Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Enhancing homeless education and faculty engagement following the launch of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness: an evaluation study
(USC Thesis Other)
Enhancing homeless education and faculty engagement following the launch of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness: an evaluation study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: HOMELESS EDUCATION 1
Enhancing Homeless Education and Faculty Engagement Following the Launch of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness: An Evaluation Study
by
Stephanie T. George
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2018
Copyright 2018 Stephanie T. George
HOMELESS EDUCATION 2
Dedication
To my mother and late father, Kathy and Jack Trela, for instilling my love of learning and
always being allowed to ask questions and seek answers.
To Matt, Grayson and Elle, for the unconditional love they have shown me in every aspect of my
life. My life is better because you are in it.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 3
Acknowledgements
Thank you to my dissertation chair, Helena Seli, for your guidance, patience and
thoughtful feedback as I learned how to put my voice to paper. To my dissertation committee
members, Dr. Ben Henwood and Dr. Sondra Fogel, for your expertise and sharing in my passion
of ending homelessness in our country. I look forward to collaborative efforts we can share
together as colleagues.
Thank you to my USC social work colleagues, it is due to your inspiration and
encouragement that allowed me to believe I could complete this educational journey. Especially
Amber Ford, who always had time for a “quick” call reminding me why we thought this was a
good idea to begin with.
To the love and support of Cohort 2, especially to the Tuesday Trojans, Andy Surber,
Arvind Ramakrishnand, Annie Rinaldi, Christopher Riddick, Rosanne Cameron, Melissa Singh
and Erika Maldonado, I wouldn’t have wanted to share a Tuesday night with anyone else, our
friendship will be forever lasting.
To my Roxborough family, the love and support you showed Matt and my girls when I
need to write or be in class will never be forgotten, especially Krista , Clay and Cadence Combs,
we couldn’t have gotten through this without you.
Finally to my family, Matt, Grayson, Elle, mom and Bridgette for never questioning that I
could do this and listening me read paragraphs over to you again and again as I wrote. Without the
sacrifices you made I would have never had the chance to see how far I could go.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 9
List of Figures 10
Abstract 12
Chapter One: Introduction 13
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 13
Organizational Context and Mission 13
Organizational Goal 15
Related Literature 17
Importance of the Evaluation 18
Description of Stakeholder Groups 13
Stakeholder Group’s Performance Goal 19
Stakeholder Group of the Study 20
Purpose of Project and Questions 21
Methodological Framework 22
Definitions 22
Organization of the Proposal 24
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 25
Social Work Profession and Education History 25
State of Homelessness 28
HOMELESS EDUCATION 5
Grand Challenges for Social Work Initiative 29
The Concept of Grand Challenge 29
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness 31
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Organizational Problem Solving Framework 32
Faculty Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influence 32
Knowledge Influences 33
Motivation Influences 38
Organizational Influences 42
Conceptual Framework 46
Chapter Three: Methodology 47
Participating Stakeholders 47
Survey Sampling Criterion and Rationale 48
Criterion 1 48
Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale 49
Criterion 1 49
Data Collection and Instrumentation 49
Surveys 49
Interviews 50
Data Analysis 52
Credibility and Trustworthiness 52
Validity and Reliability 53
Ethics 54
Limitations and Delimitations 55
HOMELESS EDUCATION 6
Limitations 55
Delimitations 55
Conclusion 56
Chapter Four: Results and Finding 57
Results 58
Survey 58
Interview 63
Knowledge Results 64
Declarative knowledge 64
Procedural knowledge 66
Metacognitive knowledge 67
Synthesis of Knowledge Influences 67
Motivation Results 68
Faculty self-efficacy 68
Faculty goal orientation 71
Synthesis of Motivational Influences 72
Organizational Results 73
Resources 73
Work Processes 76
Work Structuring (Culture) 77
Synthesis of Organizational Influences 79
Additional Findings 80
Summary 82
HOMELESS EDUCATION 7
Chapter Five: Recommended Solutions and Conclusion 83
Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge, Motivation 83
and Organizational Influences
Knowledge Recommendations 83
Motivation Recommendations 84
Organizational Recommendations 86
Integrative Implementation and Evaluation Plan 90
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 90
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 90
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 91
Level 3: Behavior 93
Level 2: Learning 95
Level 1: Reaction 98
Evaluation Tools 100
Data Analysis and Reporting 101
Summary 101
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 102
Future Research Recommendations 102
Conclusion 103
References 104
Appendices 111
Appendix A: Survey Item 111
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 120
HOMELESS EDUCATION 8
Appendix C: Informed Consent 122
Appendix D: Recruitment Letter 123
Appendix E: Faculty Grand Challenge on Homelessness Survey 124
Appendix F: Faculty Grand Challenge on Homelessness Survey 2 126
Appendix G Faculty Confidence Level 127
Appendix H: Student Interest 128
Appendix I: Logic Model 129
HOMELESS EDUCATION 9
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Organizational mission, global goal, and stakeholder goals. 20
Table 2: Knowledge worksheet. 38
Table 3: Motivation worksheet. 41
Table 4: Organizational assumed influences worksheet. 44
Table 5: Summary of motivation influences and recommendations. 85
Table 6: Summary of organization influences and recommendations. 87
Table 7: Outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal outcomes 92
Table 8: Critical behaviors, metrics, methods, and timing for evaluation 93
Table 9: Required drivers to support critical behaviors 94
Table 10: Components of learning for the program 97
Table 11: Components to measure reactions to the program. 99
HOMELESS EDUCATION 10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Conceptual framework. 46
Figure 2: Faculty line appointment. 59
Figure 3: Faculty concentration of focus. 60
Figure 4: Faculty program location. 61
Figure 5: Faculty grand challenge preference. 62
Figure 6: Faculty interest in SSW commitment to Grand Challenge to 63
End Homelessness.
Figure 7: Faculty years of experience in director homeless practice. 65
(including research and policy).
Figure 8: Importance of integrating education on homelessness into MSW 66
and DSW curriculum to you as faculty.
Figure 9: Faculty confidence in ability to design an assignment on 69
homelessness into course teachings.
Figure 10: Faculty confidence in identifying homeless intervention and prevention 70
research to incorporate into curriculum assignments specific to
homeless education.
Figure 11: Faculty confidence in identifying student learning objectives 70
while placed in a homeless service field placement
Figure 12: Faculty rating on wanting to influence curriculum about the connection 72
of homelessness in relation to poverty and mental health.
Figure 13: Introduction of Grand Challenge to End Homelessness to faculty 74
Figure 14: Resources provided to educate SSW faculty about the Grand 76
HOMELESS EDUCATION 11
Challenges to End Homelessness
Figure 15: Faculty satisfaction with learning support and professional development 78
opportunities regarding homeless education.
Figure 16: Impact of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness on faculty 126
and student interest in homelessness.
Figure 17: Visual representation of faculty confidence level in implementing homeless 127
education in the classroom.
Figure 18: Visual representation of student interest in homeless service delivery as 128
a social worker, post-graduation.
Figure 19: Logic model for the National Homelessness Social Work Initiative. 129
HOMELESS EDUCATION 12
ABSTRACT
The topic of the gap on homeless education in Social Work programs and the influence
the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness has had on faculty engagement in enhancing
homeless education, is explored in this study; within a large graduate school of social work. Full
time faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs, are the primary stakeholders
of the study. The full-time faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs
participated in the study through the use of surveys and one on one interviews. The gap of
homeless education in Social Work programs and the influence the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness has had on faculty engagement in enhancing homeless education from the
perspective of faculty course leads and concentration chairs and co-chairs were analyzed
following the gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2016). A plan to implement the results of
the study is guided by the New World Kirkpartick Model (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Analysis of evidence from the survey questionnaire and one-on-one interviews revealed that
while faculty had declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge on homeless education,
they lacked self-efficacy specific to the identifying learning objectives in homeless field
placements and recognizing value in the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness. Lastly,
inadequate resources also served as barriers to effective implementation of enhancing curriculum
on homeless education in support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 13
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
One in 200 Americans experience homelessness for at least one night a year, while on
any given night over half a million men, women and children will find themselves living on the
street or in a shelter (HUD, 2015). The social work profession is called to assist individuals and
communities who are vulnerable, oppressed and poverty stricken with the goal of enhancing
quality of life and social welfare (Jacobson, 2001; NASW, 2008). Yet, research indicates less
than 1% of licensed social workers report working directly in homeless services (NASW, 2006).
Research further suggests the social work profession has not only neglected the topic of
homelessness on the professional level but within school of social work curriculum as well
(Krumer-Nevo, Monnickendam & Weiss-Gal, 2009; Larkin, Henwood, Fogel, Aykanian, Briar-
Lawson, Donaldson, Herman, Little, Adams, Padgett, Patchner & Streeter, 2016).
Homelessness is of concern to the social work profession because of its complexity and
impact on the individual and community. There is a gap in social work education focusing on
poverty and homelessness, risking application of knowledge and skillset necessary for further
development in the homeless service workforce (Larkin, et al., 2016).
Organizational Context and Mission
The organization to be studied in this dissertation is a large research University located
on the west coast of the United States. Located within the larger University, the School of Social
Work (SSW) is ranked as one of the top 20 social work programs nationally. SSW educates
students at the Master’s (MSW) and Doctorate (DSW) level with programs located on campus
based facilities and in the virtual setting. SSW faculty consist of over 100 full time faculty and
over 300 adjunct faculty across campus based and virtual programs. The mission of the SSW is
HOMELESS EDUCATION 14
to advance individual, child and family wellbeing and social welfare with a focus on vulnerable
and distressed populations with local, national and international impact
1
. Within the SSW,
faculty members and students identify within one of three program concentrations, based on
expertise for faculty and area of interest for students: Behavioral Health (BH), Children and
Families (CF) or Community Organizing (CO).
The SSW Masters (MSW) program is a two year program incorporating classroom
curriculum, field research and community field practicum. Within social work clinical
coursework and field practicum, faculty facilitate educational content of clinical practice at the
micro and macro levels. Micro level social work, referred to as the most common type of
practice, involves direct practice with individuals and groups, while macro level social work
focuses on large scale program development and structure (Krumer-Nevo, Weiss-Gal, &
Monnickendam, 2009). Within all concentrations and levels of practice, SSW faculty are
responsible for preparing students to be proficient in nine core competencies as determined by
the social work education accrediting body, Council for Social Work Education (CSWE), to
successfully graduate from an accredited MSW program. The DSW program is a 24 month
program, designed for the advanced practitioner with focus on obtaining leadership roles that
promote great change. Throughout this research study the Masters and Doctorate program and
faculty will be represented, as the school of social work (SSW) and school of social work (SSW)
faculty.
In addition to providing oversight and curriculum development for the MSW and DSW
program, SSW is part of the larger national and international social work community, aligning
with many social work associations and partnerships. One such partnership being, the American
1
Source is SSW organizational website. Actual URL not provided to maintain anonymity.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 15
Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW). The AASWSW, established in 2009,
is an “honorific society of distinguished scholars and practitioners dedicated to achieving
excellence in the field of social work and social welfare through high impact work that advances
social good” (AASWSW, n.d.-b). In 2013, AASWSW adopted a comprehensive initiative
referred to as, the Grand Challenges for Social Work Initiative (GCSWI) with the official
initiative launch following in January 2016 (AASWSW, n.d.-b). The GCSWI identified 12 areas
of focus, with each representing a significant problem or oppressed area within the field that can
be addressed with great intention over the coming decade (Flynn, 2017). One of the 12 Grand
Challenges focuses on ending homelessness. In support of implementing the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness, a consortium of schools of social work across the nation was developed,
named the National Homeless Social Work Initiative (Larkin et al., 2016). As a partner in the
consortium, SSW strives to develop social workers as the leaders in program design and
workforce development within homeless services (Larkin et al., 2016). Further, the larger
University president and provost made the “wicked problem of homelessness” and the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness a University wide initiative, with the charge led by the SSW
Dean (Flynn, 2017).
Organizational Goal
In response to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness the SSW has made a
commitment within the MSW and DSW program focusing on addressing the “wicked” problem
of homelessness and closing the gap of homeless education, while supporting social work
workforce development in homeless services. For the purpose of this dissertation the scope of the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness encompasses MSW and DSW curriculum, field
practicum enhancement and MSW and DSW workforce development unless otherwise noted. In
HOMELESS EDUCATION 16
direct support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, by May 2018, SSW faculty will
integrate the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into curriculum as measured by the
inclusion of specific readings, professional development forums or assignments. Examples of
educational enhancements into curriculum within each of the three SSW concentrations can be
represented by: journal articles on homeless evidence based intervention (EBI) or policy
practice, paper assigned with homeless focus, book chapter on homelessness, professional
development forums and/or enhanced field placement. Enhanced field placements consist of
SSW faculty facilitating homeless education seminars specifically for MSW students and their
field placement supervisors in the homeless service arena. The aim of the enhanced learning will
lend to developing a strong homeless service workforce and contribute to students learning
comprehensive and effective evidence-informed homeless prevention and intervention services
(Flynn, 2017; Larkin, et al., 2016). The overarching goal to be evaluated on enhancing homeless
education in curriculum was determined by the researcher in collaboration with program
department leadership based on the Homeless Initiative Consortium logic model (Larkin, et. al,
2016). The Homeless Initiative Consortium logic model outlines the inputs, activities, outputs
and outcomes that are required for forward momentum in developing a strong social work
homeless workforce and reduce homeless in the United States (Larkin, et al., 2016). A copy of
the logic model can be found in Appendix H.
This evaluation seeks to identify SSWs faculty capacity and impact through
implementation of elements in support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, as well as
be used for future research to determine if student interest in post-graduate work has increased in
relation to homeless services.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 17
Related Literature
The problem being addressed in this paper is the lack of education on homelessness in
social work curriculum and the potential influence it has on professional social workers
following a career path with individuals living in poverty or experiencing homelessness.
Research suggests social work academia has abandoned its foundational roots and mission of
working with the poor in favor of direct practice with financially stable clients who are
motivated in receiving services (Perry, 2003). In a review of MSW programs, Vinton and White
(1995) noted four out of 98 accredited MSW programs provided a concentration of study on
poverty issues, which reflects the social work educational shift and priority of practice. Ten years
later, Harding, Ferguson and Radey (2005) found that of the top 50 schools of social work, only
12 social work programs offered curriculum on the topic of poverty, a major predictor of
homelessness. Without proper exposure to educational content on social justice issues such as,
poverty and inequity, Harding, Ferguson and Radey (2005) warn social work students will not
have the capacity or ability to advocate effectively for their low-income clients. In turn, social
work students will steer away from MSW internships and DSW practicums working with low-
income communities and further negatively impact their desire to enter professional social work
practice with disenfranchised populations, including those experiencing homelessness.
Schools of social work have the responsibility to guide students in addressing social
problems, providing services to vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and advocate for
change in relation to social injustice (NASW, 2008). However, literature on this topic indicates
that masters-prepared social workers (MSWs) report they are often only prepared at a moderate
level to work with people categorized as low income (Harding, Ferguson, & Radey, 2005).
Further, Perry (2003) found that while students may have motivation for working with
HOMELESS EDUCATION 18
individuals and communities in poverty, their interest decreased when homeless individuals were
included in the population.
The influence of educational curriculum shapes students’ awareness and insight in
working with specific populations (Kumer-Nevo et. al., 2009; Perry, 2003). With a continued
lack of curriculum engaging students in community practice with populations living in poverty
or experiencing homelessness, student interest and influence in working with this population will
continue to fade. For the social work profession to increase the homeless service workforce, an
enhanced social work curriculum on poverty, low-income populations and homelessness could
be of value.
Importance of the Evaluation
The homelessness gap in social work education is important to address for a variety of
reasons. Students preparing to enter the professional social work arena need to be equipped with
knowledge, motivation and organizational support to work with vulnerable and underserved
populations. By social work faculty educating students, leadership paths will be developed
allowing the appropriate evidence based interventions to reach homeless clientele and create
avenues for new research to widen content development for stronger curriculum and policy
advancement (Larkin et al., 2016). School of Social Work faculty are required to be on the
forefront of development, design and implementation for successful delivery to the student
population. It is the responsibility of university faculty to structure learning systems to serve as
collaborative links to accessing services, interventions and policy.
Description of the Stakeholder Groups
SSW involves several stakeholders in the overall structure of the MSW and DSW
program. Stakeholders identified in SSW are faculty, program leadership, students and
HOMELESS EDUCATION 19
community agencies. Each of the stakeholders play a key role in the program’s focus,
achievement and adherence to the schools mission statement. The faculty are experts in program
curriculum and bring their experience from the field to students and the community. Social work
program leadership steer national and University driven standards and initiatives within the
individual school and through the larger University. Students are considered the focus of the
program with the goal of developing successful professionals into communities of practice.
Community agencies are committed to the mission of their agency practice, the social work
profession and the learning objectives necessary to guide students in their field practicum to
complete their Social Work degrees.
Stakeholder Group’s Performance Goals
Table 1 (below) provides description of the organizational mission and the organizational
performance goal for this study. The Stakeholder goal is also detailed with a measureable
timeframe.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 20
Table 1
Organizational mission, global goal, and stakeholder goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of the School of Social Work is to advance individual, child and family wellbeing
and social welfare with a focus on vulnerable and distressed population with local, national and
international impact.
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2018, SSW faculty will integrate the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into
curriculum as measured by the inclusion of specific readings, professional development forums
or assignments.
SSW Faculty Goal
By May 2018, SSW faculty will integrate the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into
curriculum as measured by the inclusion of specific readings, professional development forums
or assignments.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
organizational goal incorporating the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into the School of
Social Work program; it is important to first evaluate the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences by SSW faculty to implement such measures. Therefore, the
stakeholders of focus for this study will be SSW faculty. Specifically for the intent and purpose
of this study, SSW faculty will consist of course leads and concentrations chairs and vice-chairs
from campus based and virtual programs across the three program concentrations. The
stakeholders’ goal, supported by the school, is that by May 2018, SSW faculty will integrate the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into curriculum as measured by the inclusion of specific
HOMELESS EDUCATION 21
readings, professional development forums or assignments. Examples of educational
enhancements into curriculum within each of the three SSW concentrations can be represented
by: journal articles on homeless intervention or policy practice, paper assigned with homeless
focus, book chapter on homelessness, webinars or town hall meetings with subject matter experts
on homelessness and/or enhanced field placement. Enhanced field placements consist of SSW
faculty facilitating homeless education seminars specifically for students and their field
placement supervisors in the homeless service arena. The aim of the enhanced learning will lend
to developing a strong homeless service workforce and contribute to students learning
comprehensive and effective evidence-informed homeless prevention and intervention services
(Flynn, 2017; Larkin, et. al., 2016). Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to a decrease in the
number of social work students with knowledge on key indicators and influences of poverty and
homelessness. The social work profession may also shift from being recognized as the leaders in
eliminating homelessness and successful implementation of the Grand Challenge Ending
Homelessness.
Purpose of the Project and Question
The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding and to evaluate the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences which contribute to school of social work (SSW)
faculty in addressing the gap of homeless education in program curriculum. Program curriculum
encompasses both clinical study and field practicum, as well as workforce development in
homeless services, following the charge of the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness.
While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all schools of social work who
have adopted the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness, for practical purposes, the stakeholder
of focus in this analysis are SSW faculty course leads and department chairs and vice-chairs who
HOMELESS EDUCATION 22
have served in this capacity as of January 2016. SSW faculty course leads and concentration
chairs and vice-chairs will represent full time faculty in both campus based and virtual programs
within the three department structure (Behavioral Health, Children and Families, Community
Organizing).
As such, the questions that guide this study are the following:
1. What are the SSW faculty knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in the
context of enhancing curriculum specific to homeless education outcomes in relation to
the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness?
2. What are the recommend solutions for organizational practice in areas of knowledge,
motivation and organizational resources in connection to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness?
Methodological Framework
To provide an analysis of SSW faculty’s capacity to incorporate homeless education into
social work curriculum and field practicum, a gap analysis will be applied. Gap analysis is a
systematic, analytical method that helps to delineate organizational goals and identify
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences (Clark & Estes, 2008). This study will use
quasi-mixed method data collection and analysis. The SSW faculty course leads and
concentration chair and vice-chair’s accomplishments and performance in relation to the
organizational goal will be examined using survey questionnaires and interviews.
Recommendations will be research-based following a comprehensive evaluation.
Definitions
Key terms listed below will be used throughout this study. Definitions of these terms
allow for a consistent understanding of terminology and usage.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 23
Direct Practice: As defined by Joseph Walsh (2013), direct practice refers to “the application of
social work theory and/or methods to the resolution and prevention of psychological problems
experienced by individuals, families, and groups” (p. 28).
Homelessness: As defined by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
(2012), homelessness is categorized in three broad categories:
People who are living in a place not meant for human habitation, in emergency
shelter, in transitional housing, or are exiting an institution where they
temporarily resided.
People who are losing their primary nighttime residence, which may include a
motel or hotel or a doubled up situation, within 14 days and lack resources or
support networks to remain in housing.
Families with children or unaccompanied youth who are unstably housed and
likely to continue in that state. People who are fleeing or attempting to flee
domestic violence, have no other residence, and lack the resources or support
networks to obtain other permanent housing. This category is similar to the
current practice regarding people who are fleeing domestic violence.
Person in Environment: As defined by Mary Ellen Kondrat (2013), the “person-in-environment
perspective in social work is a practice-guiding principle that highlights the importance of
understanding an individual and individual behavior in light of the environmental contexts in
which that person lives and acts.”
Poverty: As defined by, Merriam-Webster (2017) dictionary, poverty is “the state of one who
lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions.”
HOMELESS EDUCATION 24
Poverty aware social work: As outlined by CCETSW (1995), “students should, learn how to
counter poverty and disadvantaged; have knowledge and understanding of the significance of
poverty; have learning and practice experience of delivering services which do not stigmatize
people by reason of poverty; have the knowledge and skills to counter disadvantage” (p. 9).
Social Work Signature Pedagogy: As suggested by, Larrison and Korr (2013), social work
signature pedagogy, “occurs in all learning exchanges, in our implicit and explicit curricula, and
in both the classroom and the field. It involves those pedagogies that most enable students to
think and perform like social workers through the development of the professional self” (p. 204).
Organization of the Proposal
Five chapters serve as the outline to organize this study. Chapter one provided an
overview of the problem of practice and common terminology used in homeless education and in
homeless services. The organization’s context, mission, goals and key stakeholders followed as
well as a description of the evaluation framework being implemented. Chapter Two provides
current and existing literature supporting the scope of the study. Potential influences of faculty
capacity to enhance homeless education into curriculum are identified and outlined by
knowledge, motivation and organization. Chapter Three discusses the knowledge, motivation
and organizational influences to be evaluated as well as the methodology outlining participant
selection, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, data and results are assessed and
analyzed. Chapter Five discusses the solutions, supported by data and literature, for closing the
perceived gap as well as future recommendations outlining an implementation and evaluation
plan for the solutions.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 25
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Chapter Two outlines the predominant factors identified in literature as assumed causes
associated with the gap in social work education specific to homelessness and poverty. The first
section focuses on an overview of the history, mission and foundation of the social work
profession, while highlighting where the shift in social work practice started to emerge. The second
sections provides an overview of the state of poverty and homelessness in the United States. The
third section addresses the concept, adoption and intended impact of the Grand Challenges for
Social Work Initiative, with a specific focus on the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. The
chapter ends with an analysis on the knowledge, motivational and organizational influences that
are necessary for master of social work faculty to implement elements of the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness, specific to clinical and field practicum curriculum and workforce development
in poverty and homeless service areas.
Social Work Profession and Education History
The profession of social work began to develop near the end of nineteenth century
stemming from two social welfare movements, Charity Organization Societies (COS) and
settlement houses (Spetch & Courtney, 1994). The foundation of the social workers scope of
practice within COS and settlement houses were those of caseworker and advocate. Both of these
social movements called for the “social, political, and economic rights of the working man (and,
later, the working woman)” (Spetch & Courtney, 1994, p. 71).
Charity Organization Societies (COS) primary focus were to eliminate “indiscriminate
giving” and thoroughly screen applicants requesting assistance. The COS would then connect
applicants who were found truly in need to the appropriate charity to address their situation
(Specht & Courtney, 1994). In the social work and welfare community, COS became the first
HOMELESS EDUCATION 26
institutional effort in approaching the needs of the poor in a methodical way. Well known for her
work with COS, Mary Richmond implemented the framework of “helping the person in the
situation” (Spetch & Courtney, 1994, p. 76), which is now framed as modern day social systems
theory. Richmond recognized that to truly begin to assist an individual, the worker had to be able
to understand the person fully as well as connect them to their situation. Richmond’s work lends
to the foundation of social casework, a foundation used today with underserved and vulnerable
populations.
Settlement houses, begun in England, provided residence for young men and women to
establish their professional and personal lives in working-class neighborhoods. The men and
women of the settlement house movement were of the opinion that by emerging themselves in
the community they served, they would influence the “cultural, moral and intellectual level of the
community” (Specth & Courtney, 1994, p. 81). In 1889, Jane Adams, the recognized leader of
settlement houses, opened the Hull House in Chicago, which influenced incredible growth and
support within underserved communities. Through the work in settlement houses, Adams
influenced the field of social work to recognize that poor and working-class neighborhoods had
strength in cultural and social connections which were necessary to acknowledge while working
in the community (Specth & Courtney, 1994).
In line with the timing of the social welfare movement, schools of social work began to
take form as a recognized academic discipline. Among the first school of social work, founded
by Simmons and Harvard colleges, the Boston School of Social Work was established in 1904.
Three years later in 1907 the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy was founded (Netting,
Kettner, & McMurtry, 1998). As 1920 approached, there were just under 20 schools of social
work, which led to the development of the American Association of Professional Schools of
HOMELESS EDUCATION 27
Social Work (Patterson, 1994). Within these institutions of higher learning social work students
learned through the case study method, focusing on individual problems and diagnosis. It was at
this time that the environmental influences, such as the impact of community of one’s situation,
started to become less of a focus in social work education (Bremmer, 1964; Spetch & Courtney
1994).
The stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression began to bring the commitment
of social work back to larger social needs, such as poverty, while taking a step back from an
individualized social work focus (Payne, 2005). As the New Deal was established, the social
work profession shifted from private and voluntary agencies to work within government systems.
With the Social Security Act of 1935, the social work profession surged to 80,000, doubling in a
ten year timeframe, bringing about better salaries and need for further educational standards
(Glicken, 2011). As the social work profession entered into the 1940s and 1950s, professional
organizations began to materialize, such as the Council of Social Work Education (CSWE) in
1952 and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) in 1955. With the development of
these professional organizations, schools of social work and the social work profession began to
shift again, this time away from larger societal needs, to programs serving middle-class white
individuals (Glicken, 2011).
As the decades continued, the social work profession waxed and waned between a macro
led focus to a micro lens of practice. By the 1980s, the political focus started to move towards
privatization of public programs, which led to unstable backing for traditional social work
programs. In the 1990s, professional social workers providing services within governmental
welfare programs found their jobs threatened as the increase for privatization of services was
supported (Glicken, 2011). The history of the social work profession reveals an increase in
HOMELESS EDUCATION 28
macro level social work such as policy reform and advocacy for underserved communities and
populations when there is support for increased federal programs. However, when a more
conservative approach is in the political forefront, the social work profession retreats, taking with
it concentrated focus on poverty and social reform (Payne, 2005; Weiss & Welbourne, 2007).
State of Homelessness
In 2010, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) developed a
comprehensive federal strategic plan, Opening Doors, focused on collaborative approaches to
preventing and ending homelessness in the United States (USICH, 2017). The plan established
benchmarks specific to homeless sub-populations that communities could reference in evaluation
of the plans effectiveness (USHI, 2017). Homeless sub-populations of focus include, Veterans,
families, youth and individuals with disabilities. Since implementation of Opening Doors
reductions in homelessness across the nation have been reported, yet continued work is required
to support individuals who remain homeless or at risk for homelessness.
In 2016, Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD), Point in Time (PIT) count, indicated
close to 550,000 individual to be homeless on a single night in January 2016 (National Coalition
for the Homeless, 2017). The PIT count, supported by HUD, is a count of homeless individuals
in the United States on a single night in January. Of the 550, 000 people reported as homeless,
65% are individuals with 35% are families experiencing homelessness. While overall homeless
numbers are decreasing, family homelessness has shown an increase by 20% since 2013. More
than half of all homeless individuals reside in five states, California (22%), New York (16%),
Florida (6%), Texas (4%), and Washington (4%) (National Coalition for the Homeless, 2017).
HOMELESS EDUCATION 29
Grand Challenges for Social Work Initiative
In 2012, established and influential social work leaders and scholars from across the
United States gathered together in a meeting where a concept embraced by other disciplines,
such as engineering and mathematicians, was presented. The concept, referred to as “grand
challenge approach” to solving complex problems (AASWSW, n.d.-b, p. 71), was put into a
social work context and framework. From this initial meeting, the grand challenge approach,
specifically named The Grand Challenge for Social Work Initiative (GCSWI), was embraced by
the social work leaders and was adopted by the American Academy of Social Work and Social
Welfare in 2013 (AASWSW) (AASWSW, n.d.-b). In support of establishing the structure
surrounding the GCSWI, a call for working papers was made to the profession. The papers were
to address “significant and compelling social problems” (AASWSW, n.d.-b, p. 71). More than 80
big ideas were submitted for review. Of the 80 concepts, 12 Grand Challenges for Social Work
were born. Within the 12 Grand Challenges for Social Work, each identified social problem was
required to possess evidence based information proposing the problem could be changed in a 10-
year time frame with measurable components (AASWSW, n.d.-b; Uehara, Barth, Coffey, Padilla
& McClain, 2017).
The Concept of Grand Challenges
Dr. David Hilbert, a German mathematician, first introduced the “grand challenges”
concept to his field of practice, by presenting 23 specific unconcluded mathematical problems to
a society of mathematicians across the world (Uehara, et.al, 2017). The unsolved mathematical
equations captivated the mathematics field for more than a century. Since then, the “grand
challenge” concept has been embraced by influential world leaders, such as the, Bill and Melinda
HOMELESS EDUCATION 30
Gates Foundation 14 Grand Challenges in Global Health and Dr. Abdallah Daar a prominent
global health scientist with the Grand Challenges in Chronic: Non-Communicable Diseases.
Uehara et. al, (2017) speak to the 12 Grand Challenges for Social Work as, “creating a
platform for developing collaborative solutions to social problems, fueled by innovation and
science” (p. 75). It is strongly recognized that with the complexity of the Challenges cultural
shifts and restructuring will need to occur within schools of social work and communities who
have embraced the GCSWI (Uehara et. al, 2017). The 12 Grand Challenges for Social Work are
(Uehara et al., 2017):
1. Ensure healthy development for all youth
2. Close the health gap
3. Stop family violence
4. Advance long and productive lives
5. Eradicate social isolation
6. End homelessness
7. Create social responses to a changing environment
8. Harness technology for social good
9. Promote smart decarceration
10. Reduce extreme economic inequality
11. Build financial capability for all
12. Achieve equal opportunity and justice
Within each of the Grand Challenges the social work profession is charged with creating
“transdisciplinary collaborations” (Uehara et. al., 2017, p. 78), community partnerships and
HOMELESS EDUCATION 31
potential redesign in faculty, student and staff roles within the university encouraging innovation
and risk.
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
The Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, written in collaboration among faculty,
students and community leaders, focuses on ending homelessness among all individuals
experiencing homelessness as well as setting preventative measures to end the cycle of
homelessness (Larkin et. al., 2016). This is a shift in previous pilots and models that typically
concentrated in a singular focus within specific homeless sub-populations, such as veteran and
chronic homelessness. To achieve such a large scale task in ending all homelessness, strong
partnerships amongst university faculty, researchers, community organizers and policy advocates
must create innovative and inter-professional channels, targeting the underlying factors
associated with homelessness. Underlying factors include but are not limited to substance abuse,
mental health diagnosis, history of incarceration, domestic violence and poverty (Larkin, et al.,
2016).
The Grand Challenge to End Homelessness also recognizes the importance of enhancing
social work curriculum which includes creating increased student exposure to direct practice,
community organizing and policy advocacy within homeless services. Strengthening student
learning on homelessness intervention and prevention strategies can serve as a strong building
block of workforce development within homeless services as well. Students will feel prepared to
work with individuals with complex mental health needs and environmental challenges such as
affordable housing and employment (Larkin, et al., 2016).
HOMELESS EDUCATION 32
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Organizational Problem Solving Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) provide a framework to analyze and understand organizational
performance through the lens of knowledge, motivation or organizational influences. The gap
analysis process starts with an organization setting a global goal, then establishing stakeholder
specific performance goals, allowing for an in-depth analysis of the gap between the current
stakeholder performance and the desired performance in relation to the goal. In the case of this
dissertation, the assumed knowledge, motivation and organizational needs to implement
elements of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness specific to social work program
curriculum, field practicum and workforce development will be identified.
Faculty Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
The responsibility of faculty in social work education is to develop competent
professionals with the knowledge, skills and values to support social service delivery with
vulnerable populations (CSWE, 2003; Whalen, 2005). The National Association of Social Work
(NASW) provides guiding principles, represented by six core values in support of the clinical
attributes of social work, and a knowledge base which include: “ethics and values,
biopsychosocial development, psychopathology, interpersonal relationships, environmental
determinants, clinical methods, prevention and resilience, cultural and racial awareness, attention
to socially structured oppression, strengths and practice research” (Berzoff & Drisko, 2015, p.
263). To demonstrate these guided principles and in support of the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, by May 2018, SSW faculty will integrate the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness into curriculum as measured by the inclusion of specific readings, professional
development forums or assignments. In response to the social work education and professional
focus, the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) has identified field education as the
HOMELESS EDUCATION 33
signature pedagogy of social work (Ringstad, 2013). To ensure social work students are meeting
the expected professional standards, SSW structures classroom curriculum to align with the
scope of the student field practicum. Research by Clark and Estes (2008) emphasizes that
“training people effectively requires giving them accurate procedures, practice and corrective
feedback that permits them to gradually automate the knowledge” (p. 74). Further, SSW
faculty’s capacity to accurately assess student performance is essential to ensuring that students
are proficient in the CSWE core competencies at the level expected to serve their population of
focus (Ringstad, 2013). The Grand Challenge to End Homelessness and CSWE core
competencies can provide students a rich connection of the intersectionality of homelessness and
achieving greater understanding and practice of competency two: Engage diversity and
difference in practice and competency three: Advance Human Rights and Social, Economic, and
Environmental Justice (CSWE, 2013).
From the inception of the profession, social workers have been committed to care for
individuals in poverty and those experiencing social injustice, such as homelessness. The
literature review will analyze supporting research in regards to the type of knowledge and skill
necessary to achieve the organizational goal.
Knowledge influences. There are four knowledge types outlined by Anderson and
Krathwohl (2001) with respect to performance improvement towards organizational goals:
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge refers to elements basic in
nature that an individual must know to solve a problem or be familiar with in a discipline
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Conceptual knowledge focuses on making connections between
concepts through purposeful and reflective learning (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Procedural
knowledge, also referred to as imperative knowledge is the knowledge created in the
HOMELESS EDUCATION 34
performance of an exercise or task. Metacognitive knowledge is based on the self-awareness of
ones cognition, the knowledge of how to implement and use strategies for problem solving and
learning (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Pintrich, 2003). Social Work faculty need to have
knowledge and understanding of specific skillsets related to individuals at risk for or
experiencing homelessness. Faculty need to have proficiency in teaching social work students
relevant evidence based assessment and interventions.
Knowledge and experience in social work clinical field practice: School of Social Work
faculty need to have knowledge and experience in social work clinical field practice with
individuals living in poverty and experiencing homelessness. Berzoff and Dirsko (2015) speak to
the importance of social work clinical education being taught by faculty who have experience
working in the community versus doctoral (PhD) level faculty who may have limited to no
clinical experience in the field. Golia (2015) further indicates that trends in social work
education reflect a rise in full time faculty involved in research with limited field experience,
which lends to a decrease in full time faculty being hired with a history of direct practice.
Limitations of faculty with minimal field experience can disrupt students learning proper case
based approaches and how to use process recordings as an influential teaching method (Berzoff
& Dirsko, 2015). Proper development of Social Work students require, “application of direct
practice experience” (Golia, 2015, p. 325) as well as “faculty who can serve as clinical role
models, engage in contemporary practice, and are able to conceptualize practice from a complex
biopsychosocial perspective” (Berzoff & Dirsko, 2015, p. 265).
Faculty knowledge of research specific to homelessness. Social Work faculty need to
have knowledge on current research in relation to homelessness, prevention and intervention
strategies to develop relevant assignments into curriculum. Danis and Lockhart (2003) in their
HOMELESS EDUCATION 35
research of domestic violence, speak to the recognition social workers must have in working in
field areas that are cross-cutting, which includes homelessness. Like domestic violence,
homelessness and poverty span across generations and connect within multiple areas of social
work practice, including child welfare, adult mental health and policy (Danis & Lockhart, 2003).
By faculty teaching students the research behind the importance of the mind, body and
environmental connection that influences individuals lives, they will be able to bring a richness
into the classroom.
Understanding of poverty. Social Work faculty need to have an understanding of poverty
in relation to how it affects client populations. Understanding the conceptual knowledge of
poverty is necessary so poverty does not become normalized in social work practice (Krumer-
Nevo, Monnickendam & Weiss-Gal, 2009). Krumer-Nevo et al. (2009) explain due to the high
numbers of social work clients living in poverty, factors of poverty becomes normal to the
worker and no longer as the recognized problem. Krumer-Nevo et al. (2009) further indicate
individuals working with populations living in poverty do not adopt a “poverty awareness
approach” (p. 227), this is recognized in assessments and clinical intervention focusing on
psychological or family factors rather than socio-economic and cultural factors, such as, lack of
affordable housing.
Engaging student in clinical practice. Social Work faculty need to know mutually
agreed-on intervention goals and objectives based on the critical assessment of strengths, needs
and challenges with clients specific to poverty and homelessness. Procedural knowledge
indicates how the performance of an exercise or task is completed (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001). According to Whalen (2005), social work educators must be able to show social work
graduates’ commitment to social justice and have the clinical ability to work to alleviate poverty.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 36
Clinical skills include conducting a basic resource inventory and completing an in-depth
biopsychosocial assessment. With in-depth client knowledge and assessment skills, the social
work intern can identify the homeless subpopulation (e.g., chronically homeless, elderly,
transitioning youth, etc.) and select the appropriate evidence-based intervention or strategy
(Henwood, et al., 2011). Without the skill to implement varying levels of assessment, Krumer-
Nevo and Lev-Wiesel (2005) found close to 2/3 of the social work students have missed
opportunities to properly address clients basic needs. Continual missed opportunities can further
translate to being overlooked as part of professions responsibility. Faculty need to educate Social
Work students to be aware of and understand the individual needs of clients and take into
account the extensive amount of factors connected to poverty and homelessness (Perry, 2003).
Faculty self-awareness of potential bias surrounding poverty and homelessness. Social
Work faculty need to be able to assess their own ability to use empathy with clients living in
poverty and experiencing homelessness. Metacognitive knowledge is based on the self-
awareness of ones cognition, and the knowledge of how to implement and use strategies for
problem solving and learning (Krathwohl, 2002; Pintrich, 2002). According to the findings in a
study by Rishel and Majewski (2014), social workers who are able to reflect on their own
empathy display a more positive perception towards their population of practice, thus increasing
understanding of the client’s environment. It is important that Social Work faculty teaching
about poverty and homelessness are aware of their own empathetic approach and ability to self-
reflect on their own empathy. Gerdes, Segal, Jackson and Mullins (2013) discuss the importance
of the social worker understanding empathy as a tool that will enhance their ability to empower
their clients and in turn have the client develop their own empathy. Additionally, Lev-Wiesel
(2003) warns social work students to be made aware of the conscious and unconscious motives
HOMELESS EDUCATION 37
in selecting to work with populations requiring basic needs such as clients in poverty or
experiencing homelessness. Individuals who are “needy” may gravitate to selecting social work
as a profession specifically with vulnerable populations and may feel a secondary benefit while
assisting those in need to fill a personal void (Lev-Wiesel, 2003).
The Knowledge Worksheet (see Table 2) describes the organizational mission specific to
SSW and the organizational goal detailed in this literature review. The knowledge influences and
types are outlined to provide detail on the skills and knowledge necessary of social work faculty
involved in implementing elements of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into the SSW
program.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 38
Table 2
Knowledge Worksheet
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Influence Assessment
Declarative:
Social Work faculty need to have knowledge
and experience in field practice working with
individuals living in poverty and/or
experiencing homelessness.
Social Work faculty course leads and
concentration chairs and vice-chairs in a
survey response are asked to rank their
experience (in number of years) in social
work field practice working with individuals
living in poverty and/or experiencing
homelessness.
Procedural:
Faculty course leads and concentration
chairs/vice-chairs have an understanding of the
homeless education content in curriculum both
prior to the implementation of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness and following.
Faculty course leads and concentration
chairs/vice-chairs were asked in one on one
interview about their familiarity with how
homeless education was facilitated in
classroom content prior to the Grand
Challenge.
Faculty course leads and concentration
chairs/vice-chairs were asked in one on one
interviews if implementation of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness had impacted
their concentration area of focus.
Metacognitive:
Social Work faculty need to be able to assess
their own ability to use empathy with clients
experiencing poverty and homeless.
Social Work lead faculty and concentration
chairs and vice-chairs are asked to reflect on
their use of empathy with clients
experiencing homelessness.
Motivation
Motivation, as described by Pintrich (2003), refers to the reason or willingness an
individual has towards a task, including follow through to completion of the task. Rueda (2011)
emphasizes there is a notable difference between an individual who has the knowledge on how to
HOMELESS EDUCATION 39
do something versus their desire or willingness to do it. Motivation has three common indicators:
active choice, persistence, and effort (Rueda, 2011). In relation to clinical practice, social
workers’ active choice allows them to self-determine the desire to work with a specific
population within the large scope of social work practice, such as with those in poverty or
experiencing homelessness. Persistence, on the other hand, allows the social worker to commit to
working specifically with difficult client situations that could potentially result in strong
workforce development and expertise in the field. Lastly, effort lends itself to the mental effort
needed to implore, gaining new skills and knowledge on working within the challenges faced by
individuals living in poverty or experiencing homelessness. According to Pintrich (2003), there
are five underlying factors that affect motivation; self-efficacy, self-determination, personal
interest, value and goal-orientation. For the purpose of this literature review, self-efficacy and
goal orientation will be the motivation theories in discussion.
Faculty self-efficacy. SSW faculty need to believe they are capable of effectively
incorporating homeless education that is influential in both clinical coursework and field
practicum with individuals experiencing homelessness. With faculty confidence and value in
incorporating research and education specific to homelessness an enhanced curriculum will be
supported. Further, SSW faculty have to believe social work students are capable of
understanding and integrating interventions specific to homelessness into their clinical practice.
Self-efficacy is defined as, “the belief in one’s ability to act effectively in a particular situation”
(Rishel & Majewski, 2009, p. 366). Rishel and Majewski (2009) point to a positive correlation
between self-efficacy and academic achievement. Specifically, their research indicates social
work students’ self-efficacy perception in field work lends to a variety of positive self-rated
skills and outcomes. Social work faculty influence social work students to be competent in
HOMELESS EDUCATION 40
resource and referral, assessment and clinical intervention specific to individuals experiencing
homelessness. Faculty development of field evaluations tools include assessment of the student’s
self-confidence in completing a task and move forward successfully within their practice
placement setting (Rishel & Majewski, 2009).
Faculty goal orientation. A goal is a task or thing an individual wants to accomplish or
achieve. More specifically, goal orientation involves the process, reason and purpose for
continued involvement in goal driven behaviors (Rueda, 2011). Goals are comprised of mastery
or performance orientation. Mastery orientation is defined as having “the goal of learning and
mastering the task according to self-set standards. Learner is focused on developing new skills,
improving, and acquiring additional knowledge” (Rueda, 2011, p. 23) while performance
orientation is characterized by external factors such as their professional obligation to complete
or follow through with the task or goal. In reference to social work faculty, the mastery goal
orientation would be the ideal driving force in developing a stronger social work homeless
workforce. Social Work faculty need to want to achieve mastery in curriculum development
specific to homeless education. Faculty need to truly see the value of the impact a comprehensive
curriculum can have in influencing professional development and increase in homeless service
workforce development. Perry (2003) supports the idea of goal mastery as the focus for students
working with homeless and displaced populations. Research indicates professionals working
within homelessness and poverty show low interest in practice to other populations (Krumer-
Nevo et al., 2009). To demonstrate student mastery in homeless service delivery, social work
faculty need to clearly articulate within course material and enhanced field practicum the
connections of poverty, mental health and homelessness in relation to individuals experiencing
homelessness. Krumer-Nevo et al. (2009) emphasize as the field of social work continues to
HOMELESS EDUCATION 41
drive mastery goal orientation, students will be developed into subject matter experts in the field
of poverty and homelessness.
Table 3 shows how the organizational mission and organizational performance goal align
with the focus of providing support for social work faculty teaching homeless curriculum,
providing the skillset necessary to for students assist in complex needs. The motivational
influences for social work faculty are self-efficacy theory and goal orientation theory. Survey
question examples provided represent the type of questions faculty maybe asked in reference to
their motivation in teaching about homelessness and their self-efficacy level in providing
competent skillsets necessary to influence curriculum and student learning in homeless services.
Table 3
Motivation Worksheet
Motivational Indicator(s)
Assumed Motivation Influences
Motivation Influence Assessment
Self-Efficacy:
Self-Efficacy-Social Work faculty need
to believe they are capable of effectively
incorporating homelessness education
and research into curriculum, to create
impact in the field of social work.
Written Survey Item:
Written survey item “How confident are you about
your ability to design and assignment on
homelessness into your course teachings?”
“How confident are you in identifying homeless
intervention and prevention research to incorporate
into curriculum assignments specific to homeless
education?”
How confident are you in identifying student learning
objectives while placed in a homeless service field
placement?”
Goal Orientation (interest):
Social Work faculty need to want to
achieve mastery and want to do more
than the bare minimum by enhancing
student education on homeless content.
Written Survey Item: “As faculty I want to
influence curriculum on the connections of
homelessness in relation to poverty and mental
health.”
(strongly disagree-strongly agree)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 42
Organizational Influences
General theory. Knowledge and motivation are key influences required for individuals
to reach their highest level of potential as well as to determine gaps that can be improved.
Additionally, Clark and Estes (2008) indicate that one of the potential causes for performance
gaps is the “lack of efficient and effective organizational work process and material” (p. 103).
Knowledge and motivation cannot stand alone to reach performance goals. Organizational
culture can have an influence on all systems resulting in hindered performance improvement,
specifically, organizational culture misalignment and resource allocation (Clark & Estes, 2008).
To thoroughly analyze School of Social Work (SSW) faculty’s capacity to incorporate key
elements of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, organizational influences such as
resources, work process and culture, need to be examined.
Resources. As SSW focuses on enhancing homeless education in curriculum, in support
of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, an analysis of organizational resources is needed.
The organization is the guiding influence in moving the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
forward. The organization is responsible for the allocation of resources which includes time and
resource allocation as well as social capital (Clark & Estes, 2008). By aligning resources within
the organization, structured processes can streamline implementation of new initiatives by
supporting faculty needs.
Work processes. Workforce processes need to be aligned to the mission and goals within
institutions of higher learning (Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge, skillset and motivation cannot
support success alone if there is a lack of efficiency in the work flow process (Clark & Estes,
2008). Specific to curriculum development, faculty must be able to develop partnerships
allowing for a collaboration among faculty that share areas of interest and expertise (Sugawara,
HOMELESS EDUCATION 43
2009). In order for faculty to effectively provide enhanced curriculum on homeless education in
clinical courses and field practicum, they need opportunities to network and reflect on promising
and best practices influencing classroom curriculum as well as innovative ideas in curriculum
enhancement.
Culture-Work Structure. Clark and Estes (2008) describe organizational work culture
as, “who we are, what we value and how we do what we do as an organization.” (p. 107). To
have a positive impact on faculty and student collaboration in educating professional social
workers on homelessness and the impact of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, the
organization needs to have a cultural work structure conducive to providing support and creating
an impact in the classroom and field practicum settings. Cultural settings directly impact faculty
attributes that lead to success, and SSW leadership is influential on the organizational
environment.
As SSW seeks to create an impact with the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, the
assumed organizational influences in Table 4 will be examined for potential gaps to ensure the
organization is aligned and prepared to best support faculty roles and influence in the SSW
program.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 44
Table 4
Organizational Assumed Influences Worksheet
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational Influence Assessment
Faculty need to have the resources necessary
to enhance curriculum specific to homeless
education (Resources)
Through the use of survey questions, faculty will
indicate the degree to which they have resources
needed to enhance curriculum around homeless
education.
Faculty need to have access to guidelines and
performance measures of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness to provide
guidance and accountability in increasing
homeless education in curriculum. (Work
Processes)
Through interview questions, faculty will
describe the structure their concentration has put
in place guiding them in increasing homeless
education in social work curriculum
Faculty need to have a cultural work
structure conducive to providing support and
creating an impact in the classroom and field
practicum settings. (Culture)
Through the use of survey questions, faculty will
be asked to rate the impact they feel the Grand
Challenge will have on faculty and student
interest on homelessness.
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge
and Motivation and the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework as described by Maxwell (2013) provides a map that links what
a researcher plans to study, the existing work that supports the topic, connections between past
and present day needs as well as an assumption of developments necessary for advancement.
Within the scope of social work education’s increasing emphasis on curriculum development on
poverty and homelessness, the conceptual framework below will demonstrate the links that are
necessary for advancement within social work education. Throughout chapter two, the
knowledge, motivation and organizational (KMO) influences presented each outlined
HOMELESS EDUCATION 45
independent influences, yet a common interwoven framework was evident. The conceptual
framework in Figure 1 illustrates the relationship the KMO influences have on each other in
regards to schools of social work dependence on varying levels of support, intention and
inclusion for the study of poverty and homelessness to be increasingly present in current day
curriculum.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 46
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
By May 2018, SSW faculty
will integrate the Grand
Challenge to End
Homelessness into
curriculum as measured by
the inclusion of specific
readings, professional
development forums or
assignments.
Organization
Resources
Work Process
Culture
Knowledge
Experience in Direct
Practice,
Knowledge of
research,
Understanding role of
poverty, Engage
students in clinical
practice, Self-
awareness of bias
surrounding poverty
and homelessness
Motivation
Self-efficacy
Faculty Goal
Orientation
SSW
SSW Faculty
HOMELESS EDUCATION 47
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
To address the curriculum gap on homeless education and service delivery, the National
Homelessness Social Work Initiative (NHSWI- Consortium) in support of the Grand Challenge
Ending Homelessness, declared homelessness a professional social work priority. The initiative
aims to promote stronger relationships between social work schools and community agencies
assisting the homeless (Larkin et al., 2016). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences which contribute to SSW faculty enhancing
curriculum specific to homeless education in support of the Grand Challenge Ending
Homelessness.
1. What are the SSW faculty knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in the
context of enhancing curriculum specific to homeless education outcomes in relation to
the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness?
2. What are the recommend solutions for organizational practice in areas of knowledge,
motivation and organizational resources in connection to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness?
Participating Stakeholders
Stakeholders in this study were identified as active full time SSW faculty course leads
and concentration chairs and vice-chairs in both the campus based and virtual program across the
three SSW concentrations. The demographic background of faculty varied by gender, ethnicity,
race and age. Due to the nature of both on-ground faculty and virtual academic faculty, physical
location of faculty spanned the United States. Identified faculty were asked to participate in both
the electronic survey and virtual interview. Faculty who responded to the survey were given the
option to opt in to a one on one interview via a separate link at the end of the survey. Due to
HOMELESS EDUCATION 48
faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs key role and knowledge of program
focus, these stakeholders were likely able to identify the strengths and challenges within design
and implementation of curriculum advancement in relation to homeless educational content.
Survey Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants were identified as active full time faculty employed by SSW
within one of three concentrations (Behavioral Health, Children and Families, Community
Organizing) serving in the role of course lead or concentration chair and vice-chair. Criteria of
participants within this category was based on their role as course lead or concentration chair and
vice-chair as of January 2016, which is in-line with the launch of the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Recruitment. A survey provided the ability for the researcher to gather information from
faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs regarding their knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences related to reviewing existing core curriculum across the
three concentrations to determine where to incorporate at least one course assignment with a
micro or macro focus specifically on an area of homeless education.
The identified stakeholder group members were sent an online survey via Qualtrics. The
online survey was sent via email to all SSW faculty course leads and concentration chairs and
vice-chairs. The SSW administration who controlled the list serve provided faculty names and
emails, allowing this researcher to send survey email. Participants were provided an introduction
letter and purpose of the study. The Survey was sent to all SSW faculty who had served as
course lead and concentration chair and vice-chairs (as of January 2016) at the beginning of the
collection data method period.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 49
Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants were identified as active full time faculty employed by SSW
within one of three concentrations (Behavioral Health, Children and Families, Community
Organizing) having served in the role of course lead or concentration chair and vice-chair.
Criteria of participants within this category was based on their role as course lead or
concentration chair and vice-chair as of January 2016, which is in-line with the launch of the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Recruitment. Participants had the opportunity to self-select their involvement in
one on one interview through a separate link at the end of the survey in Qualtrics or by reaching
out to this researcher directly via email.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
This study utilized both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. The use of
both survey and interview in a mixed method approach allowed for triangulation and expansion,
a deep dive into addressing and exploring the research questions (Maxwell, 2013). Permission
from the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) was received to administer this research.
Surveys
An original survey questionnaire, developed by this researcher was the first data
collection tool used in this study. The survey was in electronic format utilizing Qualtrics for data
collection. Qualtrics access was provided to this researcher as a doctoral student. The survey was
written in the English language as all participant responders were fluent in English. The survey
was anonymous with no identifiers, such as faculty member name or specific courses taught
within SSW. The survey consisted of 24 questions with fixed response items. Participants had
the ability to respond “other” where they could write in a unique individual response. The survey
HOMELESS EDUCATION 50
took approximately 15-20 minutes to complete. Survey questions focused on the participants’
knowledge and motivation as well as the organizational influences surrounding the curriculum
enhancement on homelessness and the influence of the Social Work Grand Challenge Ending
Homelessness, in connection to their faculty role at SSW. Appendix A provides the survey
questionnaire.
With surveys reported to have an average response rate of 30% when administered online
(Nulty, 2008), all SSW faculty serving in the capacity as course lead or concentration chair and
vice-chair as of January 2016 (approximately 80 full time faculty) were provided the survey via
electronic mail (e-mail) in hopes of obtaining a minimum of 24 responses. E-mail distribution of
the survey was also beneficial due to the nature of SSW faculty demographics, with a campus
based and online program, faculty reside across the United States. This researcher sent the online
survey to SSW faculty through the faculty list serve, representing consensus sampling (Creswell,
2014).
In hopes of exceeding the average response rate, several approaches were employed.
Faculty responders were sent an introductory email from this researcher five business days prior
to the release of the official survey questionnaire link. The initial email provided the study
outline, purpose and description of the study tools. The online survey questionnaire link was
open for 14 days. Follow up email reminders, with the online survey link, were sent out at day
six and 13 to all SSW faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice chairs.
Interviews
Interviews were organized on a one on one basis, following the completion of the online
survey questionnaire, to allow for a multi methods approach (Maxwell, 2013). Interviews were
conducted in a semi-structured format and provided only in the English language. Interview
HOMELESS EDUCATION 51
participants were recruited by two approaches. In the first approach, participants were recruited
directly from the survey. Participants were able to submit their email address at the end of the
Qualtrics survey to be contacted, had they be willing to participate in the interview. The second
approach this researcher took was reaching out directory to SSW faculty serving in the role as
course lead or concentration chair and vice-chair (as of January 2016), across the three
concentrations, representing a purposeful sample. It was estimated that between five to seven
interviews would take place. Faculty who took part in an interview were not required to have
completed the online survey. All interviews were hosted on the SSW virtual platform (Adobe
Connect) due to faculty interviewees’ locations spanning across the United States. Each
interview took approximately 45-60 minutes to complete, with 15 interview questions. Virtual
interviews required a webcam and telephone connection. Virtual one on one interviews were
recorded allowing this interviewer to obtain a written transcription of the interview session.
Interviews were transcribed following interview sessions and destroyed following the submission
and approval of this study. As of study completion, transcriptions were kept in double lock
drawer in this researcher’s office, with any identifying information scrubbed.
Interview questions were outlined around the conceptual framework with attention to
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences in relation to enhanced curriculum on
homeless education following the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness. The interview
questions, 15 in total, consisted of 12 open-ended, three closed (for demographic purposes), can
be reviewed in Appendix B. The interview allowed for follow-up questions to be added to each
individual interview allowing for expansion (Maxwell, 2013).
HOMELESS EDUCATION 52
Data Analysis
A descriptive statistical analysis was conducted upon all survey results submitted. For
interviews, data analysis began during data collection. Analytic memos were written after each
interview. Thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data in relation to my conceptual
framework and research questions were documented. Following completion of the interviews,
transcription and coding took place. In preparation for coding the interviews, priori codes were
derived from the conceptual framework, research questions and this researcher’s knowledge on
the study topic. In the first phase of analysis, open coding was used. A second phase of analysis
was conducted where codes were applied based on the conceptual framework. In the third phase
of data analysis pattern codes and themes that emerge in relation to the conceptual framework
and study questions were identified.
Providing assurance of quality data was critical to the finding of a study (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). While conducting mixed methods research utilizing both quantitative and
qualitative data collection, threats needed to be considered from multiple angles. In quantitative
research threats to the research instrument design were accounted for, while qualitative research
looked to control validity strengthening the hypotheses of the study (Maxwell, 2013).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Credibility and trustworthiness within a study were of the utmost importance for both the
integrity of the research as well as of the researcher. Credibility makes the connection between
whether the research is believable and the perception of the researcher’s qualifications while
trustworthiness looks to the genuineness, honesty and feasibility of the study (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2009). This researcher maintained a consistent and reflective approach throughout the
study process, due to the topic of homelessness holding an area of specialty in her practice.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 53
Having worked in the field of homelessness and working as a University faculty member, the
risk for bias has the potential to be heightened surrounding the studies topic of focus. Respondent
validation, also known as member checking, was utilized in review of the qualitative components
of this study. Member checking consists of verifying information with the target participants
through the analysis of data. Member checking assisted to assure interpretation of the meaning
and viewpoint of the respondent is validated (Maxwell, 2013). To remain neutral in data
collection and results, this researcher disclosed all findings (Maxwell, 2013).
All protocols utilized in this study underwent piloting and a peer review process. Piloting
allowed the protocol a trial-run ensuring wording was easily understood and clear. The peer
review participants were made up of current social work adjunct faculty. Adjunct faculty
evaluated the instruments through different lens to review clarity of questions and response
options, ensuring the focus of data collection related to the research questions. The pilot group
looked for neutrality in questions and response options, guaranteeing this researcher’s bias did
not influence the study.
Validity and Reliability
In quantitative research, validity and reliability must be taken into consideration.
Validity demonstrates a study is following the structure that was intended as well as accurately
assessing what was set out to be assessed (Maxwell, 2013). Reliability in a study lends to the
research maintaining consistency and stability under the data collection tools utilized (Maxwell,
2013). In this study, a survey questionnaire was used that was original to this study and
researcher. Survey items were informed by this study’s research and supported in the literature
review. This researcher was diligent to assess whether the data collection tool held any repetitive
errors, such as a specific question having a high number of no response that can question the
HOMELESS EDUCATION 54
reliability of the tool. The researcher reported any errors that skewed the results or caused other
implications to the study.
Ethics
Researchers are held to ethical standards that protect participants in research studies. This
is done by developing trust with study participants, upholding integrity within the research and
providing insight and transparency in the process (Creswell, 2014). To support both the
quantitative and qualitative research of this study, I provided research participants with a detailed
explanation outlining the purpose of the study as well as informed consent to participate. Within
the informed consent form, participants were notified of the voluntary nature of the study as well
as the confidentiality parameters set in place. Due to this study being administered within my
place of employment, it was important to note that my role in the University is not in a
supervisory or leadership capacity of the faculty who were asked to participate. Faculty were
informed that taking part in this study or to decline participation had no effect on their
employment in any way.
Participants who agreed to participate in the study completed an anonymous survey that
scrubbed all identifiers (such as their IP address or unique faculty role identification) that could
potentially link them to their survey responses. In the qualitative one on one interviews,
participants were recorded alongside notes taken by this researcher throughout interview.
Recordings and notes were destroyed following completion of this study. The study was
submitted to the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) with all protocol and procedures
followed to protect the rights and welfare of the stakeholder participants in the study.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 55
All surveys were administered via online software capability, i.e., Qualtrics and use of the
Adobe Connect virtual classroom for interviews. No incentives were provided to participants to
ensure no coercion took place.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
Limitations in this study would have been improved with a larger sample size including
evaluation of multiple schools of social work across the country, to allow for generalizability.
Limitations of this study were also influenced by the timing of the survey and interview items
available to active full time faculty on ground and with the virtual program. Due to the survey
and interview protocols being available in the summer semester, response rates were limited due
to the on-ground program not having an active summer semester and the virtual program faculty
limiting the number of courses they teach in the summer. Summer semester has fewer active
faculty engaged in teaching courses and limited faculty meeting and engagement compared to
the fall and spring semesters. Limitations can also be found in the survey design as it is original
to this survey. As indicated by Crawford (1997), “The researcher must develop his/her own
intuition with respect to what constitutes 'good design' since there is no theory of questionnaires
to guide him/her” (p. 67). Further, due to the SSW having an large faculty base that are enrolled
in PhD and Doctorate programs as well as an active social work PhD and Doctorate program,
faculty may have experienced survey fatigue with multiple dissertation studies in the data
collection phase concurrently.
Delimitations
The scope of this study was limited to one school of social work, which did not allow the
research to provide a generalized report on all schools knowledge, motivation and organizational
HOMELESS EDUCATION 56
influences on enhancing curriculum on homeless education. With the SSW’s intentional focus on
one of the 12 Grand Challenges, faculty were thought to have had increased awareness and show
interest based on activities targeting homeless education, advocacy and knowledge. Faculty
serving as course leads and concentration chair and vice-chairs were also purposefully selected
by this researcher based there involvement in curriculum review in updating course syllabus as
well as knowledge of SSW program direction of focus messaged from leadership. Adjunct
faculty, not selected as a stakeholder, may not have the awareness of full time faculty due to less
involvement in faculty meetings and mandatory requirement of scholarship and service activities
that full time faculty have to adhere to.
Conclusion
Faculty enhancing social work student’s understanding of poverty and homelessness in
the classroom as well as in field practice can lead to creating subject matter experts who will be
leaders in their field. Universities hold the responsibility to provide the organizational culture
and influence in curriculum design to engage students in learning from both the existing
literature and field practice. School of Social Work’s commitment to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness has the opportunity to engage faculty in teaching students about social works
commitment to individuals experiencing homelessness, which can potentially influence
workforce development of professional social workers seeking employment in homeless
services.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 57
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the gap on homeless education in
Social Work programs and to understand the influence the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness has had on faculty engagement in enhancing homeless education specific to the
SSW program. The questions which guided this study are:
1. What are the SSW faculty knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in the
context of enhancing curriculum specific to homeless education outcomes in relation to the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness?
2. What are the recommend solutions for organizational practice in areas of knowledge,
motivation and organizational resources in connection to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness?
To address the research questions an electronic survey and virtual one on one interviews
with key SSW faculty were administered by this researcher. This chapter presents the results and
findings for the first research question, based on comprehensive data analysis, organized by
Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) framework. From
data analysis and supportive literature, knowledge, motivation and organizational influences
were validated if an assumed need was identified by at least a 50% response rate. Non-validated
gaps, indicate faculty respondents have the knowledge, motivation or organizational influences
necessary to reach the stakeholder goal. Validated assumed influences found in this study are,
self-efficacy, resources, work process and culture. Knowledge influences were not found to be
validated, based on the assumed declarative, procedural and metacognitive influences. As well as
the motivational influence of goal orientation.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 58
Results
Survey
Full time SSW faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs (having
served in this capacity as of January 2016) in both campus based and virtual programs across all
three SSW concentrations, were asked to take part in this study. In total, 85 full time faculty
serving as course leads and/or concentration chairs and vice-chairs were identified and sent an
electronic email requesting their voluntary participation in the online survey, via Qualtrics. Of
the 85 email addresses, four emails were returned by the outlook server as an incorrect or
unknown email address and three faculty responded to this researcher indicating they were not
full time faculty and would not meet criteria for this study, thus leaving 78 full time faculty
course leads and/or concentration chairs and vice-chairs as potential respondents to the Qualtrics
survey. Of the remaining 78 faculty emailed, twenty three consented and completed the survey,
resulting in a 29.48% response rate.
Following the completion of the survey questions, participants were given an opportunity
to provide their contact information to this researcher if they were interested in taking part in a
virtual one on one interview. Faculty who received email notification referencing the survey
were also provided the opportunity to contact this researcher directly to take part in a virtual one
on one interview that was not dependent on completing the survey. Three participants who
completed the survey indicated their interest in being part of the interview process while five
participants reached out to this researcher directly via email indicating they would participate in
a one on one interview. Eight one on one interviews were conducted by this researcher following
the closure of the online survey questionnaire.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 59
Of the 23 faculty who participated in the electronic survey, nine identified as Clinical
Field faculty, eight Clinical Teaching faculty, two Tenure faculty, two Senior Lecturer and two
adjunct faculty. The two faculty who identified as adjunct included a comment referencing they
held full time faculty status during the 2016 academic year but had recently changed to the
adjunct faculty line. Figure 2 provides the breakdown of faulty line appointments, by
respondents.
Figure 2. Faculty line appointment.
SSW full time faculty identify within one of three concentrations upon hire. Of the
survey participants nine faculty fall under the focus of the Behavior Health Concentration (BH),
eight Community Organizing (CO) and six Children Youth and Family (CYF) (n=23). Figure 3
provides a summary of information regarding faculty concentration of focus.
2
9
8
2 2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Adjunct Clinical Field Clinical Teaching Senior Lecturer Tenure Track
Faculty Line Appointment (n=23)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 60
Figure 3. Faculty concentration of focus.
Faculty were asked to indicate which program location they aligned with, the campus
based (on-ground) program or the virtual program. Sixty-five percent of faculty respondents (15
out of 23) work in the virtual program, with two (9%) in the campus-based program and six
(26%) working both virtually and on campus (n=23). Figure 4 provides a summary of
information regarding SSW faculty program location.
9
6
8
Faculty Concentration of Focus (n=23)
AMHW CYF SCI
HOMELESS EDUCATION 61
Figure 4. Faculty program location.
Faculty were asked to select one of the 12 AASWSW Grand Challenges that their
professional social work practice most aligned with. Of the 12 Grand Challenges only two
faculty respondents selected Ending Homelessness, the focus of this research project. Ensure
healthy development for all youth was the highest response rate with four faculty, followed
equally by three faculty each, Achieve equal opportunity and justice and Stop family violence.
Figure 5 provides a summary breakdown of the 12 Grand Challenges aligned most with faculty
respondents professional social work practice.
9%
65%
26%
Faculty Program Location:
Campus-Based or Virtual Program (n=23)
Campus Based Virtual Program Both
HOMELESS EDUCATION 62
Figure 5. Faculty grand challenge preference.
While majority of faculty respondents did not select Ending Homelessness as being most
aligned with their professional practice, five faculty indicated they were extremely interested in
SSWs commitment to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, followed by 16 faculty (8
each) very or somewhat interested. One faculty member selected not at all interested and
provided comment later in the survey stating, “I don't care at all about the Grand Challenges.
However, I do care about the challenges that are being addressed by the Grand Challenges
Initiative.” Another faculty respondent who selected not very interested, asked, “How do you
engage faculty who's [sic] interest doesn't revolve around which ever Grand Challenge is
selected to focus on as a school?” Further examination of faculty responses to both the survey
questions and one on one interviews will be explored in the knowledge, motivation and
3
2
2
2
1
2
4
1
2
1
3
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Achieve equal opportunity and justice
Advance long and productive lives
Build financial capability for all
Close the health gap
Create social response to a changing environment
End homelessness
Ensure healthy development for all youth
Eradicate social isolation
Harness technology for social good
Reduce extreme economic inequality
Stop family violence
Promote Smart Decarceration
Faculty Grand Challenge Preference (n=23)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 63
organizational section of this chapter. Figure 6 provides a summary breakdown of the responses
regarding interest in SSW commitment to the Grand Challenge to End Homeless.
Figure 6. Faculty interest in SSW commitment to Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Interview
Eight course leads and/or concentration chairs and vice-chairs, elected to participate in a
one on one virtual interview for this research study. Of the eight interview participants, four
faculty identified under the Community Organizing (CO) concentration of focus, two under
Children, Youth and Family (CYF) and two under Behavioral Health (BH). Five faculty worked
predominately in the virtual program while the remaining three worked both on-campus and the
virtual program. Interviews were held in a virtual classroom via adobe connect and recorded by
audio only to aid with transcription. The rev.com website was utilized to transcribe the recorded
interviews. Transcriptions were then coded and develop into a codebook to capture and define
emerging categories. The purpose of the interview sessions was to gain further insight and derive
5
8
8
1
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Extremly interested
Very interested
Somewhat interested
Not very interested
Not at all interested
Faculty Interest in SSW Commitment to Grand Challenge to End Homelessness (n=23)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 64
rich descriptions to answer the first research question of this study; What are the SSW faculty
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in the context of enhancing curriculum
specific to homeless education outcomes in relation to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness?
Knowledge Results
The responsibility of faculty in social work education is to develop competent
professionals with the knowledge, skills and values to support social service delivery with
vulnerable populations (CSWE, 2003; Whalen, 2005). As outlined in Chapter Two of this study,
there are four knowledge types with respect to performance improvement towards organizational
goals: factual (declarative), conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001). Through the survey questionnaire and one on one interviews with faculty members
(course leads and/or concentration chair/vice-chairs), an attempt was made to evaluate the
potential knowledge influences that lead to enhancing curriculum specific to homeless education
outcomes in relation to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Declarative knowledge. Proper development of Social Work students require,
“application of direct practice experience” (Golia, 2015, p. 325) as well as “faculty who can
serve as clinical role models, engage in contemporary practice, and are able to conceptualize
practice from a complex biopsychosocial perspective” (Berzoff & Dirsko, 2015, p. 265). Faculty
were asked to indicate their years of experience working directly in the homeless sector
(including research and policy). A total of 20 responses were provided. Six faculty respondents
indicated they had between one-three years of experience, four faculty with four-six years of
experience, four faculty with less than one year of experience and two with more than 10 years
of experience in the homeless sector. Four faculty respondents indicated they had no experience
HOMELESS EDUCATION 65
working within the homeless arena. Overall, 80% of faculty respondents had experience working
directly in homeless services, including policy and research. In addition to faculty having
experience in homeless services, approximately 65% of faculty respondents rated integrating
education on homelessness into SSW curriculum as very to extremely important to them as
faculty. Faculty with direct practice experience and recognizing the importance of the study on
homelessness is invaluable in the classroom. Figure 7 provides a summary of faculty
respondent’s years of experience in the homeless sector with Figure 8 providing a summary of
faculty respondents rating of importance of integrating education on homelessness into SSW
curriculum.
Figure 7. Faculty years of experience in director homeless practice (including research and
policy).
30%
20% 20%
10%
20%
1-3 years 4-6 years less than one More than 10 No experience
Faculty Years of Experience in Direct Homeless Practice (n=20)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 66
Figure 8. Importance of integrating education on homelessness into MSW and DSW curriculum
to you as faculty.
Procedural knowledge. To impact curriculum specific to homeless education outcomes
in relation to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, it is important that faculty course leads
and concentration chairs/vice-chairs have an understanding of the homeless education content in
curriculum both prior to the implementation of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness and
following. To assess faculty respondent’s procedural knowledge, faculty were asked about their
familiarity with how homeless education was facilitated in classroom content prior to the Grand
Challenge and if implementation of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness had impacted
their concentration area of focus. All eight interview respondents indicated some knowledge of
homeless content being in the curriculum prior SSWs commitment of the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness, however seven out of eight faculty respondents indicated they were not
familiar with how concentrations addressed content into curriculum as a whole. Five out of the
7 7
4
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Extremely Important Very Important Moderatly Important Slightly Important Not at all important
Importance of Integrating Education on Homelessness into
SSW Curriculum (n=21)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 67
eight faculty respondents stated SSWs commitment to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
had an impact on their concentration of focus in relation to homeless education in curriculum,
while three indicated they did not notice a shift of focus due to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Metacognitive knowledge. It is important that MSW faculty teaching about poverty and
homelessness are aware of their own empathetic approach and ability to self-reflect on their own
empathy. Seventy percent of faculty respondents (14 out of 20) indicated it is extremely
important to teach students use of empathy when working with the clients experiencing
homelessness. As well as, 70% of faculty respondents feel the topic of bias and perceptions
towards people experiencing homelessness (for both students and faculty), is extremely relevant,
to discuss in the classroom setting. Interview data indicates that faculty course leads and/or
concentration chair/vice-chairs have adequate knowledge of how to evaluate and reflect on their
own empathy with clients experiencing poverty and homelessness. One faculty respondent noted,
“I think it’s so important that we know if empathy changes the biology of the brain, and if our
policies are not including empathy, then our policies are technically violating biology. And that’s
really destructive.” Another interviewee described how they invite discussions of empathy in the
classroom, “I try to be very conscious of using my experiences and sharing them in the class and
I also design assignments so that students have to contribute and share their experiences.”
Synthesis of Knowledge Influences
Overall, the data suggests that the full time faculty course leads and concentration chairs
and vice-chairs have the knowledge required to incorporate homeless education into the SSW
classroom and field practicum settings. In the survey faculty respondents demonstrated
HOMELESS EDUCATION 68
declarative knowledge with the majority of faculty having had experience in the homeless
service field, supporting Berzoff and Dirsko’s (2015) research on the importance of “faculty
who can serve as clinical role models” (p. 265) by having had experience in the field.
Faculty respondents showed strong procedural knowledge throughout the interview
responses on familiarity with how homeless education was facilitated in the classroom prior to
the SSW commitment to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. Due to the nature of the
roles of the faculty respondents as course leads and/or concentration chairs or vice-chairs,
content in the classroom over any given time or topic would be expected of this cohort. The large
majority of faculty respondents in the survey questionnaire also demonstrated metacognitive
knowledge, by recognizing the importance of teaching students about the use of empathy as well
as the topic of bias and perceptions with individuals experiencing homelessness. While a gap in
knowledge was not validated following analysis of survey and interview responses, it is
important to acknowledge faculty respondents were less clear on the specifics or responsibility of
knowledge on the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, which will be discussed in the
organizational results section.
Motivation Results
Faculty self-efficacy. Faculty course leads and concentration chair/vice-chairs were
asked about their confidence in assignment design, identifying research and intervention and
developing learning objectives in student field practicum specific to homeless education. Thirty-
five percent of faculty respondents indicated they were somewhat confident across all three
(Survey Q. 18, Survey Q. 19 and Survey Q. 20) survey questions with regards to designing and
identifying homeless education into curriculum. While faculty showed greater confidence in
assignments design and identifying research and intervention on homeless education into
HOMELESS EDUCATION 69
curriculum overall, faculty respondents were not as confident or lacked awareness when it came
to being able to identify student learning objectives in a homeless service field placement. Four
faculty respondents indicated they were not very confident with four faculty stating, they were
not aware of homeless learning objectives in homeless services field placement. It is important to
note, while a faculty do not indicate knowledge gaps, low self-efficacy findings may be
attributed an organizational gap that affects faculty confidence. Further connection to low self-
efficacy findings and organizational gaps will be discussed in the organizational assumed
influence section of this chapter. Figure 9, figure 10 and figure 11 provide a summary of faculty
responses in regards to confidence.
Figure 9. Faculty confidence in ability to design an assignment on homelessness into course
teachings.
4
6
7
3
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Extremely confident Very confident Somewhat confident Not very confident Not at all confident
Confidence in ability to design assignmets on homelessness (n=20)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 70
Figure 10. Faculty confidence in identifying homeless intervention and prevention research to
incorporate into curriculum assignments specific to homeless education.
Figure 11. Faculty confidence in identifying student learning objectives while placed in a
homeless service field placement.
2
6
7
5
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Extremely confident Very confident Somewhat confident Not very confident Not at all confident
Faculty confidence in identifying intervention and prevention research
specific to homeless edcuation (n=20)
3
2
7
4
0
4
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Extremely
confident
Very confident Somewhat
confident
Not very confident Not at all confident Not aware of
homeless learning
objectives in field
practicum
Faculty confidence in identfying learning objectives in
homeless service field placement (n=20)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 71
Faculty goal orientation. To develop student mastery in homeless service delivery,
social work faculty need to clearly articulate within course material and enhanced field
practicum the connections of poverty, mental health and homelessness in relation to individuals
experiencing homelessness. In a survey response, 60% (12 out of 20) of faculty respondents
indicated they agree to strongly agree that they want to influence curriculum on the connection
of homelessness in relation to poverty and mental health. Further articulating the importance of
connections within homelessness, a theme among interview respondents emerged on the
complexity of homelessness. Three faculty responses below speak to recognizing the importance
of the complexity.
Faculty Respondent 1;
I think that those who speak about homelessness and talk about it, they
understand the depth of difficulty and the depth of the challenge and you can’t just
provide a cursory overview and say we’ve done our job and move on. The investment has
to be thorough.
Faculty Respondent 2;
If we could get a deeper dive of not looking at the behaviors of people who are homeless
or experience intimate partner violence, but understanding the historical and generational
trauma, I think students will leave with a deeper understanding of the implications and
how one even got to this point, versus just seeing someone who is homeless on the
street.
Faculty Respondent 3;
It’s one of those issues that you really can be talking about from how does this impact a
young child to grow up in a homeless shelter or on the street; and what is it like to die
HOMELESS EDUCATION 72
along on the street? Right? The individual experience of it to the larger societal
implications of it.
Figure 12 provides a summary of faculty respondents rating on wanting to influence curriculum
about the connection of homelessness in relation to poverty and mental health.
Figure 12. Faculty rating on wanting to influence curriculum about the connection of
homelessness in relation to poverty and mental health.
Synthesis of Motivational Influences
Faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs demonstrated in both
survey and interview responses that they have a desire to influence the curriculum in regards to
homeless education, while understanding and appreciating the complexities of the topic. Faculty
provided mixed responses in regards to confidence when asked about creating assignments on
homeless specific topics, including intervention and prevention research and identifying learning
objectives within a student’s homeless service field placement. Based on the span of the response
3
9
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree I am not aware of
connection of
homelessness in
relation to poverty
and mental health
Want to Influence Curriculum Homeless Connection in relation to
Poverty and Mental Health (n=20)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 73
from extremely confident to not very confident, with the majority falling under somewhat
confident, faculty may benefit from mentorship or coaching on homeless educational content in
the curriculum, which will be further detailed in chapter 5.
Organizational Results
As described in Chapter Two, Clark and Estes (2008) indicate that one of the potential
causes for performance gaps is the “lack of efficient and effective organizational work process
and material.” (p. 103). Knowledge and motivation cannot stand alone to reach performance
goals. To thoroughly analyze SSW faculty’s capacity to incorporate key elements of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness, both the survey and interview questions explored the
organizational resources, work process and cultural influences.
Resources. Aligning resources within an organization, structured processes can
streamline implementation of a new initiative by supporting faculty needs. In the survey, faculty
respondents were asked to rate each category of how the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
was introduced to them as faculty. Faculty respondents were able to select from posters, email,
copy of the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness Initiative reports, training provided on
campus, training provided in virtual program, no introduction to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness and other (with written response). Of the eight potential areas, email on the Grand
Challenge had the highest response rate of 41% (nine out of 22) of being very useful, with
receiving a copy of the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness Initiative report close behind at a
33% (seven out of 21) response rate of very useful. It is important to note that the majority of
responses fell in the N/A category, indicating the introduction to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness in that format was likely not provided by the SSW. Faculty respondents also were
provided the opportunity to write in a comment, four written in responses were posted. Two
HOMELESS EDUCATION 74
responses indicated, “Knowledge of person involved” and “Was personally involved.” One
respondent stated, “Concentration one day event” and another respondent, “Did not see anything
or know anything was done.” Figure 13 provides a summary of the faculty respondent rating of
each area of introduction provided on the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Figure 13. Introduction of Grand Challenge to End Homelessness to faculty.
Within the survey, following the introduction of the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, faculty respondents were also asked what resources the SSW provided to educate
faculty on the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. Sixty-four percent of faculty respondents
indicated a book, journal or other written material to be moderately useful (six of 14) to
extremely useful (three of 14). Fifty percent rated the Website on GCEH to be moderately useful
(five of 16) to extremely useful (three of 16). Faculty respondents did not prefer training on
campus compared to other resources, with 57% rating training on campus extremely useless (five
of 14) or neither useful nor useless (three of 14).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Poster Email Copy of
GCEH
Conf Call Training
on
Campus
Training
in Virtual
Program
No Intro
Organizational Introduction to Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
(poster n=21, email n=22, copy of GCEH n=21, conf call n=17, traning on campus n=21, traning
virtual program n=21, no intro n=18 )
Extremely Useful Very Useful Of Average use Of little use Not Useful N/A
HOMELESS EDUCATION 75
To further explore organizational resources in connection to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, faculty participants were asked to discuss their understanding of resources
committed by the school of social work and the larger university in accepting the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness as an organizational initiative. Respondents were divided with
four faculty indicating they were aware of intellectual resources such as investments by key
research faculty on homelessness and leadership interest within SSW and the greater University,
especially the SSW Dean and Provost’s office. Respondents stated, “This is the new world order,
we are collectively going to bring our best thinking across our fields to this wicked problem of
homelessness” and “Our Dean has made it clear that the Grand Challenge is a focus of our
school and I hear it in faculty meetings as well.” The remaining four faculty interview
respondents either expressed a vague recollection of resources put in place to support the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness or articulated; “I don’t know to be honest, I really don’t…I
don’t know whether the university is providing the school with any resources related to it” and
“I’m not aware of it in terms of ending homelessness, I do not know what is being done besides
some of our faculty I know have authored articles. I don’t know what else they are doing.”
Figure 14 provides a summary of survey responses rating resources provided to education SSW
faculty about the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 76
Figure 14. Resources provided to education SSW faculty about the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Work processes. Faculty need to have access to guidelines and performance measures of
the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness to provide guidance and accountability in increasing
homeless education in curriculum. Faculty respondents were asked in one on one interviews to
describe how the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness was introduced within their associated
SSW concentration. Among the eight faculty interview respondents across the three
concentrations, Community Organizing (CO), Behavioral Health (BH) and Children, Youth and
Families (CYF) three faculty respondents indicated they were aware of their specific
concentration holding an event or educational platform on the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness. While the other five faculty respondents indicated there was no key guidance or
accountability mentioned around the structure of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Faculty responses focused more on the Grand Challenge being a greater University or individual
faculty researcher’s initiative of interest, but not specific to a concentration. A gap in work
0
2
4
6
8
Resources Provided to Educate SSW Faculty about Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness
(traning on campus n=14, training in virtual program n=14, book/journal/other n=14, website
GCEH n=16, CEU workshop n=15 , powerpoint n=13)
Extremely Useful Moderatly Useful Slightly useful Neither useful nor useless
Slightly useless Moderately Useless Extremely Useless
HOMELESS EDUCATION 77
process may attribute to faculty respondents’ low self-efficacy as their confidence is altered due
to confusion or lack of understanding of their role in promoting homeless education or the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness overall.
Work Structuring (Culture). Clark and Estes (2008) describe organizational work
culture as, “who we are, what we value and how we do what we do as an organization.” (p. 107).
To have a positive impact on faculty and student collaboration in educating professional social
workers on homelessness and the impact of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, the
organization needs to have a cultural work structure conducive to providing support and creating
an impact in the classroom and field practicum settings. To determine the overall culture of
support and impact in relation to the charge of Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness, faculty
respondents were asked to rate their levels of satisfaction in support of professional development
opportunities regarding homeless education and the perceived impact the Grand Challenge has
on both students and faculty. Out of 21 faculty respondents rating satisfaction levels with
professional development and learning support around homeless education, 47% (10 out of 21)
faculty indicated they were somewhat satisfied with 33% selecting not very satisfied (six out of
21) or not satisfied (one out of 21). Overall, approximately 81% of faculty respondents stated
they did not have a high rate of satisfaction with how SSW has provided learning support and
professional development regarding homeless education and intervention in support of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness. One faculty respondents further noted, “I believe that there are a
lot more options for on ground faculty to deepen their awareness and understanding of this
Grand Challenge. I would like to see more offered to virtual faculty and students.” Figure 15
provides a summary of all 21 faculty respondents’ ratings of satisfaction.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 78
Figure 15. Faculty satisfaction with learning support and professional development opportunities
regarding homeless education.
Faculty respondents were also asked to rate the level of impact they thought the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness would have on SSW faculty and SSW students interest in
homelessness. Thirty-three percent of respondents (seven out of 21) indicated high impact on
faculty’s interest in homelessness, with 42% of respondents selecting extremely high impact
(two out of 21) to high impact (seven out of 21) for student’s interest in homelessness. No
faculty respondents selected no impact on interest in homelessness, for either faculty or student.
It is important to note that even with faculty not indicating a high degree of satisfaction in
learning support and professional development on homelessness education, they still believe that
overall the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness will have a positive impact on student interest
in homelessness. Figure 16 shows the ratings of impact of interest on homelessness for both
faculty and students in relation to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness within the SSW.
0%
50%
100%
Satisfaction of learning support and
professionanl development on
homeless education (n=21)
Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied
Not Very Satisfied Not Satisfied
HOMELESS EDUCATION 79
Figure 16. Impact of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness on faculty and student interest in
homelessness.
Synthesis of Organizational Influences
The SSW is responsible for providing faculty resources and an efficient work flow
process to successfully implement new initiatives. Faculty respondents, collectively, in both the
survey and one on one interviews indicated a vague understanding of the intent of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness. Majority of respondents also reported a low rate of satisfaction
with how SSW has provided learning support and professional development regarding homeless
education in support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. The SSW lacks to provide a
supportive framework communicating expectations of faculty on key elements of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness. It is important to note that majority of respondents who
completed the survey, 65%, work solely within the virtual program which may limit their
exposure to information and events by the SSW and greater University on the Grand Challenge
0
5
10
15
20
25
Extremely High Impact High Impact Somewhat of an impact Low Impact No Impact
Impact of GCEH on Faculty and Student Interest in Homelessness (n=21)
Faculty Student
HOMELESS EDUCATION 80
to End Homelessness. In the one on one interviews five out of the eight faculty respondents
indicated they worked both with-in the campus based program and virtual program, which could
potentially provide them greater access to information and resources.
Additional Findings
In addition to the knowledge, motivation and organizational assumed influences, it is
important to note additional findings that emerged. In six of the eight respondent interviews, the
importance of intersectionality in relation to homelessness was discussed. Intersectionality as
defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary (2017) is, “the complex, cumulative way in which
the effects of multiple forms of discrimination (such as racism, sexism, and classism) combine,
overlap, or intersect especially in the experiences of marginalized individuals or groups.” One
faculty respondent noted:
You don’t know the effect of what happens when a University sets out with the
mission to focus on ending homelessness and then our Dean is at the helm of this and all
of this activity around homelessness. My own growth and development went beyond the
Grand Challenge, it’s to really get people to look at the intersectionality of homelessness
and other factors and social issues.
Another faculty respondent stated:
I think that the realization that you can look at many different types of problems with
systems and how systemic oppression falls within the homeless population. And that you
find that different intersections of people and that intersectionality impacts how they
might be threatened, or they might be marginalized, or they might be excluded, or there
may be violence.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 81
Further, faculty respondents spoke to the importance and value the topic of homelessness and the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness is to the social work profession. This was noted by the
following faculty respondents’ statements: (Faculty respondent one) “The mission of social work
is commitment to working with vulnerable populations, you can’t get more vulnerable than the
homeless population. I would say it is absolutely critical,” (Faculty respondent two) “I think
there is room for more encouragement for all of us to integrate homelessness better and more,”
(Faculty respondent three) “I think the Grand Challenge has raised awareness,” and (Faculty
respondent four) “It is our (SSW) Grand Challenge, I feel like there is so much more we can do.”
Faculty respondent five elaborated in the following way:
It’s incredibly important. I think it’s shameful how little content there is on homelessness
and poverty and diversity. To me, I don’t know how you teach social work without
teaching about poverty and then almost inseparable from that is housing and diversity, I
would say they are the three cornerstones, almost of all social work and we don’t really
do it or we leave it up to the individual faculty.
By faculty emphasizing the importance of intersectionality and value of homeless education,
integration of multiple Grand Challenges can be addressed in the classroom and field practicum
setting, bringing enhanced learning opportunities to students. As noted by Larkin et al. (2016),
“The Grand Challenge to End Homelessness may serve an integrating function, bringing
opportunities to reorganize the curriculum for combined micro, mezzo, macro and policy
responses to complex issues” (p. 154).
HOMELESS EDUCATION 82
Summary
Data analysis revealed both strengths and gaps in knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences examined in this study. Of the three types of assumed influences,
organizational influences emerged as having the most significant gaps with little to no gaps in
knowledge. Faculty need to have access to resources, efficient work process and have a
supportive culture to enhance curriculum specific to homeless education outcomes in relation to
the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. In addition, faculty require more support in self-
efficacy, specific to how they can integrate homeless education in the classroom in relation to the
Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness. Faculty expressed interest and value in both homeless
education and the Grand Challenge but lack the support or direction of the collective and
individual responsibility of faculty in connection to the Grand Challenge initiative. Chapter five
will address this study’s second research question by outlining recommended motivation and
organizational solutions.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 83
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS, THE INTEGRATED IMPLEMENTATION PAND
EVALUATION PLAN, AND CONCLUSIONS
Chapter Four provided detailed findings about the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences in the context of enhancing curriculum specific to homeless education,
in response to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. The following chapter seeks to address
the second research question: what are the recommended solutions for organizational practice in
areas of knowledge, motivation and organizational resources in connection to the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness? Solutions to address the identified gaps will be provided as
well as a plan for implementation and evaluation of the suggested solutions. The New World
Kirkpatrick Model will serve as the framework for the comprehensive overview from current
practice to evaluation of training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The remainder of the
chapter will discuss strengths and weaknesses of the research and recommendations for future
research.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) identify four knowledge types with
respect to performance improvement towards organizational goals: declarative, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. Assumed influences supported by literature on implementation
and inclusion of homeless education within social work education programs, served as the
anchor to survey and interview questions. A gap in knowledge was not validated following
analysis of survey and interview responses, in regard to declarative, procedural or metacognitive
assumed influences. It is important to acknowledge that faculty respondents lacked clarity on
HOMELESS EDUCATION 84
their responsibility of implementation of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, which will
be discussed further in the organizational recommendation section.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. This study revealed gaps in motivational influences for faculty course
leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs, to achieve SSW organizational goal. This was
achieved through survey response, interviews and literature review as well as the review of
motivation theory. Motivation, as described by Pintrich (2003), refers to the reason or
willingness an individual has towards a task, including follow through to completion of the task.
Rueda (2011) emphasizes there is a notable difference between an individual who has the
knowledge on how to do something versus their desire or willingness to do it. Motivation has
three common indicators: active choice, persistence, and effort (Rueda, 2011). According to
Pintrich (2003), there are five underlying factors that affect motivation; self-efficacy, self-
determination, personal interest, value and goal-orientation. As such, as indicated in Table 5, the
motivational influence of self-efficacy has been validated as a need and has a high priority for
achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Mastery goal orientation was not validated as a need among
faculty respondents, as 60% of faculty respondents indicated they agree to strongly agree that
they want to influence curriculum on the connection of homelessness in relation to poverty and
mental health. As well as, 66% of faculty respondents finding importance (very important to
extreme importance) of integrating education on homelessness in the SSW program, indicating
value.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 85
Table 5 further shows the recommendations for this influence based on theoretical principles.
Table 5
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Motivation Influence:
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific Recommendation
SSW faculty lack self-
efficacy (confidence) to
effectively identify field
learning objectives and
incorporate homelessness
education and research into
curriculum. (SE)
Rishel and Majewski
(2009) point to a
positive correlation
between self-efficacy
and academic
achievement.
Task specific
confidence is needed
to create action.
(Bandura, 1997)
Provide opportunities for observation
and mentorship with efficacious
faculty who are highly confident in
identifying field learning objectives
and incorporating homelessness
education and research into
curriculum.
Self-Efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as “the belief in one’s ability to act effectively in a
particular situation” (Rishel & Majewski, 2009, p. 366). This study revealed that faculty
respondents lack self-efficacy (confidence) to effectively identify field learning objectives and
incorporate homelessness education and research into curriculum. As the SSW seeks to
implement key elements of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into the social program,
task specific confidence is needed to generate action per research-based recommendations by
Bandura (1997). By seeing positive reaction and engagement, confidence will further improve
(Bandura, 2006).
Rishel and Majewski (2009) point to a positive correlation between self-efficacy and
achievement. SSW faculty need to believe they are fully capable of effectively identifying field
HOMELESS EDUCATION 86
learning objectives and incorporating homelessness education and research into curriculum in
relation to the focus of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. As such, SSW leadership in
collaboration with lead faculty will provide opportunities for observation and mentorship with
efficacious faculty who are highly confident in identifying field learning objectives and
incorporating homelessness education and research into curriculum.
Organizational Recommendations
Introduction. Organizational influences are also influential in addressing performance
needs and gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). While knowledge and motivation are key drivers, cultural
context of organizations must not be ignored, to complete a full assessment. As such, as
indicated in Table 6, the gap in organizational influences of resources, work process and culture
have been validated and have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 6 further
shows the recommendations for this influence based on theoretical principles.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 87
Table 6
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Organization Influence:
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Faculty do not have the
resources necessary to
enhance curriculum
specific to homeless
education in support of the
Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness. (Resources)
The organization is responsible
for the allocation of resources
which includes time and resource
allocation as well as social capital
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Conduct whole
organizational meetings to
communicate the key
resources and guiding
influences of the Grand
Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Faculty do not have access
to guidelines and
performance measures of
the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness to provide
guidance and
accountability in increasing
homeless education in
curriculum. (Work
Processes)
Workforce processes need to be
aligned to the mission and goals
within institutions of higher
learning (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Knowledge, skillset and
motivation cannot support success
alone if there is a lack of
efficiency in the work flow
process (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Use internal database such
as faculty lounge to provide
framework and structure of
Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Faculty do not have a
cultural work structure
setting conducive to
providing support and
creating an impact in the
classroom and field
practicum settings.
(Culture-Work Structure)
Clark and Estes (2008) describe
organizational work culture as,
“who we are, what we value and
how we do what we do as an
organization.” (p. 107). To have a
positive impact on faculty and
student collaboration in educating
professional social workers on
homelessness and the impact of
the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, the organization
needs to have a cultural setting
conducive to providing support
and creating an impact in the
classroom and field practicum
settings.
SSW leadership will create
regularly scheduled sharing
with faculty on goal
outcomes of deliverables
for the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness across
all three concentrations, to
prevent silo’ d work
structures.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 88
Resources. Based on the identified organizational influence challenges, it would be
beneficial to provide meetings across all three concentrations with all faculty to communicate
key resources and guiding influences of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. SSW faculty
need to have the resources necessary to enhance curriculum specific to homeless education.
Among these resources are the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness proposal, National
Homeless Initiative logic model, documentaries on homelessness, recommended guest speakers
with clinical experience in homeless service delivery or speakers who have experienced
homelessness themselves. These resources can be valuable in enhancing faculty and student
engagement in the classroom in support of homeless education.
The SSW and its faculty are the guiding influence in moving the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness forward. The SSW is responsible for the allocation of resources which includes
time and resource allocation as well as social capital (Clark & Estes, 2008). As it relates to the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, resource allocation requires proper scheduling of
collaborative meetings, use of shared materials and opportunities for faculty engagement in order
to achieve the organizational goal. At the same time, identifying measureable deliverables so that
faculty can achieve the highest levels of success in implementing key elements of the National
Homeless Initiative logic model in support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. As
SSW focuses on enhancing homeless education in curriculum, in support of the Grand Challenge
to End Homelessness, an analysis of organizational resources is needed. By providing
opportunities to engage whole faculty in open communication and aligning of goals about their
stake in the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, the stakeholder goal can be achieved (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
HOMELESS EDUCATION 89
Work processes. Based on the identified organizational influence, an internal database
systems needs to be utilized to house the framework, structure and deliverables of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness. Knowledge, skillset and motivation cannot support success
alone if there is a lack of efficiency in the workflow process (Clark & Estes, 2008). Based on
SSW faculty working in the virtual or campus based program, a virtual centralized SharePoint or
other internal sharing space needs to be developed so all faculty have equal access and awareness
to action steps taken in support of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Workforce processes need to be aligned to the mission and goals within institutions of
higher-learning (Clark & Estes, 2008). Faculty need to have access to guidelines and
performance measures of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness to provide guidance and
accountability in increasing homeless education in curriculum. By providing a localized area
where all faculty can access documents and receive announcements that are applicable to the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, improvement in work process will be achieved.
Work structuring. Based on the identified organizational influence, SSW leadership need
to create regularly scheduled sharing with faculty on goal outcomes of deliverables for the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness across all three concentrations, to prevent silo’ d work
structures. Clark and Estes (2008) write about the importance of aligning organizational culture
with behavior as a core component in reaching organizational goals. Organizational work culture
is described as, “who we are, what we value and how we do what we do as an organization.”
(Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 107). To have a positive impact on faculty and student collaboration in
educating professional social workers on homelessness and the impact of the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness, the organization needs to have a cultural setting conducive to providing
support and creating an impact in the classroom and field practicum settings.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 90
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The selected framework, The New World Kirkpatrick Model will guide the
implementation and evaluation plan outlined below. This model seeks to provide a structured
way to evaluate training programs in four levels which are presented in reverse order. Level four
considers the desired results of the training and requires the developer to consider how the
training contributes to the overall goal (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level three focuses on
participant behavior demonstrated after the training is identified to ensure application of
knowledge. Level two evaluates the degree of knowledge, skill, and attitude acquisition which is
intended through the training program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Finally, level one
relates to learner engagement and assessment of relevance to their job which the creators of the
New World Kirkpatrick Model refer to as participant reaction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
To assure value alignment as an implementation and evaluation plan is developed, the
mission of the organization must be considered. The stakeholder group identified for this study is
full time faculty serving as a lead course instructor or concentration chair/vice-chair. A
stakeholder goal was identified by the researcher and program administrators to support this
stakeholder group. Full time faculty course leads and concentration chair/vice-chairs are, in
addition to many other stakeholders, directly responsible for the success of the organizational
mission and for sharing this mission with the faculty colleagues and students.
As stated in the throughout this research project, by May 2018, SSW faculty will
integrate the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into curriculum as measured by the
inclusion of specific readings, professional development forums or assignments. The evaluation
HOMELESS EDUCATION 91
described in this chapter will establish a baseline to determine SSW faculty’s knowledge,
motivation and the organizational support around the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness and
be used to develop training tools and resources intended to increase homeless education within
the Social Work program.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Level 4 of the Kirkpatrick model identifies leading indicators and results which influence
forward movement towards a stakeholder goal (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This
discussion will focus on internal outcomes as the study focuses on the full time faculty course
lead and concentration chair/vice-chairs, and the way in which they have included homeless
education into curriculum. Table 7 includes the leading indicators of outcomes, metrics, and
methods to address external and internal outcomes.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 92
Table 7
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
SSW program
curriculum will be
recognized as lead
school on homeless
education.
The school will have up to 12
MSW programs, as represented in
the National Homeless
Consortium, request curriculum
outline on homeless education.
Continue to participate in
National Homeless Consortium
over the next three academic
year.
Increase in the number
of subject matter
experts on homeless
education and service
delivery.
Faculty will increase publications
on homeless education
enhancements in curriculum by
10%, in peer reviewed journals.
Engage in research on influence
of enhancing homeless
education into social work
curriculum.
Internal Outcomes
Faculty confidence in
integrating homeless
education will be
increased
Up to 100 Full time Faculty will
have access to homeless
educational material to
incorporate into course
curriculum.
Lead instructors will review
syllabi once an academic year to
verify homeless education is
addressed in appropriate
identified classes.
Student interest in
homeless education
will be increased.
Up to10% of student body will
request course on homelessness
or field placement in homeless
services.
Course offerings on
homelessness and field
placements in homeless services
will be reviewed per academic
year to assure availability for
students.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Level 3 determines the actual readiness for organizational change
through the utilization of newly learned knowledge and skills. The stakeholders of focus are
SSW faculty course leads and concentration chairs and vice-chairs. The first critical behavior is
that course lead faculty in coordination with concentration chair/vice-chair will review
department curriculum to determine where homeless education would enhance learning. The
second critical behavior is that concentration chair and vice chair will provide homeless
HOMELESS EDUCATION 93
education professional development sessions on homeless education. The third critical behavior
is that School of Social Work concentration chair and vice chairs will survey faculty to
determine if their needs are met on implementation of Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Table 8 includes critical behaviors which demonstrate application of learning as well as metrics,
methods, and timing to evaluate these critical behaviors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Table 8
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Course lead faculty in
coordination with
concentration chair/vice-
chair will review
concentration curriculum to
determine where homeless
education would enhance
learning.
The number of
syllabi
integrating
homeless
education.
Lead course faculty and
concentration chair will
review department
curriculum per academic
year to assure homeless
educational content is
balanced in the
concentration curriculum.
Once an
academic
year
2. Concentration chair and
vice chair will provide
homeless education
professional development
sessions on homeless
education.
The number of
professional
development on
homeless
educational
topics.
Concentration chair and
vice-chair will create sub-
committee for homeless
education development.
Twice an
academic
year.
3. School of Social Work
concentration chair and vice
chairs will survey faculty to
determine if their needs are
met on implementation of
Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness
Number of
surveys provided
to faculty from
school leadership
Concentration chair and
vice-chairs will develop a
survey for faculty to
provide feedback in regards
to needs being met or not in
implementing the Grand
Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Twice an
academic
year (Fall
and Spring
semester)
Required drivers. The critical behaviors explored above are influenced by specific
organizational drivers which are required to ensure stakeholder and organizational goal
HOMELESS EDUCATION 94
achievement. Table 9 includes specific drivers which assist to reinforce, encourage, reward
and/or monitor desired behaviors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Table 9
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide job aid which denotes faculty expectations
on implementation of Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
Prior to semester start
(Fall and Spring
semesters)
1, 2 & 3
Provide reminders on expectations of faculty on
implementing Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness during faculty meetings
Full faculty and
department meetings
(up to 6 times a year)
2 & 3
Encouraging
Provide success stories from the social work
profession on impact social work has made
towards ending homelessness
At least twice a year 2 & 3
Rewarding
Faculty will nominate a social work student in
homeless field placement for annual Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness student award
Once a year at
graduation, end of
spring semester
2
Faculty will be recognized at end of year faculty
meeting for their contribution to enhancing
homeless education into the social work program.
Once a year at end of
year full time faculty
meeting.
2
Monitoring
Faculty meetings with line item agenda item on
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
accomplishments.
At mid-term and end of
the semester.
1, 2
Survey with students on implementation efforts
recognized on Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness.
At end of semester.
1, 2
HOMELESS EDUCATION 95
Organizational support. School of Social Work will provide the support and structure
needed to achieve the critical behaviors that will have the most impact on faculty and awareness
on the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. Support will include providing job aids and
resources to faculty on homelessness specifically in relation to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, increase recognition of students and faculty that are highly engaged in homeless
service work, and provide a structure indicating responsibility and intention of SSW faculty
surrounding the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. The following learning goals have been established for the stakeholder
group if the above solutions are implemented.
1. Develop relevant assignments into curriculum specific to key elements of Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness based on current research on scope of homelessness, prevention and
intervention strategies.
2. Believe they are capable of effectively incorporating homelessness education and research into
curriculum. (Self-efficacy).
3. Know who/where to go to seek assistance in curriculum design and classroom inclusion of
homeless education.
Program. The primary program recommended for the stakeholder group of full-time
faculty leads and concentration chair/vice-chairs is a mandatory training on the Grand Challenge
to End Homelessness focusing on engagement and implementation in Social Work program
curriculum. This training will be provided virtually, allowing for all faculty lines to attend across
the country and will include an overview of the following topics: Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness focus, suggestions for classroom content on homeless education, policy and
HOMELESS EDUCATION 96
research on homelessness and social work's influence and mission with homeless clientele. The
webinar training will last for 75 minutes, be offered at 11am PST which allows for faculty on
both east and west coast time zones to attend during normal business hours and be offered twice
in an academic year (fall and spring). These topics were selected based upon information
provided by the stakeholder group.
The facilitation of virtual training will be beneficial and address a feeling of
disconnection faculty may have on communication efforts crossing over from the ground
program to virtual faculty. This training program, could be offered two to three times to
accommodate time zones and could be recorded for those unable to attend at specific time
offerings. This would be preferred over hosting the training on campus because faculty are
spread throughout the country and all faculty have virtual platform access.
Components of learning. Table 10 provides a list of the methods to be used to evaluate
the learning goals identified for adjunct field faculty.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 97
Table 10
Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Stakeholder group/facilitator discussion regarding key
takeaways from training.
Survey checks on homeless service delivery and current
research.
Mid-way through training
and at end of training.
Once an academic year.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Stakeholder group members will successfully complete review
of course syllabi to determine if homeless education is
represented or appropriate to be in their course outline.
Demonstration of using job aids in breakout sessions during
webinar training
Prior to semester start dates
in Fall, Spring and Summer
semesters.
During breakout sessions
throughout webinar training
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Small group discussion regarding the relevance of the training
to MSW program education.
Small group discussion regarding the value of the training and
training content
In breakout session during
the virtual webinar training.
In breakout session during
virtual webinar training
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey to be sent out to faculty to evaluate continued self-
efficacy around implementation of increased homeless
education in the MSW program.
Once an academic year.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Faculty will list the tools they were provided in training that can
be used in the classroom to enhance homeless education.
Discussion following breakouts to share ideas around
implementation of Grand Challenge to End Homelessness into
program curriculum.
During the webinar training
Following breakout
sessions during webinar
training
HOMELESS EDUCATION 98
Level 1: Reaction
Level one includes the reaction of training participants. Reactions to the training itself
may be positive or negative and can influence participant understanding and desire to apply the
learning that takes place during the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 11 includes
methods that will be used to determine participant reaction to the orientation and training
program.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 99
Table 11
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Instructor observation: Instructor will use observation
skills to assess level of participant interest, engagement,
and/or distraction while attending the training.
Attendance: Instructor will track attendance to assure all
faculty receive training across 3 concentrations.
Throughout training.
At beginning of training session
link will be provided for google
doc attendance form
Relevance
Pulse-check: Instructor will briefly check-in with
participants to see where they are in the training.
Course Evaluation: Instructor will provide course
evaluation at the end of the training to faculty
participants
Throughout training as instructor
identifies potential concerns from
faculty participants.
At the end of webinar training
session
Customer Satisfaction
Participant Survey: All participants will be asked to
complete a survey which will assess knowledge and
satisfaction of needs met.
Pulse-check: Instructor will also pause training for
comments and feedback regarding relevance.
Immediately following webinar
training.
Throughout training as instructor
identifies potential concerns from
faculty participants.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 100
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. A survey evaluation tool will be
created to assess Level 1 and 2 (reaction and learning) after the virtual webinar training on the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness is implemented. This survey will be provided to
participants immediately following the webinar training. A link to the survey will be provided in
the virtual classroom for participants to access and also sent out via email. Further, survey tools
will be administered as future training programs are developed to reinforce knowledge, skills,
and application of learning.
Appendix E contains the faculty survey that will be completed immediately following the
initial webinar training. The survey consists of 10 items that concentrate on Level 1 (reaction)
engagement, relevance, and faculty satisfaction and Level 2 (learning) declarative knowledge, as
well as self-efficacy and faculty goal orientation.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. At the end of the first
semester (fall) following program implementation and again at the end of the second semester
(spring), faculty will complete a short survey that consists of Likert type items and open write-in
responses. The survey design will utilize a Blended Evaluation approach as outlined
by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016). A Blended Evaluation includes the elements of each of
the four levels: Level 1 reaction, Level 2 learning, Level 3 behavior, and Level 4 results.
Specifically, faculty will be asked to comment on their reactions to implementing elements of the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. The survey, consisting of 10 items, will further ask
faculty to describe the knowledge gained regarding homeless service delivery, as well as the how
they are incorporating homeless education in program curriculum as well as faculty professional
development.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 101
Data Analysis and Reporting
To demonstrate the merit or lack thereof, in training programs, the New World
Kirkpatrick Model provides essential information regarding data analysis and reporting. The
ability for organizations to be able to provide comprehensive data regarding trainings will
increase the potential of future funding and support (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick 2016). Data will
be analyzed immediately after the webinar training and four to five weeks post-training upon
completion of follow up survey. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed, including the
use of the data analysis questions provided by the model. Further, a dashboard reporting system
will be created for level four (results and leading indicators) and level one (reaction), displayed
in the virtual faculty lounge highlighting the confidence level of faculty implementing elements
of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness as well as the increase in student interest in
homeless service delivery. Increase in student interest will be captured in annual survey of
students graduating from the social work program. Appendix G provides visual that will be
housed in virtual faculty lounge.
Summary
Faculty course leads and concentration chair and vice chairs are an integral component of
social work programs within universities nationally. The ability to align knowledge and
awareness of national initiatives into program curriculum provides faculty with increased
resources and students with enhanced learning. To help facilitate initiatives into curriculum and
faculty understanding, the New World Kirkpatrick Model is a rich tool that assists in a multi-
level assessments of training programs (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The use of the New
World Kirkpatrick Model will allow for training programs provided to faculty to yield greater
results in classroom learning and in response to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness. The
HOMELESS EDUCATION 102
model will allow for concrete evaluation and analysis of the training on four levels which include
results, behavior, learning and reactions (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). During analysis,
three questions will be asked: Are expectations met, if not, why and if so, why (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Gaining insight on both the successes and remaining gaps can provide
valuable feedback to the SSW as they work towards achieving their organizational goal.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Use of the Clark and Estes (2008) framework to this research study provided both
strengths and weaknesses. Strengths include the organized structure allowing gaps in knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences to be identified in regards to the organizations problem
of practice. While literature supports the gap in homeless education in social work programs and
workforce development, lack of pre-existing data demonstrating gaps specific to the SSW
presented a challenge. Existing data on the performance gap would allow for greater evaluation
of the influence the Grand Challenge Ending Homelessness has had on homeless education in
program curriculum and workforce development.
Future Research Recommendations
Future research on this topic points to the need of greater understanding of schools of
social work’s existing curriculum on homeless education and the intention of the Grand
Challenge initiative to impact curriculum development. This survey implementation was too
narrow in regard to faculty knowledge and motivation specific to homeless education. Future
research could benefit with greater focus on direct knowledge and influence of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness objectives and goals.
Evaluating the impact of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness on student
perception or interest on homelessness would also be beneficial to the social work profession.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 103
Increasing student interest in homeless service delivery, would directly impact workforce
development. Lastly, research involving multiple schools of social work who have taken great
interest in the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness would be beneficial allowing for
generalized results as well as providing insight on a national perspective. Follow up studies in
one year, three year and five year timeframes from the launch of the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness could serve as an important evaluation tool overtime to track the influence of the
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Conclusion
The influence of education curriculum shapes student’s awareness and insight in working
with specific populations (Kumer-Nevo et. al., 2009; Perry, 2003). With a continued lack of
curriculum engaging students in community practice with populations living in poverty or
experiencing homelessness, social work student interest and influence in working with this
population will continue to fade. As large scale initiatives continue to filter through universities,
it is important for leadership to provide connection and context to faculty supporting the
initiative directive, allowing for measurable goals to be designed. Research on knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences in regards to how schools of social work address the
“wicked” problem of homelessness will remain an important focus nationally.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 104
References
American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW). (n.d.-a). Grand Challenges
for Social Work Initiative [Website]. Retrieved from http://aaswsw.org/grand-challenges-
initiative
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D.R., et al, (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn
& Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group).
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Berzoff, J., & Drisko, J. (2015). What clinical social workers need to know: Bio-psycho-social
knowledge and skills for the twenty first century. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(3),
263-273. doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1007/s10615-015-0544-3
Bremner, R.H. (1964). From the depths: The discovery of poverty in the United States. New
York, NY: New York University Press.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Council on Social Work Education (CSWE). (2013). 2013 Annual statistics on social work
education in the United States . Washington, DC: Author.
Crawford, I. M. (1997). Marketing research and information systems. Rome: FOA
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
CCETSW. (1995). Assuring Quality in the Diploma in Social Work-1, CCETSW.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 105
Danis, F. S., & Lockhart, L. (2003). Guest editorial: Domestic violence and social work
education: What do we know, what do we need to know? Journal of Social Work
Education, 39(2), 215-224. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http:
//search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/2 09792129?accountid=14749
Flynn, M. L. (2017). The grand challenges concept: Campus strategies for implementation.
Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 8(1), 87-98.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1086/690564
Gerdes, K. E., Segal, E. A., Jackson, K. F., & Mullins, J. L. (2011). Teaching empathy: a
framework rooted in social cognitive neuroscience and social justice. Journal of Social
Work Education, 47(1), 109-131. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/do
cview/8 53057393?accountid=14749
Glicken, M. (2011). Social work in the 21
st
century: An introduction to social welfare,social
issues, and the profession (2ndEd.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Goldberg, J. E. (1999). A short term approach to intervention with homeless mothers: A role
for clinicians in homeless shelters. Families in Society, 80(2), 161-168. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/2
3174016?accountid=14749
Golia, G. M. (2015). On the importance of direct practice experience among clinical social work
faculty: A recent graduate's perspective. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(3), 325-333.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1007/s10615-015-0535-4
HOMELESS EDUCATION 106
Harding, S., Ferguson, M., & Radey, M. (2005). Does poverty matter? An analysis of courses on
poverty at the top 50 schools of social work. Arete, 28(2), 39-53.
Henwood, B. F.,Wenzel, S., Mangano, P. F., Hombs, M., Padgett, D., Byrne, T., & Uresky,
M. (2015). The grand challenge of ending homelessness (Grand Challenges for Social
Work Initiative Working Paper No.9). Cleveland, OH: American Academy of Social
Work and Social Welfare.
Jacobson, W. B. (2001). Beyond therapy: Bringing social work back to human services reform.
Social Work, 46(1), 51-61. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/2
15271783?accountid=14749.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ADP Press, Inc.
Kondrat, M. E., (2013). Encyclopedia of Social Work. Retrieved from website:
http://socialwork.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.001.0001/acrefor
e-9780199975839-e-285
Krumer-Nevo, M., & Lev-Wiesel, R. (2005). Attitudes of social work students towards clients
with basic needs. Journal of Social Work Education, 41(3), 545-556. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/209784854?accountid=14749
Krumer-Nevo, M., Weiss-Gal, I., & Monnickendam, M. (2009). Poverty-aware social work
practice: A conceptual framework for social work education. Journal of Social Work
Education,45(2),225-243. Retrieve from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.
edu/docview/209789112?accountid=14749
HOMELESS EDUCATION 107
Larrison, T. & Korr, W. (2013). Does social work have a signature pedagogy?
Journal of Social Work Education, 49, 194-206.
Larkin, H., Henwood, B., Fogel, S. J., Aykanian, A., Briar-Lawson, K., Donaldson, L. P., &
Streeter, C. L. (2016). Responding to the grand challenge to end homelessness: The
national homelessness social work initiative. Families in Society, 97(3), 153. Retrieved
from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search .proquest.com
libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1 825405685?accountid=14749
Lev-Wiesel, R. (2003). Expectations of costs and rewards: Students versus practicing social
workers. International Social Work, 46(3), 323-332.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1177/00208728030463006
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chapter 9, pp. 260-265.
Merriam-Webster, I. (2017). Merriam-webster's dictionary and thesaurus (Revis and Updatition.
ed.). Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.
National Association of Social Work (NASW). (2006). Assuring the sufficiency of a frontline
workforce. A national study of licensed social workers. Washington, DC: National
Association of Social Workers, Center for Workforce Studies.
National Association of Social Work (NASW). (2008). Code of ethics of the National
Association of Social Workers (Approved by the 1996 NASW Delegate Assembly and
revised by the 2008 NASW Delegate Assembly). Washington, DC: Author.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 108
Netting, F. E., Kettner, P. M., & McMurtry, S. L. (1998). Social work macro practice (2
nd
ed.).
New York, NY: Longman.
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be
done? Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 33(3), 301-314.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com
/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Patterson, J. T. (1994). America’s struggle against poverty 1900-1994. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Payne, M. (2005). The origins of social work. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Perry, R. (2003). Who wants to work with the poor and homeless? Journal of Social Work
Education, 39(2), 321-341. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/209790908?accountid=14749
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Ringstad, R. L. (2013). Competency level versus level of competency: The field evaluation
dilemma. Field Educator, 3(2) Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/1
561222816?accountid=14749
Rishel, C. W., & Majewski, V. (2009). Student gains in self-efficacy in an advanced MSW
curriculum: a customized model for outcome assessment. Journal of Social Work
Education, 45(3), 365-383. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/209787666?accountid=14749
HOMELESS EDUCATION 109
Rubin, A. & Johnson, P. J.(1984). Direct practice interests of entering MSW students.
Journal Education for Social Work, 20 (2), 5-16.
Rueda, R., (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College: Columbia University.
Specht, H., & Courtney, M. E. (1994). Unfaithful angels: How social work has abandoned its
mission. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Sugawara, C. G. L. (2009). Building social capital among social work educators: a strategy for
curriculum development. Journal of Social Work Education, 45(3), 445-466. Retrieved
from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/209788574?accountid=14749
The National Coalition for Homelessness (NCH). (2017). Homelessness in America. Retrieved
from website: http://nationalhomeless.org/about-homelessness/
Uehara, E. S., Barth, R. P., Coffey, D., Padilla, Y., & McClain, A. (2017). An introduction to the
special section on grand challenges for social work. Journal of the Society for Social
Work and Research, 8(1), 75-85. doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1086/690563
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (2015). 2015 AHAR: Part 1 – PIT
Estimates of Homelessness in the U.S. Retrieved from HUD Exchange website:
https://www.hudexchange.info/reource/4832/2015-ahar-part-1-pit-estimates-of-
homelessness/
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH). (2017). Setting a path to end all
homelessness. Retrieved from USICH website: https://www.usich.gov/
Vinson, L., & White, B. (1995). The “boutique effect” in graduate social work education.
Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 11(1/2), 3-13.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 110
Walsh, J. (2013). Clinical and direct practice. Encyclopedia of Social Work. Retrieved from
website: http://socialwork.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/-
acrefore/9780199975839.001.0001/acrefore-9780199975839-e-105
Weiss, I., & Welbourne, P. (2007). Social work as a profession: a comparative cross national
perspective. Great Britain: Venture Press.
Whalen, M. H. (2005). Measuring MSW student attitudes toward poverty and the poor: A
tool for evaluating social work education outcomes (Order No. 3189771). Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
Global. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/d
ocview/3
HOMELESS EDUCATION 111
Appendix A
Survey Items
1. Indicate the department with which you are affilated with in the School of Social Work:
o Children Youth and Family
o Mental Health
o Community Organizing
2. What line of faculty are you within the School of Social Work?
o Tenure-track Faculty
o Clinical Teaching
o Clinical Field Faculty
o Senior Lecturer
o Research Faculty
o Adjuct Faculty
o Other
3. Do you work as faculty in the campus based program, online virtual program or both?
_____OTG _____Virtual _____Both
4. Which of the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW) 12 Grand
Challenges for Social Work does your professional social work practice most align with? (select
one)
o Ensure healthy development for all youth
o Close the health gap
o Stop family violence
HOMELESS EDUCATION 112
o Advance long and productive lives
o Eradicate social isolation
o End homelessness
o Create social response to a changing environment
o Harness technology for social good
o Promote smart decarceration
o Reduce extreme economic inequality
o Build financial capability for all
o Achieve equal opportunity and justice
5. How interested are you in the School of Social Work commitment to the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness? (select one)
o Extremely interested
o Very interested
o Somewhat interested
o Not very interested
o Not at all interested
6. In what ways has the School of Social Work introduced you to the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness (check all that apply)?
___ posters (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ email (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ copy of Grand Challenge on Homelessness report (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average
use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 113
___ conference call (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely
useful)
___ training on campus (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely
useful)
___ training on virtual program platform (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of
average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ Other: __________________________(please write in explanation)
___ Introduction of Grand Challenge on Homelessness has not been provided by School of
Social Work
7. What resources, if any, did the School of Social Work provide you to educate you as faculty
about the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness? (Select all that apply)
___ Training on campus (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-
absolutely useful)
___ Training on Virtual Program Platform (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very
useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ Book, journal articles or other written material (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use,
3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ Website on Grand Challenge to End Homelessness (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average
use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ Continuing Education workshop or seminar (0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-
very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 114
___ PowerPoint addressing Grand Challenge to End Homelessness (0-not useful, 1-of little use,
2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
___ Resources have not been provided by department on how Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness will impact class material
___ Other: _______________________________
(please write in explanation)
8. How relevant is the topic of bias and perception towards people experiencing homelessness
for both students and faculty to discuss in the classroom setting?
o Extremely relevant
o Very relevant
o Somewhat relevant
o Not very relevant
o Not relevant
9. Following the School of Social Work embracing the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
(after Academic Year 2016-2017), have you noticed an increased interest among students on
homelessness?
o High increase in student interest in homelessness
o Moderate, increase in student interest in homelessness
o Low, increase in student interest in homelessness
o No, increased noticed in student interest in homelessness
o Neutral, I have not noticed an increase or decrease in student interest in
homelessness.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 115
10. On a scale of 1-5, how well do you feel the school is providing adequate professional
development and training to faculty in relation to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness?
1 –Never, 2-Little, 3-Somewhat, 4-Much, 5-A great deal
11. How confident are you about your ability to design an assignment on homelessness into your
course teachings?
o Extremely confident
o Very confident
o Somewhat confident
o Not very confident
o Not at all confident
12. How confident are you about your ability to include homeless education material into your
course teachings?
o Extremely confident
o Very confident
o Somewhat confident
o Not very confident
o Not at all confident
13. What type of materials do you perceive to be most useful in order to incorporate homeless
education into your course? (rate each with scale 0-not useful-absolutely useful-4)
(0-not useful, 1-of little use, 2-of average use, 3-very useful, 4-absolutely useful)
__ Journal articles
__ Book chapter
__ Documentary on homelessness
HOMELESS EDUCATION 116
__ Guest speaker working in homeless service area
__ Guest speaker who has experienced homelessness
__ Policy on homelessness
__ Other (please write in)_______________________________
__ I am not planning on incorporating material into my course on homelessness
14. How confident are you in identifying homeless intervention and prevention research to
incorporate into curriculum assignments specific to homeless education?
o Extremely confident
o Very confident
o Somewhat confident
o Not very confident
o Not at all confident
15. In what ways do you see the Grand Challenge on Homelessness impacting social work
education? (Rate each with scale 0-no impact-extremely high impact-4)
(0-no impact, 1-low impact, 2- somewhat of an impact, 3-high impact, 4-extremely high impact)
____ increase research interest on homelessness
____ change in empathic response to homelessness
____ increase interst in social workers working with homelessness
____ decrease interest in social workers working with homelessness
____ Other: __________________________________(please write in impact)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 117
16. How much impact do you think the Grand Challenge on Homelessness will have on social
work faculty interest in homelessness?
o Extremely high impact
o High impact
o Somewhat of an impact
o Low impact
o No impact
17. How much impact do you think the Grand Challenge on Ending Homelessness will have on
MSW and DSW students’ interest in working within direct homeless services (including
homeless policy and research)?
o Extremely high impact
o High impact
o Somewhat of an impact
o Low impact
o No impact
18. How important is integrating homeless education into MSW curriculum to you as faculty?
o Extremely important
o Very important
o Somewhat important
o Not very important
o Not important
19. How satisfied are you in how the school of social work has supported your learning and
professional develp opportunities in regards to homeless education and instruction?
HOMELESS EDUCATION 118
o Extremely satisfied
o Very satisfied
o Somewhat satisfied
o Not very satisfied
o Not satisfied
20. How confident are you in creating student learning objectives while placed in a homeless
service field placement?
o Extremely confident
o Very confident
o Somewhat confident
o Not very confident
o Not confident
o I am not aware of homeless learning objectives in homeless service field
placement
21. As faculty I want to influence curriculum about the connections of homelessness in relation
to poverty and mental health.
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Neutral
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
o I am not aware of connections of homelessness in relation to poverty and mental
health
HOMELESS EDUCATION 119
22. How important is teaching students use of empathy when working with clients experiencing
homelessness?
o Extremely important
o Very important
o Somewhat important
o Not very important
o Not important
23. In your professional Social Work career, how many years’ of experience do you have in
working directly within homeless services (including homeless policy and research)? (select one)
__ Less than one year
__ 1 to 3 years
__ 4 to 6 years
__ 7-10 years
__ More than 10 years
__ No experience working within homeless services
24. Is there anything you would like to add regarding the integration of the Grand Challenge to
End Homelessness into curriculum (both clinical courses and field courses) the School of Social
Work program?
(open answer)
HOMELESS EDUCATION 120
Appendix B
Interview Protocol
1. Do you work as faculty in the campus based program, virtual program or both?
_____OTG _____Virtual _____Both
2. What department do you align within the SSW (select one)?
____Mental Health ____ Children Youth Family _____Community Organizing
3. When did you first learn about the Grand Challenges Social Work Initiative?
4. What is your understanding of the resources committed by the School of Social Work and the
larger University in accepting the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness?
5. Tell me how the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness was introduced to your associated
SSW Concentration (Behavioral Health, Children and Families, Community Organizing).
6. Prior to the introduction of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, how familiar were you
with how homeless education content is facilitated in classroom assignments and/or field
placements within your concentration?
7. Now that the School of Social Work has pledged to accept the Grand Challenge to End
Homelessness, how has that changed your Concentrations focus, if at all?
7 a. How has the faculty had to adapt professionally in their teaching, scholarship or
service, if at all?
HOMELESS EDUCATION 121
8. How has integrating homeless content into the School of Social Work program curriculum
impacted your professional focus, your service activities, your teaching, if at all?
9. Tell me how important integrating homelessness content into the overall School of Social
Work structure and educational curriculum is to you.
10. Can you describe the approach taken in designing effective assignments incorporating
homeless education into your course syllabus, if at all?
11. Can you tell me about specific assessments or interventions specific to homelessness that you
have incorporated into classroom learning?
12. How has your perception on poverty and homelessness been influenced since the integration
of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, if at all?
13. How has student perception of poverty and homelessness been influenced since the
integration of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness, if at all?
14. Can you provide me and example of when you used empathy while working with clients
experiencing homelessness that would be relevant to bring into classroom learning?
15. Is there anything you would like to add or comment on regarding the integration of the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness into the Social Work program curriculum?
HOMELESS EDUCATION 122
Appendix C
Informed Consent
Study Title: Enhancing Homeless Education and Faculty Engagement Following the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness
PI: Stephanie George
Date: MM/DD/2017
We invite you to participate in a research study being conducted by Stephanie George, a doctoral
student with the University of Southern California Rossier School Of Education. The purpose is
to learn about School of Social Work faculty engagement and capacity in enhancing homeless
education in MSW and DSW curriculum, including clinical teaching and field practicum
following implementation of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
You were selected as a possible participant because you are full time faculty member who in the
role as lead faculty or department chair and vice-chair (currently or as of January 2016) with the
School of Social Work. You will be asked to complete an online questionnaire comprised of 24
questions related to your employment role and associated work life experiences. The survey will
take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. Taking part in this research study is completely
voluntary. You are free to skip any that you prefer not to answer. If you decide to not be in this
study, you may stop participation at any time. Your responses will kept confidential and any data
identifying information about you from the data will be removed.
If you have any questions, concerns or comments regarding this study, please contact Stephanie
George at geor034@usc.edu.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 123
Appendix D
Recruitment Letter
MM/DD, 2017
Hello, my name is Stephanie George. I am a doctoral student with USC Rossier School of
Education. I am conducting research regarding School of Social Work full time faculty
engagement and capacity in enhancing homeless education in MSW and DSW curriculum,
including clinical teaching and field practicum following implementation of the Grand Challenge
to End Homelessness. Knowledge and information generated from this research may help the
School of School of Social to develop resources in support of the needs of SSW full time faculty
and other Schools of Social Work committed to the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
across the United States.
Participation in this research includes completing one brief survey about your knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences in connection to implementing elements in the Grand
Challenge to End Homelessness. The questionnaire will take approximately 10-15 minutes. You
will be provided an optional link at the end of the survey, to participate in a follow up one on one
interview. The interview will take approximately 45-60 minutes to complete.
Taking part in this research study is completely voluntary. You are free to skip any that you
prefer not to answer. If you decide to not be in this study, you may stop participation at any time.
Your responses will kept confidential and any data identifying information about you from the
data will be removed. Respondent’s information will remain confidential and will not be used
for, or related to work performance. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out, I can
be reached at 813-600-8284 or geor034@usc.edu.
HOMELESS EDUCATION 124
Appendix E
Faculty Grand Challenge on Homelessness Survey
Based on New World Level 1 and 2 Reaction Sheets (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Survey
provided to faculty immediately following webinar training.
Q1 I was interested in the training content during the session.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q2 I was comfortable with the content and timing of the program.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q3 I was given the proper technological tools to take part in the virtual training.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q4 I will be able to apply what I learned during the training into the social work program.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q5 I was provided time and opportunity ask questions and be provided relevant responses on the
implementation of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
HOMELESS EDUCATION 125
Strongly disagree
Q6 Overall, I felt the training was informative.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q7 I can identify aspects of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness that are relevant to Social
Work education.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q8 Overall, I have confidence in my ability to implement a faculty retention program.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q9 After the training, I feel confident in implementing homeless education into course
assignments.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q10 After the training, I will implement elements of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness
into the classroom.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
HOMELESS EDUCATION 126
Appendix F
Faculty Grand Challenge on Homelessness Survey 2
Modelled on New World Reaction Sheets (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). To be given four
months after the training.
Q1 I am able to apply what I learned during the training into social work program curriculum.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q2 I can identify links in homeless education to other areas of social work practice that bring
relevance to my classroom.
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Q3 I implemented a homeless assignment into my course syllabus
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
HOMELESS EDUCATION 127
Appendix G
Faculty Confidence
Figure 17. Visual representation of faculty confidence level in implementing homeless
education in the classroom.
15%
39%
46%
FA C U LT Y C O N FI D E N C E I N I MPL E ME N T IN G
H O ME L ESS E D U C AT IO I N T H E C L A S S R OOM
Book or Journal Chapter Guest Speaker Assignments on Homelessness
HOMELESS EDUCATION 128
Appendix H
Student Interest
Figure 18. Visual representation of student interest in homeless service delivery as a
social worker, post-graduation.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Student Interest in Homeless
Service Deliverty post-graduation
Student interest working in
homeless services post graduation
No, student interest in homeless
services post-graduation
S T U D E N T I N T E R EST I N H O M E L ESS S E RV IC E
D E L I V ERY
HOMELESS EDUCATION 129
Appendix I
Logic Model
Figure 19. Logic model for the National Homelessness Social Work Initiative.
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Staff engagement within an academic shared governance model for nursing education: an evaluation study
PDF
Examining the faculty implementation of intermediate algebra for statistics: An evaluation study
PDF
Uncovered: finding and being authentically myself in the workplace: an evaluation study
PDF
Improving faculty participation in student conduct hearing boards: a gap analysis
PDF
Teaching literacy to Latino English learners in kindergarten, ready or not: an evaluation study
PDF
Judiciary employees engagement and motivation: the impact on employee and organizational success: an evaluation study
PDF
Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study
PDF
An assessment of a nonprofit organization’s effort to increase its staff diversity
PDF
Factors contributing to student attrition at a healthcare university: a gap analysis
PDF
Adjunct faculty engagement at the community college: an exploration of work engagement and perceived motivational factors through the lens of Self-Determination Theory
PDF
Structured leadership development in the judicial system to enhance public service: an executive dissertation evaluation study
PDF
The happiness design: an innovation study
PDF
Learners’ perceptions of the microlearning format for the delivery of technical training: an evaluation study
PDF
High school counselors’ support of first-generation students’ postsecondary planning: an evaluative study
PDF
Employment rates upon MBA graduation: An evaluation study
PDF
Civic engagement in American schools: an evaluation study
PDF
One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China
PDF
Retention rates and burnout among medical assistants: an evaluation study
PDF
82nd Training Wing technical training evaluation: an innovation study
PDF
Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study
Asset Metadata
Creator
George, Stephanie T.
(author)
Core Title
Enhancing homeless education and faculty engagement following the launch of the Grand Challenge to End Homelessness: an evaluation study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
02/22/2018
Defense Date
12/19/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness,homeless,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Seli, Helena (
committee chair
), Fogel, Sondra (
committee member
), Henwood, Benjamin (
committee member
)
Creator Email
geor034@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-477486
Unique identifier
UC11266628
Identifier
etd-GeorgeStep-6054.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-477486 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-GeorgeStep-6054.pdf
Dmrecord
477486
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
George, Stephanie T.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
Grand Challenge to End Homelessness