Effects of an Integrative Field Seminar for MSW Students

Background and Purpose:  Many social work programs offer integrative field seminars to help socialize students to the profession, to support each other, and to integrate their classroom and field learning.  However, the impact of integrative seminars are rarely evaluated and we found no studies that compared the outcomes between students who had participated and those who did not participate.

We took advantage of our MSW’s program decision to introduce a required Integrative Field Seminar for all students in the first-year field practicum.  We gave two cohorts of students the same questionnaire at the end of field practicum.  The first cohort completed field education the year prior to the introduction of the Integrative Field Seminar (no seminar).  The second cohort completed field and the newly-required seminar the following year (seminar).  We hypothesized that the seminar cohort would report more positive attitudes and better skills in areas that we believed might be affected by the presence or absence of an integrative seminar.

Methods: At the end of the practicum, each group completed the same pen-and-paper questionnaire that included standardized scales measuring critical thinking, self-awareness, self-reflection, identification with the social work profession, self-rated competency, satisfaction with field education, and stress as a student.  To invite participants, we attended each section of the required concurrent practice course, distributed the questionnaire, and gave students time to complete it without our presence. The University’s Research Office reviewed the study and determined it “does not require review” by the Institutional Review Board (IRB).

The response rate was excellent, 92% in the first cohort and 89% in the second.  Comparisons were tested with t-tests or analysis of variance with a criterion level of .05.  The two cohorts were similar on demographic factors (young, mostly white females) with the majority having no previous human-service experience. 

Results:  At the end of practicum, students in both cohorts were similar on levels of critical thinking and self-rated competency.  The students who DID attend the Integrative Field Seminar reported more self-reflection and self-awareness, and better identification with the social work profession.  However, they were less satisfied with their field education and reported more stress compared to those who DID NOT attend an Integrative Seminar.

Conclusion and implications:  Attendance at an integrative field seminar appeared to enhance students’ reflection and self-awareness, both of which were a major focus in the seminar.  It also appeared to enhance their identification with social work, perhaps because of the emphasis on understanding agencies and their relevance to the profession’s mission.  Critical thinking and self-rated competency did not differ.  These skills may be inherent in the individual and less susceptible to changes during a group seminar.  The increased stress and decreased satisfaction reported by the students in the seminar may be attributable to “teething problems” as we implemented the seminar for the first time.  Students were also dissatisfied with having to travel for the face-to-face seminars and with taking time “away” from field.  Overall, educators must balance the intended benefits of an integrative seminar with students’ perceptions of usefulness.