Students' Experiences of Microaggressions in the Social Work Classroom

Background and Purpose

The Council on Social Work Education (2015) requires social work programs to assess to their “implicit curriculum,” which “refers to the learning environment in which the explicit curriculum is presented, including “affirmation and respect for diversity and difference” (p. 14).  This study explores the presence of microaggressions in social work education, which marginalize some students due to their social identities.

Originally conceptualized in terms of race, microaggressions are defined as ‘‘verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults” (Sue, Bucceri, Lin, Nadal, & Torino, 2007).   Microaggressions are perpetrated against groups due to race, religion, social class, gender identity and expression, political ideology, and/or sexual orientation, among other aspects of difference. Research on microaggressions within social work education has focused on student-to-student interactions and faculty perspectives (Austin, Craig, & McInroy, 2016; Greene & Blitz, 2012; Ross-Sheriff, 2012; Shulman, 2016; Woodford, Conody, Kulick, Brennan, & Renn, 2015). This study extends current scholarship by focusing on students’ experiences and perceptions of the dynamics of oppression and privilege within social work classrooms. 

Methods

BSW program directors shared a link to an anonymous online survey with their students. Participants  (N=681) completed thirteen Likert Scale questions about microaggressions in social work education. Chi Square analyses explored relationships between perceptions and participants’ social identities. 

Findings

In a  nation-wide sample of BSW students (N=681), most disagreed (92.1%) that social work instructors ignore, silence, or slight students from marginalized backgrounds and agreed (78.6%) that instructors notice when students are ignored, silenced, or slighted based on their social identities. Even more (84.7%) felt that their peers notice these incidents.  Many respondents (62.8%) were comfortable speaking up when they felt marginalized; more (78.9%) felt comfortable speaking up when they witnessed others being marginalized. The majority (87.8%) believed instructors try to be inclusive of differences, and most (81.9%) felt instructors model accountability for privilege. Most (91.0%) wanted to learn to address marginalization, which almost all (97.1%) believed was important for practice.

For all but one question, there were significant relationships between aspects of social identity (e.g.; age, race, sex, sexual orientation, and political ideology) and students’ responses. For example, students of color and LGBT students were more likely to agree that social work faculty ignore, silence, or slight students from marginalized backgrounds. Sexual minorities were more likely to believe instructors did not notice these incidents.  More politically conservative respondents were less likely to count on peers speaking up on their behalf when they were marginalized .

Conclusions and Implications

Students with less privileged social identities experience classroom dynamics differently than students with more privileged social identities. More politically conservative students respond like those with less privileged statuses. These findings suggest that social work instructors and administrators should carefully examine the experiences of students with diverse social identities to support implicit curriculums that affirm all students and reflect the values of the profession.