Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx

Running head: JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1
Journal Critique - Assessing School Effectiveness
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
2
Summary of the article
The program being evaluated by the authors was a Collegiate
Learning Assessment
(CLA) program. This article was based on the criticism
regarding the students taking the
Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) program which is used
in the measurement of the value
added in the learning institutions through carrying out a test on
the capability of the freshmen
and seniors to the logical thinking and clear writing. The
methods used by the Collegiate
Learning Assessment to help in the determination of the value
added were outlined. Authors of
this article provided some of the criticism being provided by
individuals especially when it

comes to the computation of the value added. The responses to
the concerns raised were also
provided.
According to this article, CLA program currently involves the
use of the linear regression
model and in this case, the school is considered to be the unit of
assessment whereas the school
means SAT score is the sole explanatory variable. Authors of
this article responded to the
criticism by indicating that students who are participating in the
CLA program tend to be
identical to their fellow student based on the measurements
which were observed by the authors.
Also, the senior participants are similar to the participating
freshmen and immediately when
there is a control for SAT scores, CLA tasks performance is
unrelated to the aspects of the task,
student academic major, the demographics of the learners, and
student' features like size. The
disapprovals of the CLA procedure are not being reinforced by
data. In addition, the problems
which are created by the confounding, as well as the selection
bias, are affecting different
categories of research programs. CLA is lucky due to its ability

to address the challenges faced.
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
you must cite your article throughout the paper
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
use specific language, give names and citations
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
again, use specific language, name every thing, give the title
and/or authors with an APA citation
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
3
Evaluation goals
The goal of Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) program
which was under
examination by the authors of the article is to offer colleges as
well as universities with some
information concerning how the level of improvement which has
been between the freshmen and
the senior years. The information is also on whether there is
more or reduced enhancement as
compared to the expectation with regard to the progress being
made by the students in other

learning institutions. The information being provided is aimed
at supplementing as opposed to
the replacement on the mechanism through which schools are
assessing the outcome of
education. Since CLA outcome meant for the internal use, CLA
program is not publishing
personal or the school level of data.
CLA program is also measuring the value added by carrying out
a comparison of the
freshmen and the senior tests which is used for the assessment
of the skills to be gained by the
students. The skills include those which are used by the student
in solving the problems, making
analytic reasoning, skills for the critical thinking, and skills
meant for writing. Therefore,
through this goal, it has drawn focus and there are a number of
concerns which have been raised
concerning the technique being used by the CLA program in the
estimation of the value added.
The skills that CLA is focusing on are used in a broad series of
educational majors and are
always appreciated by managers in many organizations. The
measurement of the value added by

an educational program is based on looking at the contribution
which has been made by each
learning institution towards the learning processes of the
students in the areas where testing is
being done.
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
4
Theoretical concepts
There is no evidence of the theoretical concept which has been
used by the authors to
connect the program to the goals or outcome.
Research Methods
The method used by the authors of this article was first based
on giving a description of
the techniques used by the CLA to compute value added. This
was followed by giving a
summary on some of the criticism regarding the question of
which students are taking the CLA
test. According to the author of this article, it was revealed
from the methods used that samples
are always not random and this, therefore, implies that there is
the existence of concern in

relation to the selection bias.
Regarding the methods of giving a summary on the criticism in
relation to the questions
with the students who are taking CLA test, the authors of this
article get the opportunity of
illustrating how the students who are taking CLA tests tend to
be identical to their classmates
with regard to the SAT scores and other background features.
This method also enabled the
authors of this article to prove that participating seniors tend to
be very identical to the
participating freshman.
Further evidence from the provision of the summary regarding
the question on the
student taking CLA tests is that as soon as there is presence of
SAT score controls, the CLA
tasks performance is not linked to the areas of the tasks, the
learners academic major, the
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
when one isn't given apply a theory from your analysis, there is
a list of theories in the course shell
Margaret Bragg

10250000006100258
Does this evaluation only use secondary data?
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
5
demographic features of the learners, and the characteristic like
size of the learning institution.
Therefore, based on the criticism procedure adopted by the
authors, it was also evident that
reproaches of the CLA procedure are not completely reinforced
by the presence of data. Another
method used by the authors is giving an outline of the research
which has been carried out by the
CLA, for example, the development of the new techniques used
in the computation of value
added.
Conclusion
The conclusion of the authors of this article is that learners who
are participating in the
CLA program tend to be identical to their fellow students with
regard to the dimension examined
by the authors. The variations in the background features
between the participants and the non-
participants are always smaller due to the greater variation

between the seniors and the freshmen
within the CLA scores. The addition of different categories of
variables to the regression
calculation which consist of the SAT scores is unlikely to
enhance the accuracy when it comes to
the prediction of the CLA scores.
Even though there is a possibility of having differences in
selection bias, the adequate
data is an indication that biases are too minute to matter. There
is a lack of feasibility in the
random selection of the participants. Longitudinal designs
appear not to be perfect when
compared to the present cross-sectional designs. In addition to
the concerns related to the
selection bias, there are other concerns which have been made
by the critics of the CLA and
these concerns are related to the maturation, matric sampling of
the measurements, and the
stacking of the deck which appears to be a lacking basis.
Therefore, problems are being created
by the confounding selection bias which is affecting several
types of research programs.
Margaret Bragg

10250000006100258
this section would have been better in the research methods
section
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
6
Evaluation Concepts
The concept which is applicable to the article is the process
evaluation. This is a concept
which is aimed at determining whether program activities have
been implemented based on the
previous intention. As for the case of the article, the goal was to
give a summary of the criticisms
with regard to the question surrounding the students taking CLA
test. Collegiate Learning
Assessment (CLA) program is used for the measurement of the
value added in the learning
institutions through performing a test of the logical thinking
and the clear writing of the colleges
and university students. CLA is also used in measuring the
skills of the students when it comes to
tackling problems, making logical intellectual, critical thoughts
and writing. These are the major
areas which are thought to be appropriate to a wider series of
educational areas and are valued by

most businesses.
Despite the goals and objectives of the CLA program in
providing students with the
necessary skills needed for the professional gains, there are
criticisms which have been raised
regarding the students who are taking the CLA tests. Authors of
this article looked at the role of
CLA programs such as computing of the added values and
evaluating some of the critics which
have been provided by the individuals who do not support this
program or questioning the
effectiveness of the CLA program. Authors of this article offer
some of the responses to the
opponents by indicating that learners who are taking CLA
examinations are identical to their
colleagues on the SAT scores and related backgrounds features.
Authors of this article also
reveal that immediately there is a control for SAT scores, the
outcomes in the CLA test seem to
be dissimilar to the task content and student academic major
among others.
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258

Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
this section could be more robust, there are many more concepts
you could have included
Margaret Bragg
10250000006100258
this belongs in the conclusion
JOURNAL CRITIQUE
7
References
Klein, S., Santa, M. C., Berkeley, C. A., Shavelson, R.,
Stanford, C. A., Bolus, R., et al. (2008).
Assessing school effectiveness. Evaluation Review, 32(6), 511-
525.
IDENTIFYING STUDENT COMPETENCIES IN MACRO
PRACTICE:
ARTICULATING THE PRACTICE WISDOM OF FIELD
INSTRUCTORS
Cheryi Regehr
University of Toronto
Marion Bogo

Kirsten Donovan
Susan Anstice
Community Care East York
April Lim
Although a growing Uterature examines competencies in
clinical practice, com-
petencies of students in macro social work practice have
received comparative-
ly liftle attention. A grounded-theory methodology was used to
eUcit field
instructor views of student competencies in community,
organization, and pol-
icy contexts. Competencies described by field instructors
encompassed 2 broad
dimensions: meta competencies and procedural competencies.
Meta competen-
cies included characteristics such as self-awareness,
compassion, motivation,
and conunitment to social justice. Procedural competencies
included project
management and presentation skuls, and the abüity to articulate
and imple-

ment steps to attain goals. These identified competencies
provide a basis for
development of a tool to assess student performance of
competencies in macro
practice.
ALTHOUGH DETERMINING THE practice Compe-
tence of social work students has always con-
cerned social work educators, the current
CouncU on Social Work Education's (CSWE)
Educational PoUcy and Accreditation Stand-
ards (EPAS; CSWE, 2008) require more system-
atic approaches to obtaiiiing outcome data
about schools' success in meeting their objec-
tives. Obviously reUable and vaUd assessment
of students' learning and performance in the
field practicum constitutes an important com-
ponent of any evaluation strategy. It is there-
fore imperative that educators develop effec-
tive measures for evaluating student field

performance. The first step in this process is
identifying the competencies that are required
for eftective practice. Core competencies for
the foundation of practice articulated in the
EPAS for MSW programs are expected to
also prepare for advanced practice through
Journal of Social Work Education, Vol. 48, No. 2
(Spring/Summer 2012).
©2012, Council on Social Work Education, Inc. All rights
reserved. DOI: 10.5175/JSWE.2012.201000114 307
3 0 8 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION
"knowledge and practice behaviors specific to
a concentration" (p. 3). In this regard macro
practice is seen as one such concentration.
The scholarly literature with respect to
the identification and evaluation of practice
competencies has focused primarily on micro
or clinical practice across disciplines including
medicine (Farrell, 2005; Resnick, 1993), pas-
toral care (Gordon & Mitchell, 2004), respira-
tory therapists (Cullen, 2005), dentistry (Al-
bino et al., 2008), psychology (Spruill et al.,
2004), nursing (Bondy, Jenkins, Seymour, Lan-
caster, & Ishee, 1997), and social work (Bogo et

al., 2004; Regehr, Regehr, Power, & Bogo,
2007). In this literature, two components of
competency have been identified (Bogo et al.,
2006; Kane, 1992; Talbot, 2004). One is a set of
procedural skills including such aspects as
conducting an assessment, implementing an
intervention strategy, and communicating
that strategy to other members of the treat-
ment team verbally and in writing. These pro-
cedural aspects of competency have been the
focus of competency-based assessments. This
is in part due to the overt observable nature of
such skills and in part due to the fact that such
skills are relatively amenable to measurement.
These skills can be taught by field instructors
in the practicum and in practice courses. They
can be acquired by students with practice and
mentoring.
The second component of professional
competency involves personal qualities that
students possess when they enter the
practicum. Kane (1992) has described this as
the judgment needed to combine knowledge,
skills, and abilities into effective solutions to
client problems across a wide range of situa-
tions. Talbot (2004) refers to meta competen-
cies of professional practice that include rela-
tionship, self-development, analysis, and
judgment. Bogo et al. (2006), in conducting
interviews with experienced clinical field
instructors with regard to student competen-
cies expected to identify a set of skills and
competencies that field instructors would use
to describe the differences between exemplary

students and problematic students. What
emerged instead was a constellation of per-
sonal qualities possessed by students that
were perceived as affecting their approaches
to learning, their interactions with others in
the organization, their relationship with the
field instructor, and their ability to develop
relationships with clients. Exemplary students
were described as bright, intuitive, motivated,
enthusiastic, self-directed, engaging, and tact-
ful. Problematic students were described as
irritable, defensive, judgmental, nonempathic,
shy, needy, and demanding. It was concluded
that these personality characteristics seemed
to take precedence over skills and behaviors,
with the skills and behaviors used more as
supporting evidence for these underlying
traits than as evidence of having achieved or
fauing to have achieved competence.
A more limited literature exists with
respect to competencies in community, organ-
ization, and policy contexts. No doubt this is
largely due to the fact that only about 10% of
social work MSW practicum are in macro
practice (Raymond, Teare, & Atherton, 1996)
and few MSW programs offer macro concen-
tirations (Mor Barak, Travis, & Bess, 2004). The
existing literature generally focuses on specif-
ic issues such as projects to develop advocacy
skills (Hermoso, Rosen, Overly, & Tompkins,
2006), partnerships to develop leadership
STUDBIT COMPETENCIES IN MACRO PRACTICE 309

skuls (Mertz, Fortune, & Zendeü, 2007), and
the safisfacfion of macro pracfice students
with respect to their field pracficum experi-
ences (Deal, Hopkins, Fisher, & Harfin, 2007).
Hardina and Obel-Jorgensen (2009) sug-
gested that eight skuls or competencies are
necessary for social action or advocacy
pracfice: self-awareness and cultural compe-
tency, engagement, problem identification
and assessment, facilitating consfituent self-
determinafion and empowerment, verbal and
written communicafion, weighing the ethical
implicafions of sftategies, taking acfion, and
evaluating outcomes. The Nafional Network
for Social Work Managers (Wimpfheimer,
2004) developed a set of core competencies for
social workers in adminisftafive and manage-
rial pracfice based on a review of the literature
and further modified by Mor Barak et al.
(2004) that include advocacy; program evalu-
ation; resource development and financial
management; program planning, develop-
ment, and management; public relafions and
marketing; governance; and human resource
management.
However, limited evidence suggests that
these competencies may not be taught in
MSW programs. Deal et al. (2007) found that
macro students perceived that they had limit-
ed learning opportunifies that they believed
were in part due to the complexity of the set-
ting, in part due to the chaüenges in linking
theory and pracfice, and in part due to limited

avaüabüity of supervision. This perhaps sug-
gests an increased need for self-directedness
in students in macro pracficum. In a survey of
200 social work managers and admirüstrators,
however, only program planning and devel-
opment, program evaluafion, and advocacy
were routinely avaüable in mezzo-macro stu-
dent field pracficum (Mor Barak et al., 2004).
Thus it appears that there is limited exposure
in the pracficum setting to the range of skuls
required in macro pracfice and thus Hmited
opportunifies to develop these skuls.
Macro pracfice that aims to bring about
change through community organization,
adminisftafion, and policy development is
cenftal to social work pracfice and in some
ways defines the idenfity of social work (Net-
ting, Ketfiier, & McMurfty, 2008). Although
relafively few social work students specialize
in this concentrafion, it is essenfial that we
arficulate a set of advanced competencies,
ensure they are included in MSW curricu-
lums, and design methods for assessing the
degree to which students possess these com-
petencies at various points in their educafion.
Method
The purpose of this study was to eUcit field
insftuctors' views of student competencies in
commimity, organizafion, and poUcy pracfica,
an area that has been largely neglected in the
social work literature. The study was guided
by a discovery-oriented quaUtafive design.

This approach is parficularly useful for idenfi-
fying and buüding knowledge and generating
theory in the relafively uncharted area of
inquiries (Creswell, 2007). The long-interview
method of data gathering was selected to
gather a wide range of views and experiences
(McCracken, 1988).
A purposive sample (Padgett, 1998;
Pafton, 2002) was drawn ftom au of the macro
field instructors of a large graduate program
in social work who offered pracficum in com-
munity, organization, and policy practice.
Inclusion criteria were: being an experienced
field instructor (i.e., 5 years or more); possess-
ing strong competencies as a field instructor
as determined by the pracficum director; and
recent supervision of students (i.e., within the
last 3 years). Parficipants were recruited by
telephone. AU who were contacted agreed to
parficipate. Approval was obtained from the
Research Ethics Board at Urüversity of Toron-
to and written informed consent was given by
aU parficipants at the beginning of each inter-
view. The sample of 18 field instructors con-
sisted of 16 women and 2 men representing
community, organization, and poUcy practice
settings or some combination of these meth-
ods. Participants had an average of 9 years
(range: 1-23) of practice experience with their
current employer. Sixteen of the field instruc-

tors held master's of social work degrees. In
total, participants had a mean of 21 years
(range: 6-35) of social work or related practice
experience, with an average 13 years (range:
3-30) of experience with the school's
practicum program. The majority (89%) also
were field instructors for other schools of
social work.
Trained quaUtative interviewers conduct-
ed aU interviews. Each field instructor was
asked the same set of open-ended, gmding
questions. First, they described one exemplary,
one average, and one problematic or strug-
gling student in general terms. Second, they
described student performance in each of the
foUowing practice dimensions: engagement
v^th learning, behavior in the organization,
linking poUcy and practice, relationships with-
in the organization, differential use of self,
assessment and analysis, intervention plan-
ning, leadership, verbal communication, writ-
ten communication, values and ethics, and
deaUng with diversity. Some of these factors
were identified through reviewing research on
competency . in clinically focused students
(Bogo et al., 2004; Bogo et al, 2006) and others
were identified from the Uterature on macro
pracficum placement (Hermoso et al., 2006;
Mertz et al., 2007; Mor Barak et al., 2004).
Probing questions were used to eUcit concrete
examples of student behaviors and practice
interactions. The interviews were audio taped
to ensure accuracy of data and transcribed.

The data was then subjected to an itera-
tive process of data analysis that involved the
research team engaging in open coding, which
aUowed for the development of broad cate-
gories for grouping data. Selective coding was
subsequently used to develop a theoretical
imderstanding of competencies in macro
social work practice that was grounded in the
themes that emerged. This theory was then
chaUenged through reengagement with and
reexamining of the data. Further, theoretical
triangulation with relevant literatures was
implemented after themes began to emerge.
Member checking was used by presenting the
emerging theoretical understanding to anoth-
er group of field instructors to assess trarisfer-
abüity and confirmabiUty (CresweU, 2007;
Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & AUen, 1993).
Findings
Snapshots of Student Competency in
Macro Practice
Field instructors were first asked to provide a
brief description of each of the three types of
students they had taught in a macro prac-
ticum: exemplary, average, and problematic.
STUDBIT COMPETENCIES IN MACRO PRACTICE 3 1 1
This aUowed for a beginning analysis of core
competencies that were viewed as important
in these tj^es of social work environments.

Exemplary students. A number of common
themes emerged in the descripfion of exem-
plary students. The first theme clustered
around the term "open-minded learners." In
this domain, field instructors explained that in
fast-paced and diverse m âcro pracficum set-
tings, students needed to have an awareness
of their learning needs, an abUity to arficulate
their needs, and flexibUity with respect to
learning opportunifies that would meet these
needs. A second theme emerged regarding
self-directedness and confidence, whUe main-
tairung an abiUty to ask for assistance if it is
required. Next, the abiUty to conceptualize
complex poUfical and systemic issues and the
manner in which polifics directed pracfice
intervenfions was viewed as a sign of exem-
plary ability. Several instructors used the
terms seeing or developing "linkages" between
issues and concepts. Other instructors noted
that these students were able to see the broad-
er picture, synthesize complex informafion, or
had highly developed analyfic skiUs. Engage-
ment skiUs that resulted in producfive rela-
tionships with both colleagues and client
groups were also viewed as important. Within
this was the ability to show respect and empa-
thy for marginaUzed individuals. Terms fre-
quently used in this domain included warmth,
caring, considerate, engaging, collaborative, cul-
turally sensitive, and professional. FinaUy, a

commitment to social jusfice and a parficular
passion for community development and
advocacy work were viewed as important.
Nevertheless, field instructors were quick to
note that this needed to be tempered by an
ability to listen to divergent views. One
instructor noted, "She wasn't imposing her
idealisfic viewpoint on them and she was able
to hear, frankly, some very conservative
points of view from our parficipants and work
without judging them."
Average students. Perhaps due to the
nature of the research interview, average stu-
dents were generaUy described in contrast to
exemplary and problemafic students. Average
students, for instance, were described as "less
confident" and not knowing exactly what
they wanted to do in contrast to exemplary
students. One instructor stated that "they
need to get up to speed, whUe the excepfional
student hits the ground running." Another
stated, "The difference between an average
student and an exemplary student is the aver-
age student needs support to encourage her or
to push her a Uttle bit." Average students were
viewed to need a Uttle more introducfion and
a bit more guidance. But "once given, they can
carry out the project and be trusted with the
work." Further, the average student was
viewed to produce work that benefits the
organizafion. Yet, although "the excepfional
student produces work that stands on its
own," the average student's work needs
greater supervisor involvement. "It would be

more of a coUaborafive project Whereas the
poor student, often the end product is some-
thing that looks like a make work project."
In contrast to problemafic students, aver-
age students are described as having a good
sense of judgment regarding what they know,
do not know, and what they need to know.
"The average MSW students tend to be reaUy
good at linking what they're learning in the
classroom with what they are doing in the
practicum. So, they tend to be reaUy active in
vocalizing what they're learning, what they're
interested in, and then being able to ask for
opportunities in the practicum that they
want." Average students were seen to need
some time to develop and grow. However,
they are viewed as organized, responsible,
and punctual. To manage lack of confidence,
they tend to be weU-prepared, but stiU need
reassurance. Field instructors reported that
average students respond to guidance and
fulfiU tasks that are assigned, but they rarely
initiate their own tasks.
Problematic or struggling students.Themes
that emerged with respect to struggling stu-
dents included lack of self-confidence, "diffi-
culty shifting gears and balancing a bunch of

baUs," lack of compassion and empathy, lack
of knowledge, lack of enthusiasm, and diffi-
culty working as a team member. Field in-
structors did not think that problematic stu-
dents had a clear sense of their career goals.
They were viewed as needing a great deal of
direction on tasks, seemed unmotivated, and
took undue amovmts of time to complete
tasks. In the end, it was reported that prob-
lematic students seem to have accompUshed
Uttle in the practicum.
In a macro setting ideology can also be
problematic. As an instructor stated, "The one
student who was the most difficult had a dif-
ferent ideological base, and I wondered why
they had come to the agency. There was not a
good mesh between goals and what the
agency does." These students can have a neg-
ative influence throughout the organization.
"I've had students who all they do is point out
negative things that are happening but they
don't want to be part of implementing
changes. They don't want to be part of solu-
tions to fix things."
Macro Competencies in Core Practice
Dimensions
This next analysis considers core competen-
cies that have previously been identified in
cUnical social work students (Bogo et al., 2004;
Bogo et al., 2006) and in the Uterature on
macro practicum placements (Hermoso et al.,

2006; Mertz et al., 2007; Mor Barak et al., 2004).
The field instructors were asked to comment
on engagement with learning, behavior in the
organization, linking poUcy and practice, rela-
tionships within the organization, differential
use of self, assessment and analysis, interven-
tion planning, leadership, verbal communica-
tion, written communication, values and
ethics, and deaUng with diversity. In analyz-
ing the data, six categories emerged that relate
particularly to macro practice. Specifically
identified were learning and growth; behavior
and relationships; leadership; critical think-
ing, analysis, planning, and implementation;
written and verbal professional commimica-
tion; and values and ethics. In each category,
specific skuls or attributes that are valued by
field instructors are described below.
Learning and growth. The snapshot de-
scriptions above demonstrate that learning
and growth are central to the manner in which
student competencies are viewed in macro
practice. This included students' interest in
learning and the extent to which they are able
to identify learning goals. Core competencies
in this area included being self-directed and
independent, self-aware, proactive in seeking
learning opportunities, curious, enthusiastic,
organized, and willing to chaUenge them-
STUDENT COMPETENCIES IN MACRO PRACTICE 3 1 3

selves. Ability to accept corrective feedback
and understand the role of the student within
the organization was also viewed as impor-
tant by field instructors.
Behavior and relationships. As noted, en-
gagement skills were described by field
instructors as critical to macro practice. It was
identified that it was important for students to
have the ability to understand the importance
of workplace relationships and the impact of
their behavior on the organization. Core com-
petencies described in this domain included
the ability to work coUaboratively with others,
contribute positively to the team and the work
of the organization, be respectful, adapt one-
self to the organizational culture, maintain
professional boundaries, and be self-reflective.
Leadership. Competencies related to lead-
ership included three themes: self-leadership,
task-oriented leadership, and leadership of
others. Self-leadership involved the student's
abuity to develop his or her own program of
work and identify opportunities. Task-oriented
leadership refers to the ability to identify ways
to contribute to the agency, such as developing
a new resource or tool, or making a presenta-
tion. Project management skills were also
included in this domain. Leadership of others
was described as effectively leading stakehold-
er groups or making contacts with other organ-
izations for the benefit of their practicum
organization and its stakeholders. Another skill
noted here was the ability to lead peers by tak-

ing on a role of a senior student or leading oth-
ers by example. On a more general level, lead-
ership was described as the ability to take risks.
Critical thinking—Analysis, planning, and
implementation. This domain was summarized
by one instructor as "the ability to move in
two directions to apply policy to practice and
practice theory to policy development and
implementation." Competencies in this area
included the ability to see the broader picture,
while understanding, articulating, and imple-
menting the sequence of steps necessary to
achieve desired outcomes. Awareness of poli-
cies and practices and their differential effect
on stakeholder groups were also noted as
important. The ability to critically evaluate
organizational practices "without being offen-
sive to staff," while still being able to function
within organizational constraints, was de-
scribed as essential to macro practice.
Professional communication. Competent
writing was described as demonstrating that
the student had absorbed and understood the
issues, dimensions, and various perspectives
regarding the policy or plan. Reports were
expected to be professional, well-researched,
and sophisticated. Basic skills such as using
proper grammar; clear organization; and
being succinct, concise, and cogent were iden-
tified. In preparing reports, understanding
and appropriately addressing the audience

was also identified as important.
Competent students are able to effective-
ly communicate ideas to others in a profes-
sional manner suitable to the audience. This
includes using appropriate tone and lan-
guage, being articulate and a quick thinker,
and paraphrasing ideas and insights well.
Oral presentations were viewed as critical in
macro practice. Competence in oral presenta-
tions involved being well organized, clear,
accurate, djmamic, engaging, and inspiring.
Confidence in presenting and the ability to
respond to both expected and unexpected
questions was identified as important.
Values and ethics. Competent students are
described as having a clear sense of personal
values on which they base acfions, relafion-
ships, and their work. They understand the
values and ethics of both the agency and the
profession of social work. Such students are
sensifive to diversity issues and are commit-
ted to anfioppressive pracfice. They are able to
integrate these values into their daüy interac-
fions. They are able to acfively raise quesfions
about values and ethics in the conduct of their
work. These students are able to examine their
own values and biases and work with clients
in a nonjudgmental manner.
Discussion

A considerable body of theorefical, educafion-
al, and empirical literature about field educa-
fion for undergraduate and graduate social
work students exists with related field
pracficum policies, field educator ftaining,
best pracfices for field educafion, identificafion
of competencies, and assessment of student
learning. The literature is relevant and applica-
ble to generalist social work pracfice taught in
baccalaureate programs and to micro, or clini-
cal pracfice, taught in master's programs.
However, field educafion for macro pracfice at
the MSW level has received scant aftenfion in
the social work educafion Hterature, despite
estimates that approximately 10% of students
focus their study in this concenftafion (Ray-
mond et al., 1996). Accordingly, this study
aimed to conftibute to field educafion for stu-
dents in macro pracficum through developing
a theorefical understanding of core competen-
cies for macro social work pracfice.
Interviews with experienced field instruc-
tors focused on their refiecfions on students
they had previously supervised. First, this
involved giving "snapshot" descripfions of
students who demonsftated exemplary, aver-
age, and problematic performance. Next,
instructors were asked to comment on specif-
ic competencies as they applied to macro
social work pracfice. This data was then ana-
lyzed themafically to derive a theoretical
model for understanding competency in
macro social work pracfice.

Previous research on clinical students
resulted in a model of understanding compe-
tency as having two primary and interrelated
dimersions: procedural skiüs and meta com-
petencies (Bogo et al., 2006). These meta com-
petencies are higher order, overarching abiU-
fies and qualifies that are of a difterent charac-
ter than skuls (Cheetham & Chivers, 1998,
2005) but affect the way students and profes-
sionals learn, assess pracfice situafions, and
intervene to bring about change. Simüarly in
this study field instructors discussed students'
performance in a holisfic manner wherein stu-
dents' qualifies and abilifies, knowledge, val-
ues, and skiüs were evident as they engaged
in learning and performed in a range of macro
pracfice assignments in the setting.
The snapshot descripfions provided by
field instructors of both exemplary and prob-
lemafic or struggling macro pracficum stu-
dents focused primaruy on what might be
thought of as personal characterisfics or meta
competencies, suggesting that these compe-
tencies are cenftaüy important to macro social
work practice. Exemplary students were
described as self-directed, competent, open-
minded, analyfic, respectful, caring, consider-
ate, engaging, and professional. In conftast,
problemafic students were described as lack-

ing in compassion, empathy, knowledge,
direction, motivation, and enthusiasm. Fur-
ther, commitment to social justice was seen as
differentiaUy appUed by students who were
exemplary versus those who were problemat-
ic. That is, exemplary students could be
respectful of other viewpoints and accepting
of those who held them, whereas proble-
matic students were described as judgmental
and negative when faced with divergent
viewpoints.
The focus on meta competencies was also
evident in the discussions regarding specific
areas of competence. That is, in the areas of
learrüng and growth, behavior in the orgarüza-
tion, leadership, and values and ethics, per-
sonal characteristics were key elements of the
competencies described. In addition, the area
of critical thinking, analysis, plarming, and
implementation also contained elements of
meta competencies, such as the abuity to view
issues broadly and from multiple perspecfives.
Interestingly, although meta competen-
cies clearly differentiated exemplary students
and problematic students, descriptions of
average students contained more competen-
cies that might be thought of as procedural or
practice skUls. These included the ability to
carry out a project, writing skiUs, and linking
classroom knowledge with the practicum
experience. Other practice skiUs feU into cate-
gories of planning and implementation, and
professional communication. Such skills
included awareness of poUcies, articulating

and implementing steps required for produc-
ing change, project management, report writ-
ing, and presentation skuls. A summary of
meta competencies and procedural skiUs can
be found in Table 1.
From the participants' rich descriptions it
appears that strong students at this level in
their practice development demonstrate ini-
tiative and self-direction in aU areas of the
practicum. This is observed by field irstruc-
tors in the students' abuity to articulate their
learning needs and find opportunities to meet
those needs; in having confidence; being inde-
pendent, versatüe, and flexible; and being
able to work on one's own and produce high-
quality work. High levels of competency also
involve strong conceptual and analytic abuity
as seen in critical thinking and the use of
diverse theoretical perspectives, being open-
minded, and thinking broadly and from a
social justice and empowerment perspective.
Strong performance also includes the capacity
to form and maintain respectful professional
relationships—^with coUeagues in the work-
place, in productive work in teams, and with
a wide range of commurüty stakeholders. As
well, strong quaUties include cultural compe-
tence, the abuity to work with marginaUzed
cUent groups, and the abiUty to hear and con-
sider divergent opinioris. The organizational
context of macro practice and the social
change goal requires the abuity to work with-
in rules imposed by the organization and to
appropriately chaUenge them as well. Proc-
edural or operational competencies such as

project management, planning, implementa-
tion, report writing, and presentation skuls
were aU described as reflecting these broad
dimensions.
Conciusion
As social work educators strive to articulate
and assess advanced practice specific to a con-
centrafion, they are confronted with the need
eo
o
a
S
'5
o
O)
u
a
(O
M
•a
e
w
S

a
(0
.S'5
«
ou
H
Ul
EQ
01
u
•.C
u
ra
I
*s
o
il
(U
N
ra - H y
s 5 ë
¡il
U
! C
er
s

ra
(B
'S
ê
0>
tn
's0)
m
bo
ra I
bo Pi S
(U
I •
í i í
2 s ^
§
bO
2
to
O,
il
bO C
ra S
01

01
ra
O
Si
ra
o
U
•V
'S
to conceptualize that practice in a way that
authentically reflects student levels of per-
formance in a practicum. A review of the lit-
erature on macro practice competency finds
descriptions at a global level that need to
become more specific to assist in the con-
struction of assessment tools for field
practicum. On the other hand, the tendency
to describe competencies in longer and
longer lists of discrete skills appears ill-
advised. A considerable literature critiques
such inventories as portraying social work
practice as mechanistic and reduced to a set
of discrete operations (Kelly & Horder, 2001;
Skinner & Why te, 2004). Such inventories
and assessment formats tend to omit the cru-

cial internal cognitive processes and inter-
personal and subjective factors that affect
competence (Cheetham & Chivers, 2005;
Eraut, 1994; Kane, 1992) and that appear to
constitute key dimensions these field instruc-
tor participants drew upon when they dis-
cussed their students. These findings remind
us that the traditional means for measuring
competence using Competency Based Edu-
cation models misses the essence of profes-
sional practice. That is, not all skills are
equal. Rather, professional practice rests on
meta competencies that allow professionals
to differentially use skiUs based on a broader
understanding of the social context in which
the skiUs are required and an understanding
of multiple outcomes of any given behavior
(Ericsson & Charness, 1994).
In keeping with the spirit of the compe-
tency firamework of EPAS (CSWE, 2008)—
that knowledge, values, and skills are evident
in complex practice behaviors—^new assess-
ment tools are needed that incorporate both
broad and specific factors, what we have
termed as meta competencies and procedural
competencies.
References
Albino, J., Young, S., Neumann, L., Kramer, G., Andrieu, S.,
Hervson, L., & Hendricson,
W. (2008). Assessing dental students' competence: Best practice
recommendations in the
performance assessment Hterature and investigation of current

practices in predoctoral
dental education. Journal of Dental Education, 72(12), 1405-
1435.
Bogo, M., Regehr, C, Powers, R., Hughes, J., Woodford, M., &
Regehr, G. (2004). Toward new
approaches for evaluating student field performance: Tapping
the impUcit criteria used by
experienced field instructors. Journal of Social Work Education,
40,417-425.
Bogo, M., Regehr, C, Woodford, M., Hughes, J., Power, R., &
Regehr, G. (2006). Beyond
competencies: Field instructors' descriptions of student
performance. Journal of Social
Work Education, 42,191-205.
Bondy, K., Jenkins, K., Seymour, L., Lancaster, R., & Ishee, J.
(1997). The development and
testing of competency-focused psychiatric nursing clinical
evaluation instrument.
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 11(2), 66-73.
Cheetham, G., dr Chivers, G. (1998). The reflective (and
competent) practitioner: A model
of professional competence which seeks to harmorüse the
reflective practitioner and
competence-based approaches. Journal of European Industrial
Training, 27(2), 267-276.
Cheetham, G., & Chivers, G. (2005). Professions, competence
and informal learning. Cheltenham,

UK: Edward Elgar.
CresweU, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design:
Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Council on Social Work Education. (2008). Educational policy
and accreditation standards.
Alexandria, VA: Author.
Cullen, D. (2005). Clinical education and clinical evaluation of
respiratory therapy students.
Respiratory Care Clinics of North America, 21(3), 4 2 5 - ^ 7 .
Deal, K., Hopkins, K., Eisher, L., & Hartin, J. (2007). Field
practicum experiences of
macro-oriented graduate students: Are we doing them justice.
Administration in Social
Work, 31(4), 41-58.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and
competence. London, UK: Ealmer Press.
Ericsson, K., & Chamess, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its
structure and acquisition.
American Psychologist, 49, 725-747.
Erlandson, D., Harris, E., Skipper, B., & Allen, S. (1993).
Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide

to methods. London, UK: SAGE.
Farrell, S. (2005). Evaluation of student performance: Clinical
and professional performance.
Academic Medicine, 12(4), 302e6-302el0.
Gordon, T., & Mitchell, D. (2004). A competency model for the
assessment an delivery of
spiritual care. Palliative Medicine, 18{7), 646-651.
Hardina, D., & Obel-Jorgensen, R. (2009). Increasing social
action competency: A fiamework
for supervision. Journal of Policy Practice, 8, 89-109.
Hermoso, J., Rosen, A., Overly, L., & Tompkins, C. (2006).
Increasing aging and advocacy
competency: The intergenerational advocacy pilot project.
Journal of Gerontological Social
Work, 48,179-192.
Kane, M. T. (1992). The assessment of professional
competence. Evaluation in Health Professions,
25(2), 163-182.
Kelly, J., & Horder, W. (2001). The how and the why:
Competences and holistic practice.
Social Work Education, 20,689-699.

McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview. Newbury Park, CA:
SAGE.
Mertz, L., Eortune, A., & Zendell, A. (2007). Promoting
leadership skills in field education:
A imiversity-community partnership to bring macro and micro
together in gerontological
field placements. Journal of Gerontological Social Work,
50,173-186.
Mor Barak, M., Travis, D., & Bess, G. (2004). Exploring
managers' and administrators'
retrospective perceptions of their MSW fieldwork experience: A
national study.
Administration in Social Work, 28(), 21-44.
Netting, E, Kettner, P., & McMurtry, S. (2008). Social work
macro practice (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
AJljm and Bacon.
Padgeft, D. (1998). Qualitative methods in social work research:
Challenges and rewards. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pafton, M. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Ra)rmond, G., Teare, R., & Atherton, C. (1996). Do
management tasks difter by field of pracfice.
Administration in Social Work, 20(1), 17-30.
Regehr, G., Regehr, C , Power, R., & Bogo, M. (2007). Can we
buüd a befter mouseftap?:
Improving measures of social work pracfice performance in the
field. Journal of Social Work
Education, 43, 327-344.
Resrdck, R. (1993). Teaching and testing technical skuls.
American Journal of Surgery, 165,
358-361.
Skirmer, K., & Whyte, B. (2004). Going beyond ftaining:
Theory and pracfice in managing
learning. Social Work Education, 23, 365-381.
Spmiü, J., Rozensky, R., Sfigaü, T., Vasquez, M., Bingham, R.,
& Olvey, C. (2004). Becoming
a competent clirücian: Basic competencies in intervenfion.
Journal of Clinical Psychology,
60(7), 741-754.
Talbot, M. (2004). Monkey see, monkey do: A crifique of the
competency model in graduate
medical educafion. Med Educ, 38(6), 587-592.

Wimpfheimer, S. (2004). Leadership and management
competencies defined by pracficing
social work managers: An overview of standards developed by
the Nafional Network
for Social Work Managers. Administration in Social Work,
28(1), 45-56.
Accepted: 0 3 / 1 1
Cheryi Regehr is vice-provost and professor, Marion Bogo is
professor, Kirsten Donovan is
research assistant, and Aprii Lim is a PhD candidate at the
University of Toronto. Susan Anstice is
a social worker at Community Care East York.
Address correspondence to Cheryl Regehr, Factor-lnwentash
Faculty of Social WorK University of
Toronto, 27 King's College Circle, Toronto, M5A l S l , Canada;
e-mail: [email protected]
This research was generously funded by the Sandra Rotman
Chair in Social Work.
Copyright of Journal of Social Work Education is the property
of Council on Social Work Education and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.

Disseminating Effective Community
Prevention Practices: Opportunities for
Social Work Education
J. David Hawkins,
1
Valerie B. Shapiro,
1
and Abigail A. Fagan
2
Abstract
In the United States, about 17% of adolescents meet diagnostic
criteria for mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) disorders.
Six
million young people receive treatment services annually for
mental, emotional, or behavioral problems. These problems
affect
one in five families and cost $247 million annually. Some
strategies for preventing MEB disorders in young people have
been
developed, tested, and found to be effective in preventing the
onset, persistence, and severity of psychological disorders, drug
abuse, and delinquency. Unfortunately, tested and effective
prevention policies, programs, and practices are not widely
used.
This article highlights recent advances in prevention science
and describes some opportunities and challenges in advancing
the
use of science-based prevention in communities. The chapter
concludes by exploring the potential role of social work

education
in developing a workforce ready to increase community access
to effective prevention strategies.
Keywords
prevention, prevention science, Communities That Care, social
work education, Community Youth Development Study,
workforce development, training, curriculum content
Much progress has been made over the past 30 years in the
development and testing of prevention policies, programs, and
practices. Effective policies, programs, and practices for pre-
venting mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) problems
in young people have been identified through controlled studies
using rigorous experimental designs (O’Connell, Boat, &
Warner, 2009). A variety of effective prevention programs
have been found to produce benefits to individuals and society,
which far exceed their costs (Allen, 2005). Lists of these
programs are available on the Internet (colorado.edu/cspv/
blueprints; ncadi.samhsa.gov/features/ctc/resources.aspx). Yet
in the allocation of resources, effective prevention strategies
are often overlooked in the favor of strategies to cope with the
‘‘downstream consequences’’ of disorder (Woolf, 2006).

Systems for treating MEB disorders are sustained through an
existing infrastructure that provides funding, access, and
workforce training. The translation of effective preventive
approaches to widespread practice now requires the develop-
ment of a sufficient infrastructure for prevention (Cullen &
Jonson, 2009; O’Connell et al., 2009; Woolf, 2006).
Balas and Boren (2000) speculated on reasons that advances
made through research might fail to be successfully
institutionalized in widespread practice. They suggested that
(a) scientific research is often intentionally isolated from the
complicated realities of individuals, service providers, and
communities to maintain the integrity of the scientific process;
(b) scientific theories tested with specific populations may fail
when generalized to understudied populations and settings; (c)
tested and effective practices may be difficult for potential
users to access; (d) tested policies, programs, or practices may
be too poorly articulated, cumbersome, or costly for wide-
spread replication with fidelity; (e) attention is not given to the

needs, values, and priorities of the individuals and communities
that might use the new programs or practices; and (f) there is a
lack of attention to understanding mechanisms for sustainable
systems change and community infrastructure development
needed to support effective policies, programs, and practices.
Some of the problems identified by Balas and Boren have
been addressed by prevention scientists. Standards for effec-
tiveness and dissemination research trials developed by the
Society for Prevention Research (2004) emphasize that preven-
tion policies, programs, and practices should be tested within
real-world settings by practitioners. Further, these standards
emphasize the need for research samples to be clearly
1 School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle,
USA
2
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of
South
Carolina, Columbia, USA
Corresponding Author:
J. David Hawkins, Social Development Research Group, School

of Social Work,
University of Washington, 9725 3rd Ave. NE, Suite 401,
Seattle, WA 98115,
USA.
Email: [email protected]
Research on Social Work Practice
20(5) 518-527
ª The Author(s) 2010
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1049731509359919
http://rswp.sagepub.com
518
described to inform generalizations to diverse populations. The
concerns of Balas and Boren are further addressed by standards
requiring that prevention program developers create manuals,
training, and technical assistance to support the high-quality
use and replication of prevention technologies. Those who con-
duct effectiveness and dissemination trials following these
standards cannot work in isolation from the individuals and
organizations that must implement new prevention programs

and policies when taken to scale. Nevertheless, several
challenges to the widespread adoption of tested and effective
preventive interventions raised by Balas and Boren remain.
Community infrastructures are needed which can support the
installation of tested and effective prevention policies, pro-
grams, and practices while attending to the needs, values, and
priorities of the individuals, organizations, and communities
using these new preventive interventions.
What Makes Prevention Unique?
Prevention science is based on the premise that to prevent men-
tal health problems, substance abuse disorders, or crime before
these problems occur, it is necessary to identify and alter the
predictors of such problems (Coie et al., 1993). ‘‘Risk factors’’
are characteristics of individuals or environments that predict
an increased likelihood of an undesirable outcome. Promotive
factors are characteristics of individuals or environments that
predict a decreased likelihood of an undesirable outcome.
‘‘Protective factors’’ predict a decreased likelihood of an unde-

sirable outcome in the presence of risk exposure (Rutter, 1985).
Longitudinal studies in the United Kingdom, New Zealand,
Scandinavia, Canada, and the United States have identified
risk, promotive, and protective factors for a wide range of
adolescent MEB problems. These studies have identified risk,
promotive, and protective factors in neighborhoods, schools,
peer groups, and families, as well as in individuals themselves
(Catalano, Kosterman, Hawkins, Newcomb, & Abbott, 1996;
Catalano, Park, Harachi, Haggerty, Abbott, & Hawkins,
2005; Huang, Kosterman, Catalano, Hawkins, & Abbott,
2001; Lonczak et al., 2001; O’Connell et al., 2009). Prevention
science seeks to alter malleable risk, promotive, and protective
factors in individuals and environments in hopes of changing
the probability that future problems will occur.
Prevention is distinct from treatment (O’Connell et al.,
2009). Prevention occurs when communities, groups, or indi-
viduals who do not meet criteria for the diagnosis of illness,
disorder, or crime receive services or interventions that reduce

the chances of developing a disorder or criminal behavior in the
future (O’Connell et al., 2009). This helps explain why the
development of unique infrastructure is important to the disse-
mination of effective prevention. Preventive interventions seek
to reach and affect those who do not necessarily interact with
clinically trained professionals or meet criteria for the funding
streams that have traditionally supported treatment or interven-
tion services for those with mental, emotional, or behavior
problems. Preventive services may be provided to an entire
population (universal prevention), to those at risk for problems
because of exposure to risk factors, who have not yet experi-
enced a problem (selective prevention), or to those who have
shown early signs or symptoms of mental, emotional, or
behavioral problems but who have not yet developed a diagno-
sable disorder or criminal behavior (indicated prevention).
Interventions initiated in response to mental disorders, drug
abuse/dependence, or delinquent/criminal behavior, including
treatment, punishment, and incapacitation, intended to prevent

the reoccurrence of the problem or promote recovery are not
truly preventive, as discussed here, because the undesirable
outcome has already occurred (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994;
O’Connell et al., 2009).
Another reason that the development of a unique infrastruc-
ture is important to the dissemination of effective prevention
practice is the fact that many of the same factors predict a
diverse array of outcomes, including criminal behavior,
violence, depression, substance abuse, teenage pregnancy,
dropping out of school, and other behavior problems in adoles-
cence and young adulthood (Howell, 2009; O’Connell et al.,
2009). Because many of the same risk factors predict a number
of different negative outcomes, it is possible to prevent these
different problems by addressing their shared predictors. This
creates a disconnect between existing service delivery systems
that are designed to intervene and treat specific problems such
as crime, mental disorders, or substance abuse and those
needed to support prevention programs. For example, a low

commitment to education and academic failure are predictors
of later delinquency and drug abuse, but juvenile courts and
drug treatment agencies often have little influence on interven-
tions to increase school success in the communities they serve.
Yet specific methods of classroom management and instruction
can prevent future drug use and delinquent behavior by increas-
ing academic success and enhancing students’ commitment to
schooling/education (Wilson, Gottfredson, & Najaka, 2001).
Schools must be involved in prevention efforts if the relevant
risk factors are to be addressed. As this example illustrates,
changing risk and protective factors in communities requires
coordination by multiple existing service and community
structures such as police, city planners, schools, families, and
businesses. New prevention infrastructures are needed to
ensure that all the relevant stakeholders who represent the
entire range of institutions and organizations that affect risk,
promotive, and protective factors are involved in planning and
implementing preventive interventions.

In sum, diverse stakeholders need to be part of local preven-
tion infrastructures promoting effective prevention in each
community. Prevention infrastructures need to exist locally
because risk, promotive, and protective factors vary in intensity
and prevalence in different communities (Hawkins, Van Horn,
& Arthur, 2004; Van Horn, Hawkins, Arthur, & Catalano,
2007), and the specific risk, promotive, and protective factors
that are elevated or depressed vary across communities (Fagan,
Hawkins, & Catalano, 2008). These profiles of risk, promotive,
and protective factors may also vary over time as conditions
change and problems are addressed. Communitywide efforts
to prevent MEB problems before they arise need to address the
Hawkins et al. 519
519
specific levels of risk and protective factors in each community
at a given time. Further, the resources available for prevention,
the values and priorities of community members, and the per-

ceived fit and acceptability of various preventive interventions
are likely to differ across communities. Having diverse stake-
holders participate in the prevention infrastructure ensures that
communities can effectively build on local strengths, address
local needs, and recognize local preferences while planning,
promoting, and implementing tested and effective prevention
strategies. Community prevention infrastructures are needed
which foster local ownership and self-determination while
using the advances of prevention science to prevent community
problems (Hawkins, Catalano, & Arthur, 2002).
Community Coalitions as Prevention
Infrastructures
Coalitions of diverse stakeholders representing a variety of
agencies and organizations concerned with the healthy devel-
opment of young people have been advocated as infrastructures
for advancing prevention in communities. Coalitions have been
a popular mechanism for communitywide change in substance
use prevention and other areas (Roussos & Fawcett, 2000).
Given the multiple sources of risk and protection, the overlap

in risk and protection for multiple problems, and the variation
in local risk exposure, a community-driven, communitywide
effort to reduce health-risking behaviors has been advocated
to reduce health-risking behaviors community wide (Woolf,
2006).
However, a number of prior efforts to activate coalitions of
community stakeholders to prevent problems have been unsuc-
cessful. Several well-intentioned community-based coalition
efforts have failed to make any significant difference in the
lives of young people. Scientific evaluations of coalitions
focused on preventing problems ranging from drug abuse to
teen pregnancy have found no positive effects on these out-
comes (Collins, Johnson, & Becker, 2007; Flewelling et al.,
2005; Hallfors, Cho, Livert, & Kadushin, 2002; Roussos &
Fawcett, 2000; Wandersman & Florin, 2003; Yin, Kaftarian,
Yu, & Jansen, 1997; Zakocs & Edwards, 2006). Even
well-funded initiatives such as the Robert Wood Johnson
Foundation’s Fighting Back project and the federal Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention’s State Incentive Grants have
failed to produce significant effects on young people’s health
or behaviors in available evaluations (Collins et al., 2007; Hall-
fors et al., 2002).
Evaluations of these failed coalition initiatives have
concluded that to produce a significant impact on intended out-
comes, coalitions should follow some basic guidelines (Collins
et al., 2007; David-Ferdon & Hammond, 2008; Feinberg,
Greenberg, Osgood, Sartorius, & Bontempo, 2007; Flewelling
et al., 2005; Hallfors et al., 2002):
� Set clearly defined, focused, and manageable goals;
� Ensure that efforts allow for adequate planning time;
� Base decisions on empirical data about what needs to
change in the community and on evidence from scientifi-
cally valid studies of what works to address those needs;
� Implement policies, practices, and programs that have been
tested and shown to be effective;
� Carefully monitor prevention activities to ensure imple-
mentation quality.
A new generation of community coalition–based approaches

has emerged with a dual focus on both community mobilization
and the use of scientific evidence regarded as essential for the
success of community-based prevention. When community sta-
keholders from diverse organizations and backgrounds come
together to achieve clear and common goals, use scientific
advances regarding what works to prevent problem behaviors,
and monitor their activities for quality assurance, positive out-
comes can be achieved. By pooling information and resources
and selecting tested and effective policies and programs that
address local needs, community coalitions can ensure the
adoption of tested and effective prevention activities, enhance
community buy-in for these initiatives, and increase the likeli-
hood of their sustainability.
There is now clear evidence that coalition-based efforts that
meet these conditions can increase the likelihood of positive
and widespread benefits for community youth. Recent evalua-
tions of two community-based, coalition-driven models have
demonstrated effectiveness in reducing children’s involvement

in problem behaviors. Although their specific implementation
processes differ, both the PROmoting School–community–
university Partnerships to Enhance Resilience (PROSPER)
project (Spoth, Greenberg, Bierman, & Redmond, 2004) and
the Communities That Care (CTC) operating system (Hawkins,
Catalano, & and Associates, 1992; Hawkins, Catalano, &
Arthur, 2002) rely on broad-based coalitions of community
stakeholders who work together to carefully implement and
mon-
itor prevention strategies that have scientific evidence of effec-
tiveness. The PROSPER model is initiated by local university
Cooperative Extension Service agents, who partner with school
district personnel to advocate for the use of tested and effective
family- and school-based programs. Prevention activities are
overseen by a coalition of stakeholders that typically includes
representatives from substance use and mental health agencies,
parents, youth, and other local leaders (Spoth et al., 2004).
In the CTC system (Hawkins et al., 1992), the community

coalition is composed of key leaders and stakeholders from all
sectors of the community, including schools, law enforcement,
health and human service agencies, youth-serving agencies,
local government, business, religious groups, youth, and par-
ents. The coalition identifies local prevention needs by con-
ducting a school-based survey of the community’s youth and
a review of ongoing community prevention services. The coali-
tion then selects prevention activities from a menu of tested and
effective preventive interventions to fill gaps in prevention
services, implements and tracks these activities and their out-
comes, and makes implementation changes as needed to ensure
results.
520 Research on Social Work Practice 20(5)
520
The PROSPER and the CTC system have both been tested in
well-designed randomized experiments and have been found to
reduce adolescent problem behaviors. The evaluation of the

PROSPER model was conducted in 28 communities in Iowa and
Pennsylvania in which communities were randomly assigned
either to receive PROSPER or not. Eighteen months after the
study began, fewer middle school students in the 14 PROSPER
communities reported having used gateway or illicit drugs for
the first time. Students in the PROSPER communities also
reported less marijuana and inhalant use in the past year com-
pared to students in the control communities (Spoth et al.,
2007).
The CTC system has been evaluated in two studies, one con-
ducted by the Prevention Research Center at The Pennsylvania
State University (Feinberg et al., 2007) and one conducted by
the Social Development Research Group at the University of
Washington (Hawkins et al., 2008). The Pennsylvania project
involved 120 communities funded to create CTC coalitions that
enacted tested and effective prevention programs, and a group
of comparison communities in which CTC was not enacted.
CTC communities experienced significant reductions in com-
munitywide alcohol and cigarette use as well as in delinquent

behaviors compared with controls (Feinberg & Greenberg, in
press; Feinberg et al., 2007).
The most recent CTC evaluation, the Community Youth
Development Study (CYDS), involved 24 matched communities
across seven states, which were randomly assigned to either
implement the CTC system or to conduct prevention services
as usual. Students in both CTC and control communities were
followed in a longitudinal panel from Grade 5 to Grade 8. By
the
spring of Grade 8, 4 years after the CTC process began, panel
students in CTC communities were 33% less likely to have tried
smokeless tobacco, 32% less likely to have initiated tobacco
use,
32% less likely to have ever used alcohol, and 25% less likely
to
have initiated delinquent behavior. By the spring of eighth
grade,
current alcohol use in the panel was reduced by 23%, current
smokeless tobacco use was reduced by 48%, and recent binge
drinking was reduced by 37%. Eighth-grade panel students from
CTC communities were 31% less likely than controls to engage
in a variety of delinquent acts.
Both the PROSPER and the CTC systems have produced

significant, communitywide reductions in behavior problems
among young people while many other coalitions initiatives
have not. It can be challenging to faithfully implement these
coalition-based approaches because they involve multiple
components enacted over several years by groups of diverse
individuals (Wandersman & Florin, 2003). Given the positive
outcomes found from controlled experimental trials of these
recent coalition-driven systems, it is important to understand
what skills are required of individuals to successfully imple-
ment them. Both PROSPER and CTC require a community
coordinator in each participating community to facilitate the
work of the prevention coalition. The skills of these coalition
coordinators will be important determinants of the success of
efforts to replicate these outcomes in communities nationwide
(Allen, 2005; Kegler, Norton, & Aronson, 2007; Riggs,
Morgan, & Pentz, 2008; Watson-Thompson, Fawcett, &
Schulz, 2008). In our work with communities implementing
CTC, we have identified the following skills and capacities that

community coordinators should have:
� Community-mobilizing skills for activating and organizing
coalitions of diverse community stakeholders.
� An understanding of the basic premises of prevention sci-
ence, including risk and protective factors and effective
prevention programs.
� Ability to collect, analyze, interpret, and present epidemio-
logic data on empirically identified risk and protective fac-
tors and MEB problems in the community.
� Group process facilitation skills needed to build stake-
holder consensus around priorities and actions.
� Ability to locate, read, comprehend, and critique research
reports on the effects of preventive interventions.
� Knowledge of universal, selective, and indicated effective
prevention policies, programs, and practices.
� Knowledge of the various systems, agencies, and organiza-
tions that affect youths and could be activated for preven-
tion programming.
� Skills to facilitate implementation and integration of pre-
vention strategies into existing systems, agencies, and
organizations.
� Appreciation of the need to implement prevention strate-
gies with fidelity; that is, in adherence to the theoretical

rationale and key components specified by developers.
� Ability to manage systems for monitoring fidelity of
implementation.
� Process and outcome evaluation skills.
� Ability to communicate the economic benefits of tested and
effective preventive interventions relative to their costs.
� Ability to identify and secure resources to support and sus-
tain coalition and prevention work.
This is an extensive list of skills and capacities needed to suc-
cessfully coordinate the work of community prevention coali-
tions. It is difficult to find candidates who have them all. The
2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report identified workforce
development as one of three infrastructure challenges to the
effective widespread dissemination and implementation of
the advances of prevention science (O’Connell et al., 2009).
The
Annapolis Coalition on Behavioral Health Workforce Education
(Hoge & Morris, 2003) asserted that ‘‘the public health perspec-
tive on the value of prevention, early identification and early
intervention are honored in training programs more in word than

deed’’ (p. 2). The Annapolis Coalition recommended that clini-
cal training programs be expanded to include specific competen-
cies in prevention (Hoge, Huey, & O’Connell, 2004). There is a
need for purposive training of prevention practitioners.
Social Work’s Advantageous Position for
Providing Prevention Training
Social work has a long history of leadership in prevention work
(Siefert, 1983) and is well positioned to respond to this
Hawkins et al. 521
521
contemporary need. Social work originally emerged as a dis-
tinct profession through primary prevention efforts in the set-
tlement house movement (Van Pelt, 2009). The Sheppard-
Towner Act of 1921 established governmental responsibility
for the health of children and was passed, based in large part
on an advocacy campaign led by social workers. This legisla-
tion established national and local infrastructures to carry out

data collection activities and to mount preventive interven-
tions. Yet in 1981, Bloom decried the lack of emphasis on pre-
vention training in social work education programs (Bloom,
1981). Subsequently, the Council on Social Work Education
was awarded a 3-year National Institute of Mental Health
(NIMH) grant to ‘‘promote the development of curriculum and
teaching materials on primary prevention in mental health. The
ultimate objective of the project was to increase the supply of
manpower equipped to plan and deliver preventive mental
health services’’ (Nobel, 1981, p. v).
Reimbursement structures for services, the lure of private
practice, and an emphasis on ‘‘casework’’ and treatment for
disorders in the1980s inhibited the widespread inclusion of cur-
ricula focused on prevention in social work training programs
at that time (Roskin, 1980). Advances in prevention science
over the last two decades have clearly established what works
in preventing MEB disorders, creating a greater demand for
preventive services skills and resulting in new practice roles.

The Council for Social Work Education has recognized this
need for a trained prevention workforce by making the
‘‘Advanced Social Work Practice in the Prevention of Sub-
stance Use Disorders’’ (Council on Social Work Education,
2009), the first concentration area for which it has developed
advanced practice training competencies to build on the Educa-
tional Policy and Accreditation Standards of 2008.
Social work could be a natural home for prevention training.
Social work has a tradition of preparing students to consider
environmental predictors of health and behavior problems as
potential targets for preventive solutions (Roskin, 1980). Social
workers use an ecological model to consider multiple individ-
ual and contextual factors in assessment, intervention, and
evaluation, as well as the role of power and resources in under-
standing policy, institutions, and interpersonal dynamics (Rus-
sell, Champika, Wagoner, & Dawson, 2008). Social work
training already provides significant content in policy develop-
ment and agency administration (Moore, Davis, & Mellon,

1985). Social workers are exposed to the great variety of
service systems and agencies that are included in prevention
coalitions. At any given time, 58% of social work students are
in field placements learning applied practice skills. Further-
more, the solution-focused and strength-based methods that
social work trains students to use in their casework and
community-organizing activities are necessary in the work of
prevention (Roskin, 1980). Social work is poised to respond
to the 2009 IOM report’s call to develop a workforce to
advance the prevention of MEB disorders (O’Connell et al.,
2009). To what extent will social work provide leadership in
the preparation of professionals in the prevention of MEB prob-
lems? In the remainder of this article, we suggest ways in which
social work education might seize the opportunity to develop a
skilled workforce prepared to empower local coalitions to uti-
lize advances in prevention science to reduce the prevalence of
undesirable outcomes in the communities they serve. Our ideas
about skill development for prevention through social work
education require varying degrees of change. They are pre-

sented in hope that various approaches to infusing training for
preventive practice into social work education programs will be
considered, debated, and adopted to fill a growing need.
Opportunities for Development of the
Prevention Workforce
We see three strategic opportunities through which schools of
nonsocial work can advance workforce development for effec-
tive prevention policies, programs, and practices. These are
through general undergraduate education, preservice training
in social work at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels,
and continuing education training for workers already in
practice.
General Undergraduate Education
The federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) broadly defines their workforce
to include professionals, paraprofessionals, community mem-
bers, and families who work to promote resilience and recovery
(Hoge, Morris, Daniels, Stuart, Huey, & Adams, 2007). This

notion reflects the importance of consumer advocacy in system
transformation and the expanding role of paraprofessionals in
service delivery (Brennen, 1967; Clark, Power, Le Fauve, &
Lopez, 2008; Lincourt, 2005). It is important to empower stu-
dents earning associate and bachelor’s degrees with knowledge
of the advances of prevention science and skills needed to
become informed consumers of prevention services, committed
frontline paraprofessionals (such as mentors and tutors),
engaged community members, citizen advocates, and contribu-
tors to the advancement of prevention through their chosen
professions.
What does this look like in general undergraduate educa-
tion? Teaching undergraduates to use scientific principles to
inform opinions and decisions (Gambrill, 2006), helping them
to develop content knowledge and critical thinking skills
(Nickerson, 1986) in regard to the effective prevention of social
problems, and developing an ideal of social justice fostered
through the universal promotion of well-being (Kenny, Horne,

Orpinas, & Reese, 2008) should increase their support and
advocacy for prevention, encourage enrollment and retention
in effective preventive interventions, and facilitate recruitment
into the social work profession (Wittman, 1965). Social work
faculty should reach across disciplines and institutional bound-
aries to orient non-social work students to a way of thinking
that will foster the adoption of science-based solutions to social
problems. In a course, we offer at the University of Washing-
ton, titled ‘‘Advances in Prevention Science: Bridging the Gap
from Science to Service,’’ undergraduate students from diverse
522
disciplines learn, often for the first time, that many significant
social problems can be prevented before these problems occur.
The students learn to ask ‘‘what is the scientific evidence that
this policy, program, or practice works?’’ in formulating an
opinion as to how to ameliorate social problems. They learn

how to read scientific reports, evaluate evidence, and use their
power as engaged citizens and allied professionals to shape
debate and advocate for the implementation of effective pre-
vention strategies in their communities. These students are the
future coalition members, interventionists, and consumers of
community-based preventive initiatives and are crucial to the
successful development of infrastructure to support the diffu-
sion of tested and effective preventive policies and programs.
Preservice Training
Preservice training provides an opportunity for future social
workers to learn the skills needed for effective prevention prac-
tice. Bachelors of Social Work (BSWs) could be the interven-
tionists who implement effective prevention programs. Masters
of Social Work (MSWs) could be prepared for roles as commu-
nity coordinators who mobilize entire communities to use
effective strategies to prevent MEB disorders. Prevention train-
ing for these roles can be incorporated into social work educa-
tion through (a) integrating prevention into the foundation

curriculum, (b) offering elective courses and/or advanced
concentrations, and/or (c) developing interdisciplinary
collaborations.
Foundation Curriculum
Adding prevention content to foundation coursework is the most
direct way to broaden social workers’ perception of their roles
(Roskin, 1980) and ensure that classroom training is aligned
with
prevention practice demands (Volland, Berkman, Stein, &
Vaghy, 1999; Wilkinson, Rounds, & Copeland, 2002). Refram-
ing students’ expectations of social work roles to include those
who prevent problems (Conyne, Newmeyer, Kenny, Romano,
& Matthews, 2008) as well as treat them will encourage
students
to learn skills for community mobilization, and for the design,
implementation, and evaluation of preventive interventions
(Wilkinson et al., 2002). Skills needed for prevention work
build
upon skills developed in other courses, but the utility of these
skills for prevention often goes unnoted without sufficient con-

crete examples of application (Conyne et al., 2008).
In the foundation curriculum, students already learn to
assess empirical studies of interventions to determine whether
the design, measures, and analyses are adequate to allow
conclusions regarding intervention efficacy or effectiveness.
Students would benefit from additional examples using preven-
tive interventions and should learn skills to monitor the fidelity
of implementation in these courses. In teaching research
courses to MSW students, we have found that about three fifths
of students begin the course with the assumption that research
is ‘‘extremely useful or relevant’’ to social work practice, but
only about a third anticipate that research will be as useful or
relevant to the role they will have when they complete their
MSW. Social work students need to learn and appreciate
research methods as a practice skill relied upon in their preven-
tion and intervention work.
When students are introduced to the historical and intellec-
tual foundations of social work practice, they learn the philoso-

phical orientation that underlies public intervention to promote
community and social welfare. They should additionally learn
about the history of prevention in social work, from the com-
munity transformation efforts of the Settlement Movement and
the institutionalization of health promotion practices through
the Children’s Bureau (Kemp, Almgren, Gilchrist, & Eisinger,
2001), to the current mandates for evidence-based practice.
In foundation policy classes, students already develop skills
to analyze a policy for use as both a tool and target for social
change. In addition, students should understand how welfare
policy can be an investment in prevention (i.e., Esping-Ander-
sen’s Child Centered Social Investment Strategy calls for a
reorientation from welfare state ‘‘social spending’’ to ‘‘social
investment’’—Esping-Andersen, Gallie, Hemerijk, & Myers,
2002). They should study exemplars of effective policies for
the prevention of social problems, for example, how changing
the minimum drinking age from 18 to 21 reduced drinking and
driving accidents among 18- to 21-year-olds in the United

States (Wagenaar & Toomey, 2002).
In courses in which students learn about ‘‘human beha-
vior in the social environment,’’ students should be exposed
to the longitudinal and epidemiologic studies that have
identified risk and protective factors predictive of undesir-
able outcomes (Mason & Nakkula, 2008; Siefert, Jayaratne,
& Martin, 1992). Content should include individual, inter-
personal, and structural/systemic factors that interact and
predict diverse MEB outcomes. Students should develop
skills to collect, organize, interpret, and report epidemiolo-
gic data on risk and protective factors and on the incidence
and prevalence of MEB problems as a foundation for
data-based prevention practice.
In foundation practice classes, students begin to learn the
micro-practice skills of communicating with diverse stake-
holder groups, using screening protocols to select individuals
appropriate for interventions, and appraising strategies for
appropriateness with diverse populations in specific contexts.

Students also begin to learn the macro-practice skills of enga-
ging stakeholders and assessing resources, building consensus
for social priorities, and using effective outreach and education
campaigns to access hard-to-reach populations. In addition,
students need to understand the distinction between prevention
and treatment and the assumptions and characteristics of uni-
versal, selective, and indicated prevention approaches.
Infusion of prevention content into the curriculum requires
appropriate field education experiences (Conyne et al., 2008;
Zins, 2001). Currently, prevention practicum opportunities
appear most plentiful in school districts and with sovereign
tribes. It is noteworthy that at our own university, prevention
is not listed as an area of work on the checklists field sites used
to communicate placement opportunities to prospective
Hawkins et al. 523
523
students. When a meaningful number of bachelor’s and mas-

ter’s level social workers have opportunities to engage in pre-
vention work in their field placements, social workers will
begin to be adequately trained in prevention.
Advanced Electives or Specialization in Prevention
In some schools of social work, there may be opportunities for
advanced practice courses in prevention that build upon the
foundation already discussed. In such courses, students could
learn how to promote community readiness; mobilize coali-
tions; use risk and protective factor profiles to select new pre-
vention policies, programs, or practices to address identified
community needs; set explicit goals for change; and implement
preventive interventions that achieve coalition goals. Students
could learn how to secure or promote reallocation of resources
to support and sustain prevention work, and could study and
learn to apply theories of organization change and diffusion
of innovations (Rogers, 1995). They would also benefit from
understanding basic principles of benefit-cost analysis and
communicating the impact of preventive interventions in

economic terms.
Even where the core curriculum is unchanged, social work
educators could create freestanding courses and programmatic
tracks to prepare students specifically for prevention work. The
University of Michigan has offered ‘‘Preventive Intervention in
Social Work,’’ a course which conveys the history of preven-
tion in social work, the current knowledge base in prevention,
ethical issues in the design and implementation of prevention
strategies, and basic epidemiological methods (Siefert et al.,
1992). At the University of North Carolina, prevention course-
work was designed for the Maternal and Child Health Leader-
ship Program in order to connect the prevention agenda with
the mission and values of social work (Wilkinson et al.,
2002). Other universities have established freestanding multi-
disciplinary prevention training programs outside schools of
social work, such as the program at the University of Wisconsin
(a joint affiliation of the schools of education, human
development, nursing, and social work), or within colleges of

education, such as Harvard University, the University of Penn-
sylvania, and the University of Virginia, which each grant a
degree in some variant of prevention science (Britner &
O’Neil, 2008; Mason & Nakkula, 2008) for graduate students.
In partnership with the Southwest Prevention Center, the Uni-
versity of Oklahoma has developed an online master’s degree
program in prevention expected to enroll its first cohort in
2010 (http://swpc.ou.edu/services/masterdegree.htm).
Critics of these programs suggest that programs outside of
social work schools and departments may be difficult or costly
for social work students to access. It can be difficult to align
the
credits from these programs with accreditation standards for
gra-
duation, certification, and licensing. Moreover, elective preven-
tion programs and courses are likely to be enrollment challenges
for social work students if prevention content is absent from the
core curriculum in social work because students may not
appreciate the prevention training program’s relevance or utility

to their profession. Clearly, prevention training programs exter-
nal to social work should include mentoring and some course-
work in prevention in social work education programs in order
to integrate social work and prevention (Conyne et al., 2008).
Public Health Social Workers
Some universities have institutionalized relationships between
schools of public health and schools of social work to cross-
train cohorts of prevention workers (Institute for the Advance-
ment of Social Work Research [IASWR], 2003). Over the past
30 years, joint programs have expanded from an initial pilot in
Minnesota (Hooyman, Schwanke, & Yesner, 1981) to the cur-
rent 21 programs. Interdisciplinary trainers claim that the ben-
efits are mutual in helping social workers learn applied
epidemiology, and public health students learn participatory,
empowering, and culturally responsive techniques that aid in
diffusion of macropractice preventive interventions (Ruth,
Geron, Wyatt, Bachman, & Chiasson, 2006). Elizabeth Clark,
the executive director of National Association of Social Work-

ers (NASW), wrote that ‘‘public health social work might be
the future of social work. Recent political changes are expected
to affect the future delivery of health care, possibly leading to
more emphasis on preventive health care and integrated health
care and wellness services. The ability of public health social
workers to bridge prevention and intervention, individual and
community, and practice and policy will be increasingly valued
in our changing society’’ (Van Pelt, 2009, p. 30). The IASWR
(2003) reports several challenges to the implementation of this
model, including a lack of student identification with the term
‘‘public health social worker,’’ a lack of social work integration
into the American Public Health Association (APHA), and ten-
sions between the social work commitment to the vulnerable
and the public health commitment to the broad population, all
of which may be addressed by interdisciplinary mentoring and
field placements. The only published outcome study of gradu-
ates of these dual degree programs indicated that graduates
were slightly underutilized for their skills sets, felt somewhat

‘‘homeless’’ with regard to professional identification and had
significant financial consequences of the dual degree training,
though they reported that they would choose the same training
again. Participants in the dual degree program saw social work
as the ‘‘soft,’’ though valued, side of their training (Ruth et al.,
2006). Critics of the integration of public health content into
social work fear it will medicalize the profession (Siefert
et al., 1992).
At the doctoral level, required coursework often is more
flexible and interdisciplinary training is strongly encouraged.
At the University of Michigan and the University of Washing-
ton, institutional training grants support the development of
prevention scientists through the NIMH Prevention Research
Training Program. While those trained at the doctoral level
may have limited direct practice roles in prevention, they will
need to be well trained in prevention science in order to train
bachelor’s and master’s level social workers to provide
preventive services. They also may become prevention

524
program developers, researchers, state and federal program
administrators, and federal agency personnel. Preparation at
this level varies substantially by institution and needs to be
made more available.
In-service Training/Technical Assistance
Workforce training for prevention could also reach profession-
als already practicing in the field of social work through
in-service training and technical assistance. In fact, most clin-
icians develop their prevention skills on the job postgraduation
(Conyne et al., 2008). Technical assistance can be very respon-
sive and relevant to practice demands but has been found to be
more successful when built upon a training foundation that
allows practitioners to take advantage of it (Chinman et al.,
2005). Therefore, training and technical assistance programs
should be integrated. Social work departments have an oppor-

tunity to provide training to professionals through certificate
and continuing education programs. Nearly every jurisdiction
that issues social work licenses requires continuing education
courses for license renewal. Social work continuing education
requirements are rigorous across all 50 states (Daniels &
Walter, 2002), but continuing education opportunities for
practitioners working at the community level continue to be
sparse. Schools could offer such individuals a coordinated
series of prevention courses resulting in a postgraduate certifi-
cate in prevention practice. It could be worthwhile to extend
collaborations with APHA to provide continuing education
credits for public health social workers.
Schools of social work could also provide training to front-
line prevention practitioners who have not received graduate
training. Schools of social work could expand upon an emer-
ging infrastructure by partnering with the Association for
Addiction Professionals to become approved providers of train-
ing for Certified Prevention Specialists, a designation offered

by the International Certification and Reciprocity Consortium
(IC&RC) to credential frontline prevention workers in 40 of
50 American states and in 9 foreign countries (Hayden,
2005). Credentialing requires a minimum of 2,000 hr of prac-
tice experience, 120 hr in supervision, and 100 hr of education,
with a 40-hr continuing education requirement every 2 years.
The coursework content and the credentialing exam include
(a) planning and evaluation, (b) education and skill develop-
ment, (c) community organization, (d) public policy and envi-
ronmental change, and (e) professional growth and
responsibility. Although this training is now done exclusively
by the service sector, academic schools of social work should
become involved in training Certified Prevention Specialists
to facilitate the transfer of research to practice and bring
advances in prevention science to the field.
The Challenge Ahead
We are aware of the challenges of placing a serious emphasis
on prevention practice in social work education. A case study

from the Risk and Prevention training program at the Harvard
Graduate School of Education suggests that success is predi-
cated on finding like-minded faculty, communicating to admin-
istration and recruits the importance and uniqueness of the
program, ensuring eligibility for licensure, and translating the
training to professional opportunities upon graduation (Mason
& Nakkula, 2008). Others have suggested focusing first on
bachelor’s and doctoral training, so as to more quickly build
a quorum of agency staff ready to carry out prevention work,
change agency norms, and simultaneously prepare the next
generation of faculty with skills to teach prevention content
in master’s training programs (Siefert et al., 1992).
The advances in prevention science over the past two
decades have created the need for a national workforce that
is trained to move evidence-based prevention from efficacy and
effectiveness trials into widespread national application.
Schools and departments in other professions and disciplines
are assessing their capacity to seize this opportunity. We urge

schools and departments of social work to respond to this need
by leading the training of the prevention workforce of the 21st
century.
Authors’ Note
This article was prepared for the Los Angeles Conference on
Interven-
tion Research in Social Work, School of Social Work,
University of
Southern California, October 22–23, 2009. The authors wish to
acknowledge the contributions of the communities participating
in the
Community Youth Development Study.
Declaration of Conflict of Interest
The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the
author-
ship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support
for the
research and/or authorship of this article: A research grant from
the

National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA015183-01A1) with
co-
funding from the National Cancer Institute, the National
Institute of
Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of
Men-
tal Health, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism,
and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, and a training
grant
from the National Institutes of Mental Health (T32 MH20010).
References
Allen, N. E. (2005). A multi-level analysis of community
coordinating
councils. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 49-
63.
Balas, E. A., & Boran, S. A. (2000). Managing clinical
knowledge for
health care improvement. In J. H. van Bemmel, A. T. McCray &
T. Alexa (Eds.), Yearbook of medical informatics: Patient-
centered systems (pp. 65-70). Stuttgart, Germany: Schattauer.
Bloom, M. (1981). Primary prevention. Social Work in Health

Care, 6,
53-67.
Brennen, E. C. (1967). College students and mental health
programs
for children. American Journal of Public Health, 57, 1767-1771.
Britner, P. A., & O’Neil, J. M. (2008). The teaching of primary
pre-
vention: Concluding thoughts and a call to action. Journal of
Primary Prevention, 29, 455-459.
Hawkins et al. 525
525
Catalano, R. F., Kosterman, R., Hawkins, J. D., Newcomb, M.
D., &
Abbott, R. D. (1996). Modeling the etiology of adolescent sub-
stance use: A test of the social development model. Journal of
Drug Issues, 26, 429-455.
Catalano, R. F., Park, J., Harachi, T. W., Haggerty, K. P.,
Abbott, R.
D., & Hawkins, J. D. (2005). Mediating the effects of poverty,
gen-

der, individual characteristics, and external constraints on
antiso-
cial behavior: A test of the social development model and
implications for developmental life-course theory. In D.
P. Farrington (Ed.), Advances in criminological theory: Vol. 14.
Integrated developmental and life-course theories of offending
(pp. 93-123). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Chinman, M., Hannah, G., Wandersman, A., Ebener, P., Hunter,
S. B.,
Imm, P., et al. (2005). Developing a community science
research
agenda for building community capacity for effective preventive
inter-
ventions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 143-
157.
Clark, H. W., Power, A. K., Le Fauve, C. E., & Lopez, E. I.
(2008).
Policy and practice implications of epidemiological surveys on
co-occurring mental and substance use disorders. Journal of
Sub-
stance Abuse Treatment, 34, 3-13.

Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx

Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx

Similar to Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx (20)

More from wlynn1

More from wlynn1 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running head JOURNAL CRITIQUE 1Journal Critique - Assessi.docx