The Implicit Curriculum of a School of Social Work: Student Experiences

Purpose: The social work profession has begun to reckon with the legacy of violence, oppression, and colonialization of educational practices that contribute to continued inequities. This has sparked social work educational institutions to pay closer attention to intersecting dimensions of diversity in the lived experiences of students within the learning environment. The purpose of this study was to explore students’ perspectives to better understand the components of the School of Social Work’s implicit “hidden” curriculum, specifically whether student’s experiences at a midwestern university School of Social Work reflect a diverse, equitable, and inclusive environment.

Methods: This study employed a sequential, quantitative-qualitative mixed-methods design, using convenience sampling to recruit students in the spring 2022 semester. Participants first completed a short, online survey assessing their experiences based on the Implicit Curriculum Survey. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze quantitative data. A content analysis using grounded theory was used to identify themes within the qualitative data.

Results: Of the 157 participants to the survey, 70% were MSW. More than 70% of participants reported having a field placement. Additionally, more than 80% of participants reported having current employment, with 49% of these participants indicating working 30 or more hours per week. Participants on average were 27 years old and 82% identified as cis-female. Nearly 75% of students identified as White, 15% identified as Black, 3% identified as Asian, and 5% identified as two or more races. The following findings pertain to the seven competencies of the implicit learning environment. Within student support services, participants noted a lack of funding and scholarships (37%) and inadequate career guidance (26%). Within experiences with faculty/instructors, participants did not think faculty/instructors responded timely (19%) or provided feedback for critical thinking (12%). Within experiences with courses, participants disagreed that the quality of instruction was high (24%). Within experiences with academic advisors, participants noted that they sought advising from faculty/instructors other than their assigned advisor (51%) and indicated that advising was not supportive (17%). Within experiences with school community, participants did not feel recognized for their accomplishments (21%) and indicated the school’s communication was ineffective (14%). Within experiences with diversity, participants felt isolated during discussions on diversity (21%) and felt uncomfortable expressing all aspects of their identity (14%). Within experiences with field, participants indicated that their placement was not challenging (17%) and they lacked clear performance expectation (16%).

Implications: Recommendations emerged to improve implicit curriculum. Student support services recommendations include funding and scholarships opportunities and identifying community and career liaisons to assist with career development. Experiences with faculty/instructors recommendations include hiring staff and faculty from diverse backgrounds and providing individualized feedback to students. Experiences with academic advisors recommendations include offering summer advisors and adhering to the faculty advisor model. Experiences with the school community recommendations include promoting extracurricular social justice and equity activities and offering forums to engage students in decisions. Experiences with diversity recommendations include building a culture that affirms viewpoints and on-going diversity training. Experiences with field recommendations include additional training to faculty liaisons and field supervisors.