El desarrollo humano y sostenible como punto de encuentro

Summary of Feedback by Attendees

Thirteen (n=13) attendees completed the presenter designed evaluation form. There were four-presentation skill areas quantitatively rated by a Likert scale (1= significantly below

average, 2= below average, 3=average, 4=above average, 5=significantly above average). The presentation skill areas and the mean ratings included: 1) relevance of area of research to social work education, mean= 4.62; 2) clarity of focus of inquiry, mean=4.23; 3) appropriateness of

research methods and conceptual foundation, mean = 4.39; and 4) significance of findings for social work education, practice, or research, mean =4.39. Two prompts following the rating asked for “strengths” and “areas to improve” soliciting qualitative comments. Strengths focused on the clear definition of SCT concepts and EBP, evaluation of interviewing skills seen as very applicable to field, and clarity of and detailed nature of presentation. Areas to improve tended to focus on my presentation skills, noting a soft voice and fast rate of speech. Two comments mentioned the need to sound more confident in my presentation style especially given how strong the findings and implications for social work education. One comment noted the denseness of the content (i.e., use of five measures) and wondered about alternate ways to present or parcel out research.

Critical Analysis

Presenting this paper to peers provided the valuable opportunity for feedback on both the research project and process chosen to communicate about it. Given the presentation format was a research paper and not a workshop, the content was organized accordingly. Colleagues,

however, seemed very interested in the SCT concepts that were used to teach micro practice skills. The origin and intent of EBP also attracted a high level of attention and discussion.

Given this conference was primarily for social work educators, focus also quickly

migrated to the intervention design (i.e., course structure within classroom and lab) and choice of interviewing and problem solving skills. The type and number of measures (i.e., adaptability, attitudes toward EBP, coding of skill demonstrations) seemed too much to meaningfully cover. Attendees were curious about the process of taping and coding the skill demonstrations. I found myself thinking that if I led with the findings, the “so what” of the research, my message about

the steps for teaching skills would have been clearer. Highlighting the sequential and looping steps of:

1. Mastery modeling of each partialized skill by instructor

2. Behavior rehearsal in simulated, taped role plays with a small group of peers. 3. Peer in-the-moment feedback and instructor feedback based on review of tapes. 4. Student consideration of feedback, review of each of their taped sessions, and then a

written self-reflection annotated the tape.

5. Repeat steps 1-4, six to eight times so that students can gain trust and sense of safety learning group, grow in self-efficacy, and gain skill improvement.

I found that there was not time to delve deeper into the teaching pedagogies of the behavioral rehearsal component, use of Panopto software, and the development of a reflective practitioner who can flexibly employ practice wisdom when needed. The development of the capacities of the practitioner is the element of the research that was and is most interesting to me, that is, how to develop disciplined, skilled practitioners who can also demonstrate a “resiliency to difficulties” (Bandura, 1997).

The underlying conceptual hypothesis of the contributing value of SCT concepts for professional training especially in light of EBP seemed to resonate with the audience. Within the field of implementation science, the research to practice gap is frequently noted with regards to the adoption of EBP intervention with fidelity (Beidas & Kendall, 2010). However, in the conceptualization and development of this work, the basic training of EBP skills and

development of habits of reflection, needed to come prior to training for the variations. Once these skills are mastered, the emergent capacities of the practitioner to respond to the complex, contextual challenges of real clients can be fostered.

References

Aarons, G. A. (2004). Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: The evidence-based practice attitude scale (EBPAS). Mental Health Services

Research, 6 (2), 61-74.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2010). Training therapists in evidence-based practice: A critical review of studies from a systems-contextual perspective. Clinical Psychology, 17, 1–30. Beidas, R. S., Cross, W., Dorsey, S. (2014). Show me, don’t tell me: Behavioral rehearsal as a

training and analogue fidelity tool. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 21, 1-11. CSWE Commission on Accreditation. (2016). EPAS handbook. Alexandria, VA: Author. Cross, W. F., Seaburn, D., Gibbs, D., Schmeelk-Cone, K., White, A. M., & Caine, E. D. (2011).

Does practice make perfect? A randomized control trial of behavioral rehearsal on suicide prevention gatekeeper skills. Journal of Primary Prevention, 32, 195–211

Hershell, A. D., Kolko, D.J., Baumann, B. L., Davis, A. C. (2010). The role of therapist training in the implementation of psychosocial treatments: A review and critique with

recommendations. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 448-466.

Holloway, S., Black, P., Hoffman, K., & Pierce, D. (n.d.). Some considerations of the import of

https://www.cswe.org/getattachment/Accreditation/Other/EPAS- Implementation/2008EPASCurriculumDesign.pdf.aspx

Kazdin, A. E. (2008). Evidenced-based treatment and practice: New opportunities to bridge clinical research and practice, enhance the knowledge base, and improve patient care. American Psychologist, 63(3), 146-159.

Linsk, N. L., & Tunney, K. (1997). Learning to care: Use of practice simulation to train health social workers. Journal of Social Work Education, 33(3), 473-490.

Rawlings, M. A. (2012). Assessing BSW participant direct practice skill using standardized clients and self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social Work Education, 48(2), 553-576. Singer, J. B., & Greeno, C. M. (2013). Case study: When Bambi meets Godzilla: A practitioner’s

experience adopting and implementing a manualized treatment in a community mental health setting. Best Practice in Mental Health, 9(1), 99-115.

Sun, R., Merrill, E., & Peterson, T. (2001). From implicit skills to explicit knowledge: A bottom up model of skills learning. Cognitive Science, 25, 203-244.

Swell, L. (1968). Role-playing in the context of learning theory in casework teaching. Journal of

Education for Social Work, 4(1), 70-76.

Thyer, B. A., Wodarski, J. S. (1990). Social learning theory: Toward a comprehensive

Appendix A

Appendix B