Diversity Event: Inclusion of Diversity Contents in MSW Curriculum

Background:  The Council on Social Work Education (2008)’s Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards outlines expectations for social work education to enrich diversity contents throughout the curriculum.  However, diversity contents related to various isms (racism, sexism, ableism, heterosexism) can be highly controversial (Daniel, 2011), and social work classes tend to induce critical discussions on injustices, inequalities, and oppressions that historically and structurally embedded in society (Ortiz & Jani, 2010).  Social work educators often face challenges in their curriculum development to encompass diversity contents.  This paper first describes an innovative approach to present diversity contents to MSW students through the daylong Diversity Event.  Then, the students’ learning outcomes of the event are examined.

Methods:  Data were collected using pre- and post-event surveys at the Diversity Event.  Surveys contained questions pertaining to students’ basic demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, student status) and diversity measures.  Miville-Guzman University-Diversity Scale- Short Form (M-GUDS-S) was used to measure an attitudinal change in awareness and acceptance of both similarities and differences that exist among people (Fuertes et al., 2000). 

Twenty-four students participated in the Diversity Event.  All 24 students completed pre-event surveys, while 23 returned post-event surveys.  Average age of the participants was 33.17 years old with a range between 22 and 54 (n = 23).  There were seven male students and 17 female students (n = 24).  Nine students identified themselves as Black/African American, 1 as Hispanic, and 14 as Non-Hispanic White.  Most students were full-time first- year (17 students); there were students from other cohorts including one part-time first year students, two full-time second-year students, and three part-time second-year students (n = 23).

Results:  A Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Tests were conducted to evaluate whether students showed greater attitudinal change in awareness and acceptance of diversity before and after the Diversity Event.  The results indicated a statistically significant difference in students’ overall attitude (z = -1.66, p <0.10) with a favorable change (pre median = 73; post median = 74).  Also, the event seemed to elicit a statistically significant change in students’ Comfort with Differences (z = -3.33, p < 0.01) in a desired direction (pre median = 25; post median = 28).  There was no statically significant difference observed in Diversity of Contact (DC; z = -.48, p = 0.63) and Relativistic Appreciation (RA; z = -0.10, p = 0.92) subscales.  However, when looking at the data closely, students appeared to present higher levels of diversity appreciation to begin with and their attitudes remained equally high after the event (RA pre median = 25; post median = 25).  In addition, one’s participation in cultural activities would not change in a day (DC pre median = 22; post median = 23).  Thus, these outcomes are considered acceptable. 

Implications:  Social work educators must prepare students to become well prepared for culturally competent practice (Jani, Ortiz, Pierce, & Sowbel, 2011).  The findings suggest that carefully designed experiential learning can promote positive attitudinal changes in social work students.  Future studies can examine qualitative accounts of students’ learning through focus groups.