Carleton University
School of Social Work Theories in Social Science and Social Work (SOWK 5501) Fall 2013 Behnam Behnia, PhD Time: Room: Office: Office Hours:
Telephone: E-mail:
Thursday, 8:30-11:30 TBA 607 DT Thursday 11:30-12:30 Monday: 13:30-14:30 or by appointment 520-2600 ext.2665
[email protected]
Course Description In this course theories and perspectives such as person-centered psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioral, symbolic interactionist, ecological, empowerment, radical, structural, critical and anti-oppressive will be presented and examined. This course examines the relationships between theories in social sciences and social work and explores their connections to social work practice.
Course Objectives The objectives of this course are to make students acquainted with major theoretical frameworks that have shaped social work; to foster students’ awareness of the influence of theories on social work practice; and to enhance students’ ability to critically analyze social issues
Course Evaluation Course evaluation will be based on students' attendance and active participation in class discussion (5%), short paper (20%), class presentation (20%), and term paper (55%). * Depending on the class size, some elements of the evaluation scheme may be modified. I) Class Attendance and Participation (5%) Since this class is organized in an interactive format and professionals are invited to discuss various aspects of social work, students are expected to attend classes regularly, do the assigned readings, identify issues for class discussion, and actively participate in discussion.
1
* Students will lose all 5 marks if they miss five classes, except in exceptional circumstances such as the death in the family or the student’s illness. In the event of illness, student must provide a medical certificate. * Students who miss more than five classes will have two marks taken from their final grade for each additional class missed.
II) Short Paper (20%) (Oct 10) Each student will write a short paper (7 to 10 pages) on a topic of his/her choice. The short paper is intended to be an application of one or more theories. The short paper must be typed, and cannot be more than 10 double-spaced pages with a 12-point font (including bibliography and end-notes/foot-notes). * Students must use a minimum of five scholarly sources for their paper. * There is a penalty of 1 mark per day from final grade for late submission.
III) Class Presentation (20%) In class 7,8, 9, and 10 groups of 2-3 students will do a class presentation. Each group has 25-30 minutes to present and answers to questions. Groups are expected to review the outline of their presentation with the instructor beforehand and to submit a copy of their presentation to instructor after presentation. Please choose your group early for the greatest possibility of getting your topics preference. As this is a joint effort, the evaluation will be based on the paper that is submitted and presented and one grade will be assigned to all group members. * Groups must use a minimum of SIX academic sources for their presentation. Students are expected to submit a copy of their presentation to me after their presentation.
IV) Term Paper (55%) (Dec 8) The term paper is intended to be an application of one or more theories. The term paper must be typed, it can not be less than 16 pages and more than 20 double-spaced pages using a 12-point font (including bibliography and end-notes/ foot-notes) and should be handed to me personally, left in my mailbox, or deposited in the Department Essay Box. Enclose a self-addressed envelope with sufficient postage if you wish to have your essay returned by mail. Students are advised to keep a copy of their paper. * Students must use a minimum of ten scholarly sources for their paper * There is a penalty of 2 marks per day from final grade for late submission of the term paper
* Students are encouraged to print their assignments double-sided and not use bindings (especially plastic).
2
Evaluation Criteria for the Short and Term Papers I) Organization and Clarity (10%) Clarity of ideas and definitions Citations (author(s), year, and page) References (author(s), title, publisher, year, volume, number, and page) References include only the material cited in the text Structure of paper (length of paragraphs, subheadings, distribution of paper into different sections)
II) Comprehensiveness of Literature Review (20%)
III) Presentation of the paper’s thesis, Theoretical Framework, Key Concepts, Findings (50%) Statement of purpose/problem/thesis Rationale and Relevance of the topic Definition of theoretical framework and models as well as key concepts used for analysis Presentation of the paper’s finding and conclusions Elaboration of the argument
IV) Critical Reflections (20%) The essay is intended to be an application of the theories and material studied in the course as well as to illustrate student’s analytical ability
3
SOWK 5501 Class Presentation Each group has a maximum of 30 minutes of which about 20 minutes is allocated for the presentation and the rest for class discussion. Each group is expected to facilitate and guide a class discussion. Therefore, students will prepare a handout containing some of the highlights of their presentation as well as questions for class discussion.
Each group will: (1) describe the purpose/thesis of its presentation and explain its relevance; (2) define and apply theoretical framework(s) and key concepts used for analysis; and (3) provide its critical reflections and analysis (e.g., its observations regarding the strengths and weaknesses of a theory, the existing debates around the topic of their presentation, and the relevance of an intervention for the social work profession).
Evaluation of the class presentation will be based on the ability of the students to provide a non-descriptive analysis of the topic of their presentation, to clearly define and apply theories and concepts, to identify strengths and weaknesses of the used theory or approach, to show the complexity of the debate, to meet the time frame, to engage the class in discussion, and to produce a good quality handout.
Groups are expected to review the outline of their presentation with the instructor beforehand and to submit a copy of their presentation to instructor after presentation. Grades will be provided in the week following each presentation.
4
COURSE READINGS * The course readings are available in the Reserve Desk of the McOdrum Library. CLASS 1 Sep 12
Introduction and Overview of the Course
CLASS 2 Psychological Perspectives Sep 19 Freire, E.S. (2007). Empathy. In M. Copper, M. O’Hara, P.F. Schmid & G. Wyatt (Eds.), The Handbook of Person-Centered Psychotherapy and Counselling (pp. 194-206). New York: Palgrave McMillan. [RC481.H34] Randall, E. (2008). Existential Theory. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalist-eclectic Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 321-342). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42] Rogers, Carl R. (1961). The Characteristics of a Helping Relationship. In On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy (pp. 39-58). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. [RC480.5.R62] Rothery, M. & Tutty, L. (2008). Client-Centred Theory. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalist-eclectic Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 299-320). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42]
CLASS 3 Cognitive-Behavioral Perspective Sep 26 Berlin, S. (2010) Why cognitive Therapy Needs Social work. In W. Borden (Ed.). Reshaping Theory in Contemporary Social Work. Toward a Critical Pluralism in Clinical Practice (pp. 31-50). New York: Columbia University Press. [HV40R387] Cobb, N.H. (2008). Cognitive-Behavioral Theory and Treatment. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalisteclectic Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 221-248). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42] LaSala, M.C. (2006). Cognitive and Environmental Interventions for Gay Males: Addressing Stigma and its Consequences. Families inn Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 87(2):181-189. Weissman, A.S., Antinoro, D., & Chu, B.C. (2009). Cognitive-Behvaioral Therapy for Anxious Youth in Scholl Settings: Advances and Challenges. In M.J. Mayer, R.Van Acker, J.E. Lochman & F.M. Gresham (Eds.), Foundations of Cognitive-Behavioral
5
Interventions for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. School-Based Practice (pp. 173203). New York: The Guilford Press. [RJ505C63C63]
CLASS 4 Strengths-Based & Solution-Focused Perspectives (First Assignment) Oct 3 Corcoran, J. (2008). Solution-Focused Therapy. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalist-eclectic Approach (2nd edition) (pp 429-446). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42] Dermer, S.B.; Hemesath, C.W. & Russell, C.S. (1998). A Feminist Critique of SolutionFocused Therapy. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 26:239-250. Healy, K. (2005). The Strengths Perspective. In Social Work Theories in Context: Creating Frameworks for Practice (pp. 151-171). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. [HV40.H393] Munford, R. & Sanders, J. (2005) Working with Families: Strengths-based Approaches. In M. Nash, R. Munford & K. O’Donoghue (Eds.), Social Work Theories in Action (pp.158-173). London, Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. [HV473.S67]
CLASS 5 Symbolic Interactionist Perspective (First Assignment) Oct 10 Becker, H.S. (1972). Becoming a Marihuana User. In J.G. Manis & B.N. Meltzer (Eds.), Symbolic Interaction. A Reader in Social Psychology (2nd edition) (pp. 498-509). Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. [HM291.M37] Hewitt, J.P. (2007). Deviance and the Social Order. In Self and Society. A Symbolic Interactionist Social Psychology (10th edition) (pp. 213-232). Boston: A & B. [HM1033.H49] Norris, D.R. (2011). Interactions that Trigger Self-Labelling: The Case of Older Undergraduates. Symbolic Interaction, 34 (2): 173-197. Zschau, T., Adams, A.E., and Shriver, T.E. (2012). Reframing the Biotechnology Debate: The Deconstructive Efforts of the Council for Responsible Genetics. Symbolic Interaction, 35 (2): 221-239.
CLASS 6 Radical & Structural Perspectives Oct 17 Ferguson, I. & Lavalette, M. (2004). Beyond Power Discourse: Alienation and Social Work. British Journal of Social Work, 34(3):297-312.
6
Gross, J.P.K. (2011). Education and Hegemony: The Influence of Antonio Gramsci. In Levinson, B.A.U. (Ed.). Beyond Critique. Exploring Critical Social Theories and Education (pp.51-79). Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. [HM480.L48] Heinonen, T. & Spearman, L. (2001). Structural Social Work and Social Change. In Social Work Practice: Problem Solving and Beyond (pp. 257-282). Toronto: Irwin Publishing Ltd. [HV40.S648] Mullaly, B. (2007). Working within (and Against) the System: Radical Humanism. In The New Structural Social Work (3rd edition) (pp. 288-330). Oxford: Oxford University Press. [HV40.M85]
CLASS 7 Radical & Critical Perspectives Oct 24 Blaug, R. (1995). Distortion of the Face to Face: Communicative Reason and Social Work Practice. British Journal of Social Work, 25:423-439. Hayes, D. & Houston, S. (2007). ‘Life-world’, ‘System’ and Family Group Conferences: Habermas’s Contribution to Discourse in Child Protection. British Journal of Social Work, 37(6): 987-1006. Mullaly, B. (2007). Structural Social Work Theory and Oppression. In The New Structural Social Work (3rd edition) (pp. 203-251). Oxford: Oxford University Press. [HV40.M85] Spratt, T. & Houston, S. (1999). Developing Critical Social Work in Theory and in Practice: Child Protection and Communicative Reason. Child and Family Social Work, 4:315-324.
CLASS 8 Constructivist & Narrative Perspectives Nov 7 Buckman, R.; Kinney, D. & Reese, A. (2008). Narrative Therapies. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalisteclectic Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 369-400). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42] Furman, R.; Downey, E.P.& Shears, J. (2003). Social Constructivist Practice with Youth. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 20(4):263-275. Hall, J.C. (2012). Honouring Client Perspectives through Collaborative Practice: Shifting from Assessment to Collaborative Exploration. In S. L. Witkin (Ed.). Social Construction and Social Work Practice. Interpretations and Innovations (pp. 38-71). New York: Columbia University Press. [HM1093.S63]
7
Houston, S. (2001). Beyond Social Constructionism: Critical Realism and Social Work. British Journal of Social Work, 31:845-861.
CLASS 9 Risk Society Nov 14 France, A. (2008). Risk Factor Analysis and the Youth Question. Journal of Youth Studies, 11(1):1-15. Pithouse, A., Broadhurst, K., Hall, C., Peckover, S., Wastell, D. & White, S. (2011). Trust, Risk and the (mismanagement) of Contingency and Discretion Through New Information Technologies in Children’s Services. Journal of Social Work, 12(2):158-178. Pollack, S. (2010). Labelling Clients ‘Risky’: Social Work and the Neo-liberal Welfare State. British Journal of Social Work, 40:1263-1278 Stanford, S. (2010). ‘Speaking Back’ to Fear: Responding to the Moral Dilemmas of Risk in Social Work Practice. British Journal of Social Work, 40:1065-1080.
CLASS 10 Communication Theories & Social Work Practice Nov 21 Delgado, M.; Jones, K. & Rohani, M. (2005). Culturally Competent Practice. In Social Work Practice with Refugee and Immigrant Youth in the United States (pp. 148-161). Boston: Pearson. [HV4010.D45] Drench, M.E.; Noonan, A.C.; Sharby, N. & Ventura, S.H. (2012). Communication. In Psychosocial Aspects of Health care (3rd Edition). Boston: Pearson. (pp.77-113). [R726.7P7953] Johnson, Y.M. & Munch, S. (2009). Fundamental Contradictions in Cultural Competence. Social Work, 54(3):220-231. Kadushin, A. & Kadushin, G. (1997). The Interview as Communication. In The Social Work Interview. A Guide for Human Service Professionals (4th edition) (pp. 27-46). New York: Columbia University Press. [HV43.K26]
CLASS 11 Ecological Approach Nov 28 Gitterman, A. (2010). Advances in the Life Model of Social Work Practice. In F.J. Turner (Ed.), Social Work Treatment. Interlocking theoretical Approaches (5th edition) (pp.279292). Oxford: Oxford University Press Rothery, M. (2008). Critical Ecological Systems Theory. In N. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical Perspectives for Direct Social Work Practice. A Generalist-eclectic
8
Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 89-118). New York: Springer Publishing Company. [HV43.T42] Schiamberg, L.B.; Barboza, G.G.; Oehmke, J.; Zhang, Z; Griffore, R.J.; Weatherill, R.P.; Von Heydrich, L. & Post, L.A. (2011). Elder Abuse in Nursing Homes: An Ecological Perspective. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 23:190-211. Triplehorn, C. & Chen, C. (2006). Layers of Support. The Social Ecology of Protecting Children in War. In N. Boothby; A. Strang, & M. Wessells. A World Turned Upside Down. Social Ecological Approaches to Children in War Zones (223-241). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, In. [HQ784.W3W67]
CLASS 12 Oppression & Anti-Oppressive Approaches (Term Paper) Dec 5 Barnoff, L. & Coleman, B. (2007). Strategies for integrating Anti-Oppressive Principles: Perspectives from Feminist Agencies. In D. Baines (Ed.). Doing Anti-Oppressive Practice. Building Transformative Politicized Social Work (pp.31-49). Halifax: Fernwood Publishing. [HV40.D64] Chouinard, V. (1999). Body Politics: Disabled Women’s Activisim in Canada and Beyond. In R. Butler & H. Parr (Eds.), Mind and Body Spaces: Geographies of Illness, Impairment and Disability (pp.269 – 294). London: Routledge. [HV1568.M56] Henry, F. & Tator, C. (2002). Media Discourse Involving First Nations People. In Discourse of Domination (pp. 205-224). Toronto: University of Toronto Press Inc. [PN4914.R29H45] Mullaly, B. (2002). Internalized Oppression and Domination. In Challenging Oppression. A Critical Social Work Approach (2nd edition) (pp. 122-145). Toronto: Oxford University Press. [HM821.M84]
9
PLAGIARISM The University Senate defines plagiarism as “presenting, whether intentional or not, the ideas, expression of ideas or work of others as one’s own.” This can include: •
Reproducing or paraphrasing portions of someone else’s published or unpublished material, regardless of the source, and presenting these as one’s own without proper citation or reference to the original sources;
•
Submitting a take-home examination, essay, laboratory report or other assignment written, in whole or in part, by someone else;
•
Using ideas or direct, verbatim quotations, or paraphrased material, concepts, or ideas without appropriate acknowledgment in any academic assignment;
•
Using another’s data or research findings;
•
Failing to acknowledge sources through the use of proper citations when using another’s works and/or failing to use quotation marks;
•
Handing in “substantially the same piece of work for academic credit more than once without prior written permission of the course instructor in which the submission occurs.”
Plagiarism is a serious offence which cannot be resolved directly with the course’s instructor. The Associate Deans of the Faculty conduct a rigorous investigation, including an interview with the student, when an instructor suspects a piece of work has been plagiarized. Penalties are not trivial. They include a mark of zero for the plagiarized work or a final
Accommodation for Students with Disabilities Carleton University is strongly committed to providing access and accommodation for all individuals with identified and duly assessed disabilities. The University has a Senateapproved policy on Academic Accommodation that forms part of its Human Rights Policy. This policy should be consulted for further information and is available at the front of this Calendar and online at: carleton.ca/equity. The policy promotes efforts to accommodate students with disabilities so that they will have the opportunity to meet learning objectives and be fairly evaluated in their performance. In no case, however, does academic accommodation negotiate away, lower, or remove the academic standards and learning objectives of any course or program, rule, regulation, or policy at the University. The Paul Menton Centre for Students with Disabilities is the designated unit at the University for assisting the Carleton community in integrating persons with disabilities into all aspects of Carleton's academic and community life. The Paul Menton Centre provides assessment of academic accommodation, advises students on strategies to open a dialogue with instructors and acts as consultant, facilitator, coordinator and advocate in this area for all members of the University community. 10
The Paul Menton Centre provides individualized support services, based on appropriate and up to date documentation, to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, with learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder (ADD), visual impairments, head injuries, physical disabilities including mobility impairments, or who have psychiatric, other medical or non-visible disabilities. Students are responsible for applying for special services by making an appointment with the appropriate coordinator at the Paul Menton Centre. All requests will be considered on the basis of individual need. Students are advised to come to the Centre early in the term to discuss service requests. Examination accommodations for all tests and examinations (in-class, CUTV, or formally scheduled) must be arranged by specific deadline dates. Please consult the Paul Menton Centre for a list of deadlines for all examinations. Accommodation requests not made prior to the specified deadlines will not be fulfilled. Accommodation for Students with Religious Obligations Carleton University accommodates students who, due to religious obligation, must miss an examination, test, assignment deadline, laboratory, or other compulsory event. The University has a Senate-approved policy on religious accommodation that forms part of its Human Rights Policy, available at: carleton.ca/equity. Accommodation will be worked out directly and on an individual basis between the student and the instructor(s) involved. Students should make a formal written request to the instructor(s) for alternative dates and/or means of satisfying requirements. Such requests should be made during the first two weeks of any given academic term*, or as soon as possible after a need for accommodation is known to exist, but in no case later than the penultimate week of classes in that term. Instructors will make reasonable accommodation in a way that shall avoid academic disadvantage to the student. Students unable to reach a satisfactory arrangement with their instructor(s) should contact the Director of Equity Services. Instructors who have questions or wish to verify the nature of the religious event or practice involved should also contact this officer.
11
12