SOWO 842 (Section 01, Tuesdays: 2-4:50 PM) F : T

advertisement
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK
COURSE NUMBER: SOWO 842 (Section 01, Tuesdays: 2-4:50 PM)
COURSE TITLE, SEMESTER AND YEAR: FAMILIES: THEORY AND PRACTICE, FALL ‘09
INSTRUCTOR:
Gary L. Bowen, Ph.D., ACSW
School of Social Work
Tate-Turner-Kuralt, Room 438
Phone: 919-962-6542 (O), 919-967-3196 (H), 919-448-4058 (M)
Fax: 919-962-0890
Email: [email protected]
OFFICE HOURS:
Monday, 1-3:30 PM (By Appointment)
UNC-CH Safe Zone
COURSE DESCRIPTION: A review of explanatory and practice theories for understanding
and intervening with families and couples.
COURSE OBJECTIVES:
By course end, students will:
1. Understand the development and role of explanatory and practice theory in familycentered social work practice.
2. Understand concepts, selected theory, and research concerning family functioning
and interaction.
3. Understand family functioning and interaction in the context of race, ethnicity,
gender, age, socioeconomic status, and culture and history.
4. Apply models of family functioning and interaction to frame and inform social
interventions with couples and families.
5. Gain awareness of the field of family life education and review specific programs
focused on promoting strong families and effective parenting.
6. Review major clinical and community intervention strategies for working with
couples and families experiencing relationship problems or facing adversity and
positive challenge.
7. Develop skills in engaging, assessing, intervening, measuring progress, and ending
relationships with families that are culturally sensitive and relevant.
8. Examine family-centered social work practice in a variety of direct practice settings,
including health, mental health, schools, the U.S. military, and settings particularly
focused on child welfare.
1
9. Recognize ethical dilemmas and employ decision-making skills for ethical practice
with families in agency and community based settings.
EXPANDED DESCRIPTION: This course includes a focus on both explanatory theories for
understanding variation in couple and family interaction and practice theories for
intervening to improve family member and family system functioning. Students will gain
experience in identifying critical explanatory factors associated with strong and adaptive
couple and family functioning—factors that function as leverage points in the design of
social interventions. Students will review and present a specific couple or family-level
practice intervention for promoting strong and adaptive functioning. In the context of
advanced electives in couple and family therapy, this course will focus on couple and
family life education and enrichment programs.
REQUIRED TEXTS/READINGS:
Main Text
Smith, S. R., Hamon, R. R., Ingoldsby, B. B., & Miller, J. E. (2009). Exploring family
theories. New York: Oxford Press. (ISBN 9780195377712)
Supplemental Texts
Boss, P. (2006). Loss, trauma, and resilience: Therapeutic work with ambiguous loss.
New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc. (ISBN 0-393-70449-1) [Hardcover]
Ehrenreich, B. (2001). Nickel and dimed: On (not) getting by in America. New York:
Henry Holt and Company, LLC. (ISBN 0-8050-6389-7) [Paperback]
Lipper, J. (2003). Growing up fast. New York: Picador. (ISBN 0-312-42223-9).
[Paperback]
RELATED READINGS:
Boss, P. (2002). Family stress management: A Contextual Approach (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. (ISBN 0-8039-7389-X) [Paperback]
Boss, P. (1999). Ambiguous loss: Learning to live with unresolved grief. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press. (ISBN 0-674-01738-2) [Paperback]
Boss, P. (Ed.). (2003). Family stress: Classic and contemporary readings. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage. (ISBN 0-7619-2612-7) [Paperback]
Bredehoft, D. J., & Walcheski, M. J. (2009). Family life education: Integrating theory
and practice. St. Paul, MN: National Council on Family Relations. (ISBN 0-916174-697) [Paperback]
2
Harris, M. B., & Franklin, C. (2007). Taking charge: A school-based life skills group
curriculum for adolescent mothers. New York: Oxford University Press. (ISBN 978-019-517294-2, Paperback, $24.95)
Revenson, T. A. Kayser, K., & Bodenmann, G. (2005). Couples coping with stress:
Emerging perspectives on dyadic coping. Washington, DC: APA.
Patterson, J., Williams, L., Grauf-Grounds, C., & Chamov, L. (1998). Essential skills in
family therapy: From the first interview to termination. New York: Guilford Press.
Piercy, F.P., Sprenkle, D.H., & Wetchler, J.L. (1996). Family therapy sourcebook (2nd
Ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
TEACHING METHODS:
This course has been designed to maximize student involvement, and it will be facilitated
using a transformative learning model. From this model, students work with the
instructor as full partners in assuming responsibility for the success of the course.
Students will prepare lectures, develop assignments, lead class discussion, and provide
peer review.
CLASS ASSIGNMENTS:
Class Attendance
Students are expected to attend all class sessions, and classes will begin and end on time.
A roll sheet will be distributed at the beginning of each class. If there is some reason that
you cannot attend a class, please contact the instructor or leave a message for the
instructor at the School of Social Work. Students who miss two class sessions will be
penalized by one letter grade (special exceptions may apply). Students who miss three or
more class sessions will receive an "F" as their final grade for the class.
Email Accounts
All students are required to have a valid UNC email account. A valid UNC email address
has the following extension: @email.unc.edu.
Required Reading
To facilitate class involvement and discussion, students are expected to read all required
materials prior to class.
Class Participation
Students are expected to contribute "meaningfully" to class discussion. During weeks 4
and 5, students will serve as discussion leaders on class readings. The professor may call
upon students to respond to assigned readings/class discussion. Please let the professor
know if you have particular concerns about being called upon in class. At the beginning
of each class session, time will be allocated to address questions about readings and
assignments.
3
Class Lecture
Students will have an opportunity to prepare and deliver a class lecture on an assigned
topic, which should be approximately 60-90 minutes in duration (time will vary by
presentation topic). Students will work together in small groups to prepare the class
lecture. Topics will be assigned randomly (see assignments on last page), although
students may trade topics with each other. Please submit an electronic copy (email
attachment) of the PowerPoint slides (15-25 slides) to the professor at least 12 hours in
advance of the presentation. Please distribute a hard copy of the PowerPoint presentation
slides to all student participants on the day of the presentation (6 slides per page).
Students are expected to consult at least two additional reference sources in preparing for
their lectures, and they are asked to identify, play and integrate a video clip (movie) in
class (no more than 5-7 minutes in length) that depicts key assumptions/concepts from
their presentation. Please prepare a one-page summary of this video clip for class
distribution that includes reference information, a brief summary of its theme/content,
and its implications for the topic. Presenters need to assume responsibility for having AV
equipment necessary for their presentation.
Feedback on the presentation will be requested from other class members via a structured
presentation evaluation form (See Appendix A) using the following scale: 60 = Poor
(60%), 70 = Fair (70%), 80 = Good (80%), 90 = Very Good (90%), and 100 = Clearly
Exceptional (100%) (see attached). The professor will prepare a summary critique,
including an assigned grade, which will be distributed to students in the class following
the presentation. Students’ critiques will be included. In most cases, students working
together will receive the same grade for the presentation. On some occasions, class
lecture grades are adjusted upward at the end of the semester in the context of other
lectures.
Due: Day of Presentation.
Review of Marital/Family Education/Enrichment/Enhancement Program
Working in pairs, students will select a marital/family
education/enrichment/enhancement program in consultation with the professor for review
and presentation to the larger class. The review/presentation will cover the following
points, although the professor will seek consultation from the students about this outline:










4
Name of program and developer(s)
Basis for selection—Why did you select this particular program for review?
Content—What is taught? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
Timing—When does it occur in the life cycle? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
Target—Who receives it? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
Setting—Where does it take place? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
Trainers/Leaders—What are the qualifications and requirements for those who
train or lead the program?
Methods—How is content presented and learned? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
Intensity—What is the dosage? (see Hawkins et al., 2004)
o Time/duration—How much investment in time does the program
participation require?
Engagement—How are participants recruited and engaged in the program?










Ending—How is termination handled with participants?
Outcomes—What are the intended results from participation? How are these
results measured? How long are participants tracked to monitor results?
*Theoretical orientation—What explanatory theories anchor the program? (see
Bowen, 1991)
*Empirical research base—How is program content informed by the empirical
research base? If possible, develop a logic model, including outcomes and
antecedents. (see Adler-Baeder et al., 2004)
Assessment tools—What, if any, types of tools are used for
assessment/evaluation? How is progress monitored and measured during the
course of program implementation?
Program—What is the program agenda and timeline? (see Bowen, 1991)
Inclusiveness—To what extent is the program sensitive to gender, class,
race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and contextual differences? (see Leslie, 1995)
Ethical issues or dilemmas—Do you have ethical concerns about the program as
described?
*Empirical support—By what means and to what extent has the program received
empirical support for its efficacy? (Jakubowski et al., 2004)
Next steps—In your opinion, what steps are necessary to continue to
develop/refine this program?
I have placed an asterisk on the most important aspects of your review. You are free to
vary the order of these points. Please prepare a detailed PowerPoint presentation (30-35
slides) that includes the points above, including the use of charts and diagrams. You will
have approximately 40 minutes to present your summary in classes 13-16, including 10
minutes for class discussion. Once I have your selections, I will be able to develop
logical order for presentation. Feedback on the presentation will be requested from other
class members via a structured presentation evaluation form (see Appendix B). In the
absence of presenting concerns or issues, presenters working in teams will receive the
same final score.
Due: Day of Presentation.
Integrative Collage
Please develop a collage (images and words from magazines) on an approximately 22”
by 28” poster board or heavy-duty card stock paper that describe your understanding of
and perspective toward working with families in the context of our work this semester
(theory and practice). Of all the concepts and assumptions that we have reviewed, which
ones have most influenced your perspective—try to represent this in developing your
collage. The same for people—which authors had a particular impact on your
perspective? Please attempt to represent how your family history, gender and
racial/ethnic/cultural heritage contributes to your integrative perspective. Please be
prepared to explain your collage to a colleague. Bring a “sticky pad” (2” x 2”) to class to
attach comments on other collages. You will be able to keep your collage.
Due: (Week 16)
5
Final Integrative Experience
Prepare a eight-page, written essay that summarizes your integrative perspective at the
beginning of the course (1 page); your integrative perspective at this point (3 pages); a
discussion of how your perspective is influenced by your family history, gender and
racial/ethnic/cultural heritage (1 page); implications of your analysis for your social work
practice with families (2 page); and strengths and weaknesses in your integrative
perspective for social work practice and the implications of your analysis for informing
your work next semester (1 page). Please edit your papers carefully.
Due: Exam Date
GRADING SYSTEM:
The core assignments and their relative weights in the grading system are listed below:
Class Lecture
Practice Presentation
Collage
Final Integrative Experience
Peer Review/Class Participation
35.0%
35.0%
07.5%
15.0%
07.5%
Each assignment/requirement will be graded using the following numeric system:
H = 94-100
P = 80-93
L = 70-79
F = 69 and below
To qualify for a grade of Clear Excellence (H), students will need to complete all
assignments with a grade of 70% or better, with an average grade of 94% or better.
POLICY ON INCOMPLETES AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS:
Unless negotiated in advance with the professor, assignments are due on the date
specified in the syllabus. All assignments must be completed to receive a Passing Grade
for the course (H/P/L). Students will receive 0 credit for assignments submitted past the
due date.
POLICY ON ACADEMIC DISHONESTY:
Please refer to the APA Style Guide, The SSW Manual, and the SSW Writing Guide for
information on attribution of quotes, plagiarism and appropriate use of assistance in
preparing assignments. All written assignments should contain a signed pledge from you
stating that, "I have not given or received unauthorized aid in preparing this written
work".
In keeping with the UNC Honor Code, if reason exists to believe that academic
dishonesty has occurred, a referral will be made to the Office of the Student Attorney
General for investigation and further action as required."
6
POLICY ON ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
Students with disabilities that affect their participation in the course and who wish to
have special accommodations should contact the University’s Disabilities Services and
provide documentation of their disability. Disabilities Services will notify the instructor
that the student has a documented disability and may require accommodations, Students
should discuss the specific accommodations they require (e.g. changes in instructional
format, examination format) directly with the instructor.
POLICIES ON THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES IN THE CLASSROOM:
Do not engage in activities unrelated to the course including, but not limited to:
 completing assignments for other courses
 checking email during class
 communication unrelated to in-class activities (i.e., voice, email, text messaging,
etc.)
 surfing the web or visiting websites unrelated to in-class activities
 playing games, listening to music or watching videos
Do not distract others
 Set all devices including all sound alerts to “vibrate” or “mute” during class
 Do not place or accept calls or text messages during class
 Arrive with sufficient time to set up laptops, etc., before class begins. Set-up must
be completed before class begins.
 Be aware of potentially distracting typing or clicking
Prohibited use of computers and other wireless devices includes:
 Special events or guest speakers
 Presentation or role-play demonstration by classmates
 While viewing videotapes
 Any other time designated by the instructor
ALWAYS respect the request of a classmate or the instructor to cease the use of any and
all electronic/wireless devices.
BAD WEATHER POLICY:
Please check your email by 7:00 a.m. on the day of class in case of snow, ice or other
threatening and/or unsafe conditions. Use your best judgment about travel safety if you
are driving to Chapel Hill from surrounding areas that have snow, ice or other threatening
and/or unsafe conditions.
7
READINGS AND COURSE OUTLINE
Week 1: August 25 (No Class)
Week 2: September 1
Introductions
Course Review
Logistics
Personal Integrative Perspectives (Small Group Exercise)
 Record for later review
Scott, M. E., Schelar, E., Manlove, J., & Cui, C. (2009). Young adult attitudes about
relationships and marriage: Times may have changed, expectations remain high. Child
Trends Research Brief (Publication #2009-30). Washington, DC: Child Trends.
Week 3: September 8
Introduction to Theory (Professor)
Smith et al. (2009). Introduction (pp. 1-8).
Smith et al., (2009). Social Exchange Theory (pp. 201-212).
Substantive Application (Professor)
Intimate Relationship Cohesion and Dissolution
Smith et al. (2009). Sample Reading: Power and Dependence in Intimate Exchange (pp.
213-229).
Hawkins, D. N., & Booth, A. (2005). Unhappily ever after: Effects of long-term, lowquality marriages on well-being. Social Forces, 84, 445-465.
Previti, D., & Amato, P. R. (2003). Why stay married? Rewards, barriers, and marital
stability. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 561-573.
Week 4: September 15
Practice Application (Professor)
MAP: A Corporate Support Program for Couples
Bowen, G. L. (1992). Navigating the marital journey. New York: Praeger. (Chapters
2/3).
8
The Practice Couple and Marital Education and Enrichment 1
Larson, J. H. (2004). Innovations in marriage education: Introduction and challenges.
Family Relations, 53, 421-424.
(Discussion leader: Bowen)
Doherty, W. J. (1995). Boundaries between parent and family education and family
therapy: The levels of family involvement model. Family Relations, 44, 353-358.
(Discussion leaders: Bustle, Cadarette, Clemence)
Hawkins, A. J., Carroll, J. S., Doherty, W. J., & Willoughby, B. (2004). A comprehensive
framework for marriage education. Family Relations, 53, 547-558.
(Discussion leaders: Costa, Crawford-Green, Denard)
Jakubowski, S. F., Milne, E. P., Brunner, H., & Miller, R. B. (2004). A review of
empirically supported marital enrichment programs. Family Relations, 53, 528-536.
(Discussion leaders: Faison, Hanef, Hartley)
Halford, W. K., Markman, H. J., & Stanley, S. (2008). Strengthening couples’
relationships with education: Social policy and public health perspectives. Journal of
Family Psychology, 22, 497-505.
(Discussion leaders: Andringa, Basnight)
Adler-Baeder, F., Higginbothan, B., & Lamke, L. (2004). Putting empirical knowledge to
work: Linking research and programming on marital quality. Family Relations, 53, 537546.
(Discussion leaders: Martinson, McAllister, Millican)
Leslie, L. A. (1995). The evolving treatment of gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation
in marital and family therapy. Family Relations, 44, 359-367.
(Discussion leaders: Perkins, Price, Rafter)
Bledsoe, S. E., et al. (2007). Empirically supported psychotherapy in social work training
programs: Does the definition of evidence matter? Research on Social Work Practice, 17,
449-455.
(Discussion leaders: Ridout, Stern, Taperek)
Recommended Readings
Carr, A. (2009). The effectiveness of family therapy and systemic interventions for adultfocused problems. Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 46-74.
Carr, A. (2009). The effectiveness of family therapy and systemic interventions for childfocused problems. Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 3-45.
1
The National Council on Family Relations (NCFR) sponsors a Certification for Family Life Educators
(CFLE). For more information, see http://www.ncfr.org/cert/
9
Week 5: September 22
Families In Context (Professor)
Bowen, G. L., Richman, J. M., & Bowen, N. K. (2000). Families in the context of
communities across time. In S. J. Price, P. C. McKenry & M. J. Murphy (Eds.), Families
across time: A life course perspective (pp. 117-128). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury
Publishers.
Mancini, J. A., Bowen, G. L., & Martin, J. A. (2005). Community social organization: A
conceptual linchpin in examining families in the context of communities. Family
Relations, 54, 570-582.
Fingerman, K. L. (2009). Consequential strangers and peripheral ties: The importance of
unimportant relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 1, 69-86.
Substantive Application (Professor)
Families in the Military
Huebner, A., Mancini, J. A., Bowen, G. L., & Orthner, D. K. (2009). Shadowed by war:
Building community capacity to support military families. Family Relations, 58, 216228.
Mancini, J. A., Nelson, J. P., Bowen, G. L., & Martin, J. A. (2006). Preventing intimate
partner violence: A community capacity approach. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment,
and Trauma, 13(3/4), 203-227.
Week 6: September 29
Children in Context (Professor)
Bowen, G. L. (2009). Preventing school dropout: The Eco-Interactional Developmental
Model of School Success. The Prevention Research, 16(3), 3-8.
Bowen, G. L., & Richman, J. A. (2008). The School Success Profile. Chapel Hill, NC:
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Bowen, G. L., Rose, R.A., Powers, J. D., & Glennie, E. J. (2008). The joint effects of
neighborhoods, schools, peers, and families on changes in the school success of middle
school students. Family Relations, 57, 504-516.
10
Substantive Application (Student Presentation)
Children in the Military
Flake, E. M., et al. (2009). The psychosocial effects of deployment on military children.
Journal of Development & Behavioral Pediatrics, 30, 271-278.
Huebner, A. J., & Mancini, J. A. (2008). Supporting youth during parental deployment.
The Prevention Researcher, 15, 10-13.
Week 7: October 6
Symbolic Interactionism Theory (Student Presentation)
Smith et al. (2009). Symbolic Interactionism Theory (pp. 9-24).
Substantive Application (Student Presentation)
Teenage Pregnancy
Lipper, J. (2003). Growing up fast. New York: Picador.
Week 8: October 13
Family Systems Theory (Student Presentation)
Smith et al. (2009). Family Systems Theory (pp. 123-139).
Smith et al. (2009). Sample Reading: The Costs of Getting Ahead: Mexican Family
System Changes after Immigration (pp. 140-160).
Substantive Application (Student Presentation)
The Circumplex Model
Olson, D. (1995). Family systems: Understanding your roots. In R. D. Day, K. R. Gilbert,
B. H. Settles, & W. R. Burr (Eds.), Research and theory in family science (pp. 131-153).
Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Heatherington, L., & Lavner, J. A. (2008). Coming to terms with coming out: Review
and recommendations for family systems-focused research. Journal of Family
Psychology, 22, 329-343.
Crosbie-Burnett, M., Foster, T. L., Murray, C. I., & Bowen, G. L. (1996). Gays’ and
lesbians’ families-of-origin: A social-cognitive-behavioral model of adjustment. Family
Relations, 45, 397-403.
11
Week 9: October 20
Feminist Family Theory (Student Presentation)
Smith et al. (2009). Conflict Theory (pp. 161-176). [Review as background reading for
Feminist Family Theory]
Ingoldsby, B. B., Smith, S. R., & J. E. Miller (2004). Feminist Family Theory (pp. 187197). [Text]
Smith et al. (2009). Sample Reading: Why Welfare? (pp. 177-200).
Substantive Application (Student Presentation)
Working and Still Poor
Ehrenreich, B. (2002). Nickel and dimed. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Class 10: October 27
Family Stress Theory (Professor)
Ingoldsby, B. B., Smith, S. R., & J. E. Miller (2004). Family stress theory (pp. 137-149).
Patterson, J. M. (2002). Integrating family resilience and family stress theory. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 64, 349-360.
Class 11: November 3
Substantive Application (Student Presentation)
The MEES Model
Peters, M. F., & Massey, G. (1983). Mundane extreme environmental stress in family
stress theories: The case of black families in white America. In H. I. McCubbin, M. B.
Sussman, & J. M. Patterson (Eds.), Social stress and the family: Advances and
developments in family stress theory and research (pp. 193-218). New York: The
Haworth Press.
2 Murry,
V. M., Brown, P. A., Brody, G. H., Cutrona, C. E., & Simons, R. L. (2001).
Racial discrimination as a moderator of the links among stress, maternal psychological
functioning, and family relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 915-926.
2
Presenters only.
12
3 Murry,
V. M., et al. (2008). Long-term effects of stressors on relationship well-being
and
parenting among rural African American women. Family Relations, 57, 117-127.
Conceptual Frameworks
Ambiguous Loss
Smith et al. (2009). Sample Reading: Ambiguous Loss and the Family Grieving Process
(pp. 111-122).
4 Boss,
P. (2004). Ambiguous loss research, theory, and practice: Reflections after 9/11.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 551-566.
Boss, P. (2006). Loss, trauma, and resilience: Therapeutic work with ambiguous loss.
New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc.
5 Carroll,
J. S., Olson, C. D., & Buckmiller, N. (2007). Family boundary ambiguity: A 30year review of theory, research, and measurement. Family Relations, 56, 210-230.
Week 12: November 10 (No Class)
Week 13: November 17
Practice Presentations x 3
Week 14: November 24
Practice Presentations x 3
Week 15: December 1
Practice Presentations x 3
Week 16: December 8
Practice Presentation x 1
A Personal Integrative Perspective (Collage)
Final Integrative Experience Discussion
Final Exam
Final Integrative Experience Due (See Exam Schedule)
3
Presenters only.
Presenters only.
5 Presenters only.
13
4
14
Class Lecture Assignments 6
09/29 Children in the Military (Meredith Costa, Christine Rafter)
10/06 Symbolic Interactionism Theory (Jen Bustle, Jolee Faison)
10/06 Teenage Pregnancy (Erin Ridout, Noah Martinson)
10/13 Family Systems Theory (Whitney Andringa, Kourtney Taperek)
10/13 The Circumplex Model (Jackie Millican, Martha Cadarette)
10/20 Feminist Family Theory (MC Hartley, Christina Denard)
10/20 Working and Still Poor (Samir Hanef, Yolanda McAllister)
11/03 The MEES Model (Kindra Clemance, Lauren Perkins)
11/03 Ambiguous Loss (Carly Price, Becky Stern)
6
You may trade presentation topics and partners.
15
Appendix A
Presentation Evaluation Form
Presentation:___________________________________________________________________
Presenter(s):__________________________________________________________________
Please rate the group presentation in the following areas with:
60 = Poor, 70 = Fair, 80 = Good, 90 = Very Good, and 100 = Clearly Exceptional.
Content:
Overall integration of assigned readings/reference materials
60
70
80
90
100
Use of examples to clarify presentation material
60
70
80
90
100
Application to family functioning and interaction
60
70
80
90
100
Integration of video selection
60
70
80
90
100
Implications for social work practice with families
60
70
80
90
100
60
70
80
90
100
Organization—Use of transitions, flow of content in a logical
manner, and good use of time
60
70
80
90
100
Visual aids—Use of hand-outs, PowerPoint, and other forms of
media to supplement information presented
60
70
80
90
100
Interaction with class—Answering questions, requests for class
participation, receiving feedback from class members
60
70
80
90
100
Enthusiasm—Communicated ideas with fervor
70
80
90
100
Style/Delivery:
Creativity—Use of innovative ways to convey information
60
Please identify two strengths of the presentation:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Please provide at least one recommendation for improvement:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
16
Appendix B
Presentation Evaluation Form
Presentation:___________________________________________________________________
Presenter(s):__________________________________________________________________
Please rate the group presentation in the following areas with:
60 = Poor, 70 = Fair, 80 = Good, 90 = Very Good, and 100 = Clearly Exceptional.
Content:
Responsiveness to presentation outline
60
70
80
90
100
Review of theoretical orientation
60
70
80
90
100
Review of empirical research base
60
70
80
90
100
Review of empirical support
60
70
80
90
100
60
70
80
90
100
Organization—Use of transitions, flow of content in a logical
manner, and good use of time
60
70
80
90
100
Visual aids—Use of hand-outs, PowerPoint, and other forms of
media to supplement information presented
60
70
80
90
100
Interaction with class—Answering questions, requests for class
participation, receiving feedback from class members
60
70
80
90
100
Enthusiasm—Communicated content with fervor
70
80
90
100
Style/Delivery:
Creativity—Use of innovative ways to convey information
60
Please identify two strengths of the presentation:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Please provide at least one recommendation for improvement:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
17
Download