 | ||
 |
 |
 |
Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008) | ||
| Friday, January 18, 2008: 10:00 AM-11:45 AM | |||
| Palladian Ballroom (Omni Shoreham) | |||
| [OTH] Issues in Teaching Evidence-Based Practice | |||
| Speakers/Presenters: | Allen Rubin, PhD, University of Texas at Austin Eileen Gambrill, PhD, University of California, Berkeley Edward J. Mullen, DSW, Columbia University Enola Proctor, PhD, Washington University in Saint Louis Aron Shlonsky, PhD, University of Toronto Matthew O. Howard, PHD, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor Haluk Soydan, PhD, University of Southern California Cynthia Franklin, PhD, University of Texas at Austin David W. Springer, PhD, University of Texas at Austin Jeffrey M. Jenson, PhD, University of Denver Joan Levy Zlotnik, PhD, ACSW, Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research Kevin J. Corcoran, PhD, JD, Portland State University Bruce A. Thyer, PhD, Florida State University | ||
| Abstract Text: This roundtable will follow-up on the progress made at the National Symposium on Improving the Teaching of Evidence-Based Practice, held in Austin, TX in October 2006. Panelists will discuss the following issues in the teaching of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) in masters and doctoral programs in social work education: 1. At the master's level, should we be emphasizing EBP – as a process, – or the plural EBPs – which means teaching how to find and provide “evidence-based” interventions? 2. What EBP content should be taught at the doctoral level, and with what pedagogical approach? 3. How to cultivate school-agency partnerships regarding the practice and teaching of EBP. 4. How best to provide training and other supports in agencies to promote the implementation of EBP? 5. Should a top-down (reviews, practice guidelines, etc.) versus a bottom-up (search for and appraise individual studies) approach be emphasized in teaching EBP and promoting its use among practitioners? 6. Strategies for improving classroom and field faculty understanding and support of EBP? 7. Agency-team approaches to EBP. 8. Strategies to alleviate misunderstandings regarding research hierarchies in EBP. 9. Strategies to increase incentives for agency implementation of EBP. 10. Overcoming resistance to EBP based on misconceptions of EBP or epistemological objections. 11. MSW curriculum and EBP regarding: a. Implications of admission standards. b. Problem-based learning c. Curriculum structure (i.e., abandon generalist model? Foundation and advanced content re EBP?) d. Should MSW research courses no longer attempt to prepare students to produce research, and instead focus on the specific methods of the EBP process? e. Increasing and incorporating EBP content in different curriculum areas. f. Macro EBP content. g. Model syllabi and assignments in different curriculum areas. | |||
See more of Roundtable
See more of Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)