirit of GW's new strategic plan.


How do the proposed Program changes relate to GW's new strategic plan?
GW's new strategic plan (GW, February 2013) has three main goals of fostering education, research and service, which connect with four broad themes. The themes include: innovation through cross-disciplinary collaboration; globalization; governance and policy; and, citizenship and leadership. In examining the newest version of the strategic plan and the proposed Program changes, it is clear that the Human Services and Social Justice Program is not only well-positioned and poised to carry forth the aims of the plan, but may also be able to serve as a resource to other programs and departments with regards to a few of the plan's aims.

Overall, the HSSJ Program aligns squarely with the new strategic plan. The Program truly excels in interweaving education and service, and to a lesser, but growing extent, research. For example, one of the Program's existing strengths is providing students with the opportunity to translate learning into effective action and to develop reflective practices. The Program provides students with multiple opportunities to reflect and connect their co-curricular and curricular experiences, requiring a high level of academic engagement (see Appendix D) as illustrated in the comparison of the Program and Kuh's (2008) high impact practices.

In particular, the integration of service-learning in all required courses fosters active learning by presenting students with the opportunity to address authentic community-identified needs, to apply classroom theories, to revise conceptual understandings, and to cultivate their interpersonal skills when working with people from different backgrounds. These experiences often spark ideas for community based research, elicit questions regarding local and federal policies, contextualize theoretical arguments, as well as invite humility when coming to realize the "other" may not be other after all. Indeed, the proposed Program invites students to explore the interconnections and interplay between theory, research, practice, and policy.

While there are several aspects within the plan that the HSSJ Program already embodies, there are areas where new and old strengths can be nurtured. As GW's strategic plan is implemented and resources are allocated, the HSSJ Program looks forward to collaborating with colleagues in the Program and Department to identify specific opportunities from the plan to pursue with respect to HSSJ that will enable the Program to contribute even more to the Department, College, University, and Community. The Program aims to ensure that all Human Services and Social Justice graduates embody the hallmarks of a GW education and are prepared to serve not only the needs of the profession, but most importantly the most complex and urgent needs of our communities.


Conclusions
The Human Services Program has a rich history and a strong legacy at GW. The assessment process highlighted areas where we have been successful in cultivating meaningful learning experiences (see Appendix D to view how the HSSJ curriculum embodies Kuh's (2008) High Impact Practices), as well as reflected where we can develop so as to ensure that students graduate with the tools they need to be successful. By aligning more closely with Sociology, we embody the historical roots of Sociology and expand the depth and breadth of courses offered to students in HSSJ, SOC, and CJ. We also increase the number of GPAC eligible courses and potentially increase enrollments within the department. Overall, the proposed revitalized Human Services and Social Justice Program offers a more robust, coherent, and structurally sound program, bringing greater strength and visibility to the department, the college, and the university. GW's Human Services and Social Justice Program is a rigorous academic experience that places students at the intersections of theory, practice, research, and service, providing them with the foundation to become creative, contributing citizen leaders in our diverse democracy.





References

Astin, A.W., Vogelgesang, L. J., Ikeda, E. K., & Yee, J. A. (2000). How service learning
affects students. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.

Bell, L.A. (2007). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. In Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed.) (pp 1-14). NY: Routledge.

Eyler, J., & Giles, D. (2000). At a glance: What we know about the effects of service
learning on college students, faculty, institutions, and communities, 1993-2000 (3rd ed.).
Washington, DC: Corporation for National and Community Service. Retrieved from
http://servicelearning.org/filemanager/download/aag.pdf

Feagin, J. R. (2001). Social justice and sociology: Agenda for the twenty-first century. American Sociological Review, 66, 1-20.

GW. (2013, February). Vision 2021: A strategic plan for the third century of The George Washington University. Retrieved on February 28, 2013 from http://provost.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Strategic-Plan_Feb13.pdf

Hale, C. (2008). Engaging contradictions: Theory, politics, and methods of activist
scholarship. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Israel, B. A., Parker E. A., Rowe, Z., Salvatore, A., Minkler, M., López, J., … & Halstead, S. (2005). Community-based participatory research: Lessons learned from the Centers for Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(10), 1463–1471.

Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access
to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and
Universities.

National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. (2012). A crucible
moment: College learning & democracy's future. Washington, DC: Department of
Education.

Neukrig, E. (2008). Theory, practice, and trends in Human Services (4th Ed.) Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Novak, J. M., Markey, V., & Allen, M. (2007). Evaluating cognitive outcomes of
service learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Communication Research
Reports, 24(2), 149–157.

O'Neill, N. (2010). Internships as a high-impact practice: Some reflections on quality.
PeerReview, 12(4). Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-fa10/pr-fa10_oneill.cfm

Simons, L., & Cleary, B. (2006). The influence of service learning on students' personal and social development. College Teaching, 54, 307–319.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary and Office of
Postsecondary Education. (2012). Advancing civic learning and engagement in
democracy: A road map and call to action, Washington, D.C.: Author.


Appendix A
Proposed Changes to GW's Human Services Program

On behalf of the Human Services Program, I propose the following changes to GW's Human Services Program based on a comprehensive program assessment and designed in consultation with and support of the Human Services stakeholders:

Change name from Human Services (HMSR) to Human Services and Social Justice (HSSJ)
Recode and renumber the following courses:
All courses to be coded as HSSJ instead of HMSR (to prevent confusion in this document between existing courses and new courses, the HMSR code is used for all courses already official in the University Bulletin, while HSSJ refers to those that need approval).
Convert special topics courses to regular line courses (with names staying the same unless otherwise indicated):
HMSR 4198: Introduction to Human Services to HSSJ 1100: Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice
HMSR 4198: Non-profit Management to HSSJ 1150
HMSR 4198: The Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance to HSSJ 2160
HMSR 4198: Principles of Ethical Leadership to HSSJ 2200
Change HMSR 2133 to HSSJ 4133: Supervised Experience in HSSJ in order to reflect that this is an independent study course intended for upper class students who have a strong working foundation of Human Services and Social Justice
Rename (and renumber as indicated) the following courses from ___ (to) ____:
HMSR 1177: Human Services and Community: Empowerment for Social Change Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services
HMSR 2171: Introduction to Human Development I Human Interactions: Child and Adolescent Development
HMSR 2172: Introduction to Human Development II Human Interactions: Adult Development
HMSR 2176W: Program Planning and Development for Service Agencies HSSJ 3100W: Program Planning and Evaluation
HMSR 2182W: Organization and Administration in the Human Services HSSJ 3110W Non-profit and Organizational Management
HMSR 3152: Issues in Human Services Fact, field, and fiction: Intersections in Human Services and Social Justice
HMSR 4195: Seminar in Human Services: Current Issues Capstone Seminar in Human Services and Social Justice
Create 3-credit course HSSJ 2170: Interpersonal Relationships in Human Services

Major and Minor Requirement Changes

Require HSSJ 1100: Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice for all majors and minors.
Replace COMM requirement with the new HSSJ 2170 "Interpersonal Relationships" course.
Replace PHIL 2135: Ethics in Business and the Profession requirement with HSSJ 2200: Principles of Ethical Leadership.
Require students to take TWO out of four approved SOC courses. Students are required to take at least one course from Category A: SOC 2170: Class and Inequality or SOC 2179: Race and Minority Relations. For the second upper-level Sociology course requirement, students may choose the other course from Category A or choose a course from Category B which includes: SOC 2104: Contemporary Sociological Theory (a current requirement in the Program) or SOC 2175: Sociology of Sex and Gender.
Change the course restriction on SOC 2101: Social Research Methods to allow sophomores to enroll. This is a pre-requisite course for upper-level HMSR courses. (This also helps criminal justice which states in the bulletin that both "SOC 2101 and SOC 2102 be taken by the junior year.")
FOR MINORS: Change requirements (total remains at 18 hours) to:
HSSJ 1100 (3 credits)
HMSR 3152 (6 credits)
3 courses (9 credits) within HSSJ with no more than one additional course at the 1000 level beyond the required HSSJ 1100
Apply for GPAC Designations for the following:
HSSJ 1100 (Intro) GPAC for Social Science and Civic Engagement
HSSJ 1177 (Social Change) GPAC for Social Science and Civic Engagement
HSSJ 2160 (NGOs) GPAC for Social Science, Global/Cross-Cultural Perspectives, and Civic Engagement



Appendix B

Current Human Services Major Requirements

Bachelor of Arts in Human Services 2012-2013

Prerequisite course:

SOC 1/ 1001 or SOC 1002


Required courses in related areas:

Phil 135/ 2135

One course chosen from COMM 40/ 1040, 41/ 1041, 42/ 1042, 120/ 2120

Required courses:

HMSR 177/ 1177 HMSR 171/ 2171

SOC 101/ 2101 HMSR 172/ 2172

SOC 104/ 2104 HMSR 176/ 2176

HMSR 182/ 2182 HMSR 195/ 4195

HMSR 152/ 3152 (6 hours)

Advising Notes:
Students in are required to earn a grade of C- or better in all courses required in the major. If a student receives a grade of D+, D, or D- in a required course, the student may either (1) repeat the course, in which case the grade in the repeated course must be no lower than a C-, and grades for both the original and repeated courses will appear on the student's transcript; or (2) take an upper-division course in the same department, in addition to the minimum number of courses required for the major, and receive a grade no lower than C-. Option 1 must be approved by the department chair in writing before the student may register for a course a second time.

CCAS major checklists are intended for planning purposes only. As the requirements for majors sometimes change, please verify your major requirements with an advisor in the relevant department.

These checklists are valid for students who declared during the 12-13 academic year. If you declared your major during a different year, please consult that year's University Bulletin to confirm your major requirements.


Appendix C
Sequence of Proposed Human Services and Social Justice Academic Requirements

Human Services and Social Justice Major
Total of 45 credit hours required:

First and Second Year:
Fall
HSSJ 1100: Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice (3)
GPAC—Social Science and Civic Engagement (eventually offer both F and Sp)
Pre-requisite for SOC 2014; 2170; and 2179; and all HSSJ 3000+ courses
HSSJ 2170: Interpersonal Relationships in Human Services (3)
HSSJ 2171: Human Interactions: Child and Adolescent Development (3)

Spring
HSSJ 1177: Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services (3 credits)
GPAC—Social Science and Civic Engagement
HSSJ 2172: Human Interactions: Adult Development (3)
HSSJ 2200: Principles of Ethical Leadership (3)

Fall or Spring
SOC 1001: Introduction to Sociology OR SOC 1002: The Sociological Imagination
SOC 2101: Social Research Methods (3)
(Take Sp SO or F JR yr; Pre-requisite for HSSJ 3100 and strongly encouraged before 3110 and 3152)
SOC: Choose TWO out of the four following SOC courses (total of 6 credits). At least one course must be from Category A and the second course can be from Category A or B:
Category A:
SOC 2170: Class and Inequality (3)
SOC 2179: Race and Minority Relations (3)
Category B:
SOC 2104: Contemporary Sociological Theory (3)
SOC 2175: Sociology of Sex and Gender (3)

Third and Fourth Year
Fall
HSSJ 3100W: Program Planning and Evaluation (pre-req. Soc 2101) (WID) (3)

Spring
HSSJ 3110W: Non-profit and Organizational Management (WID) (3)
HSSJ 4195: Capstone Seminar in Human Services (Final Spring Semester) (3)

Fall or Spring
HSSJ 3152: Fact, field, and fiction: Intersections in Human Services and Social Justice (16 hrs/week) (6)

Human Service and Social Justice Minor
Total of 18 credit hours required:
HSSJ 1100 (3)
HSSJ 3152 (6)
3 more courses in HSSJ for a total of at least 9 credit hours with no more than one additional course beyond HSSJ 1100 at the 1000 level (i.e., 1150 or 1177)


Human Service and Social Justice Elective Courses

HSSJ 1150: Non-profit Management
HSSJ 2160: The Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance
GPAC—Social Science, Global/Cross-Cultural Perspective, and Civic Engagement
HSSJ 4133: Supervised Experience in HSSJ
HSSJ 4193: Research and Independent Study (required Fall -semester course for seniors wishing to graduate with Honors in HSSJ)











Appendix D
High Impact Practices in the HSSJ Curriculum

Kuh (2008) identified ten High Impact Practices that increase student engagement and retention. The HSSJ curriculum incorporates all of the practices.

First year seminars and experiences
HSSJ 1100: Introduction to Human Services and Social Justice
HSSJ 1177: Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services

Service-learning
All required courses in HSSJ integrate service-learning

Learning communities
The proposed Program sequences the courses in ways that allow for learning communities to emerge.

Common intellectual experiences
Implied through the sequence of courses and academic requirements.

Writing-intensive courses
HSSJ 3100: Program Planning and Evaluation
HSSJ 3110W: Non-profit and Organizational Management
HSSJ 4193: Research and Independent Study (1 semester course for Honor's students)

Collaborative projects
HSSJ 1177: Organizing for Social Justice in Human Services
HSSJ 3100: Program Planning and Evaluation
HSSJ 3110W: Non-profit and Organizational Management
HSSJ 4195: Capstone Seminar in Human Services

Undergraduate research
HSSJ 3152: Fact, field, and fiction: Intersections in Human Services and Social Justice HSSJ 4193: Research and Independent Study (1 semester course for Honor's students)

Diversity/global learning
HSSJ 2160: The Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance
HSSJ 2170: Interpersonal Relationships in Human Services
SOC 2170: Class and Inequality
SOC 2179: Race and Minority Relations

Internships
HSSJ 3152: Fact, field, and fiction: Intersections in Human Services and Social Justice

Capstone courses and projects.
HSSJ 4195: Capstone Seminar in Human Services


Appendix E
Sample of Course Mapping



Faculty members evaluated each of their course(s) using a matrix that consisted of the following categories:
Course Mapping Matrix Categories and Legend
Course Name and Number
KSAA: Knowledge, skill, ability, attitude
Content Area: Identified from major perspectives, theories, and practices within Human
Services and important for our Program
Level: Foundational (F); Skill-building (S); Theory-building (T); Demonstrating Mastery
(M)
Imp/Exp: Scale from 1 to 5 regarding the extent to which objective and outcomes are
implicitly (1) to explicitly (E) stated in the syllabus
Learning Objective: One specific course learning objective being examined across the other
categories
Assignment: Related to the learning objective
Service-Learning Component: Related to the learning objective
High-Impact Practice: Related to the learning objective

The aim of the course mapping project was to identify where and which types of knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes were being cultivated. By following each course assignment, learning objective, and requirement, we could then assess where there gaps and overlaps in the Program, as well as ascertain the level of learning (i.e., something foundational, skill-building, theory-building, or demonstrating mastery), the kind of content being covered, the actual texts and assignments, what (if any) high impact practice was incorporated, as well as the degree to which expectations were made clear.

In the example provided, the courses involve more KSAAs, content areas, assignments, etc., however, the task was to look at each individual learning objective for a course. Each course had a row for each learning objective. What follows is an excerpt to illustrate what the process entailed.










Course
KSAA
Content Area
Level
Imp/ Exp
Assignments
Learning Objectives
Service Learning
High Impact Practice









HMSR 4198: The Role of NGOs in International Humanitarian Assistance
 Teamwork,
Written and oral comm, intercultural knowledge, critical thinking, civic knowledge and engagement
Global Perspectives; Humanities; Non-profit structure; Social Justice
F&S
5-Exp.
Case Study

Critically examine global efforts and atrocities in places like Rwanda and Darfur as well as organizations that work globally like OXFAM and Doctors Without Borders
 22 hours of Service-Learning to understand how NGOs deliver humanitarian assistance to populations/
communities in need
Service-Learning, Diversity and Global Learning









HMSR 3152: Issues in Human Services
 Written and oral comm, ethical reasoning, critical thinking, quantitative & scientific reasoning
Conducting Research; Civic knowledge and engagement
M
5-Exp.
Research paper (includes: literature review, interviews with community members, data analysis, and oral presentation)
Research paper including empirical and theoretical articles, articles coming from refereed journals, and articles drawing from at least 3 disciplines
Research problem emerges from a question or topic related to the issue or organization in which the student serves
Writing intensive, Undergraduate Research