THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK
COURSE NUMBER:
SOWO 900
COURSE TITLE:
Conceptualizing Social Problems to Inform Interventions
SEMESTER:
Fall 2009 (Tuesday, 9-11:50 a.m., Room 439)
PROFESSOR:
Gary L. Bowen, Ph.D., ACSW
Kenan Distinguished Professor
School of Social Work
325 Pittsboro Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3550
Office Phone:
919-962-6542
Home Phone:
919-967-3196
Mobile:
919-448-4058
Email: glbowen@email.unc.edu
OFFICE HOURS:
Monday (1:00 – 3:00 p.m.)/By Appointment
UNC-CH Safe Zone
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
An application and critical analysis of behavioral and social science theories and theorydriven research for understanding the etiology of social problems for purposes of social
intervention.
COURSE OBJECTIVES:
By course end, students will:
1. Understand the application of the scientific process to social work research and
practice, including the role of research and theory in evidence-based social work
practice.
2. Understand the reciprocal and dynamic links among theory, research, and practice.
3. Understand distinctions among theories at different levels of abstractness and scope,
as well as the distinction between explanatory theories and practice theories.
4. Review specific examples of the use of conceptual frameworks for informing the
development of explanatory substantive models for understanding social problems,
and how these substantive models inform the development of social interventions.
5. Identify a specific social problem, describe its incidence/prevalence and signficance
for social work intervention, and identify and critique relevant conceptual
frameworks and substantive models that have been used to frame and inform
understanding of the problem (explanatory theories).
6. Understand the development and application of theories in the context of race,
ethnicity, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and culture and history.
1
EXPANDED DESCRIPTION:
This course instructs students in the critical analysis and application of behavioral and
social science theories for understanding variation in the incidence and prevalence of
social problems. It is designed to be highly pragmatic; it is not designed to provide a
forum to debate the merits of different approaches to science or epistemologies.
Positivist, postpositivist, and postmodern views are embraced. The aim is to gain
experience in identifying critical explanatory factors associated with the occurrence of
social problems—factors that function as leverage points in the design of social
interventions.
Primary attention is directed to two levels of theory: conceptual frameworks and
substantive models (causal models, middle-range theories, formal propositional theories,
analytical typologies). In the context of HBSE preparation in the MSW curriculum,
limited focus is directed to grand or universal theories of development, such as Freud’s
theory of psychosexual development or Piaget’s stage-developmental theory of cognitive
theory. 1 In addition, the course addresses explanatory theory rather than practice theory
(solution-focused therapy, narrative theory, motivational interviewing). Practice theories
provide perspectives on the implementation of strategies to promote change and
development. 2
A conceptual framework is defined as a set of concepts, most often with interrelated
assumptions (declarative propositions), that provide “perspectives” or “orientations” to
understanding behavioral and social phenomena, including human development (e.g.,
systems theory, exchange theory, symbolic interactionism, life course theory). As
compared to substantive models, conceptual frameworks are more abstract and broader in
scope. Substantive models are conceptually similar to what Jeanne Marsh (2004) calls
“theories of the problem” (p. 27), although, where possible, we reframe social problems
from a strengths perspective (e.g., school success versus school failure). According to
Marsh, “Problem theories are concerned with typography or characteristics of problems,
the factors and conditions that shape and constrain them, and the ways that they change
in response to those factors and conditions” (p. 29). Marsh distinguishes “theories of the
problem” from “theories of the treatment or service” and “theories of problem-service
matching,” which are not the focus of this class. In most cases, substantive models are
logically deducted from larger conceptual frameworks (or grand theories of
development), which may be more or less explicit in the specification of the substantive
model. At times, we may be tempted to overstate this linkage for purposes of our
learning.
The conceptualization of social problems is a necessary first step in developing logic or
program models that inform the design, implementation, and evaluation of social
interventions. As stated by Marsh (2004), “Problem theory is relevant to designing
interventions in that it puts a problem in context and identifies specific aspects or
1
See Newman, B. M., & Newman, P.R. (2007). Theories of human development. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates for an excellent book on theories of development. The authors divide theories into
three groups: (a) theories that emphasize biological factors, (b) theories that emphasize environmental
factors, and (c) theories that emphasize the interaction of person and environment.
2 See Walsh, J. (2006). Theories for direct social work practice. Australia: Thomson Brooks/Cole for an
excellent book on direct practive theories.
2
dimensions of the problem that might be amendable to change or intervention” (p. 2728). This course addresses this first step—conceptualizing social problems. The
specification of explicit practice models from our conceptualization of social problems is
the ultimate outcome from this activity and functions as a beacon in our work, including
the specification of inputs, throughputs, and outputs. However, the design of social
interventions is secondary rather than primary in SOWO 900. SOWO 940, Development
of Social Intervention Models, will build on the foundation of SOWO 900.
At the beginning of the course, students will be introduced to concepts related to the
process of theorizing, including a discussion of evidence-based practice in social work. 3
They will also review exemplary examples of theory driven research and perform a
content analysis of selected social work journals and journals from areas related to social
work to identify recent examples of theory-informed research. Students will subsequently
review examples in the use of conceptual frameworks and substantive models for
understanding social problems, which reflect “storylines of research,” from a broad range
of interdisciplinary research (Greenhalgh et al., 2005). It is important to underscore that
these topics were selected as examples; many other topics lend themselves to the same
type of review and discussion. In addition, it is usually possible to identify multiple
“storylines of research” in any one topical area. Our focus is on the process of
conceptualizing rather than on the content per se. Yet, it is hoped that students will gain
valuable insights from a review of this research—insights that can be applied to thinking
about their own specialized area of study. And, who knows, one of these topics may fuel
the fires of future scientific inquiry for a class member.
In this class, we will work inductively; we will first define the social problem, including
a discussion of its incidence and prevalence and its significance. We will subsequently
identify a substantive model from the literature that provides a “perspective” or “lens” to
view this problem. In most cases, this is one of several substantive models that could be
reviewed and discussed. Next, we will review the results from theory-driven research that
has examined hypotheses or expectations from this model. Finally, we will consider the
conceptual frameworks from which this substantive model was derived. 4 For example,
students will review how ecological theory (conceptual framework a la Bronfenbrenner),
and general systems theory (conceptual framework a la von Bertalanffy) frame the study
of school success (social problem) via a risk and resilience perspective on educational
persistence (substantive model). In this context, students will review theory-driven
research that examines research questions from the substantive model. From each social
problem review, students will identify research questions to advance knowledge of the
issue, problem, or phenomenon and to inform the design of social interventions. Special
attention will be given to the deductive and inductive cycle of theory building and
empirical research, as well as to quantitative and qualititive research and evaluation
strategies. The aim is to engage students in the same process that prepares them for
successful completion of the written portion of the qualifying exam, the scientific
3
The topic of evidence-based practice is discussed more extensively in SOWO 910, Research Methods in
Social Intervention. The material is an important foundation for SOWO 900.
4 It is important to note that, in some cases, we do not have an adequate empirical base for conceptualizing
social problems; we simply lack an understanding of the problem. Still, we may be able to discuss the
problem from the perspective of different conceptual frameworks and even substantive models, especially
substantive models that are more abstract and broader in scope.
3
process, through the repetition of these reviews across a range of social problem areas
highly relevant to social work practice today.
After gaining an appreciation for the use of theory to conceptualize social problems,
students will have the opportunity to identify a particular social problem for advanced
study, including a review of its incidence and prevalence, its significance, and its
relevance/implications for social welfare and social intervention. To develop a broad
understanding of this problem, students will be introduced to the method of metanarrative review, and they will review literature from multiple disciplines to identify a
relevant research question. From their identification and application of one or more
theories or conceptual perspectives (grand theory, conceptual framework, or substantive
model) that frame and inform the research question and the research strategies for
addressing it, they will develop a conceptual/empirical model that explains variation in
the social problem. They will also examine how available data fit with this model
(empirical support). Students will conclude their review by offering additions and/or
refinements to the conceptual/empirical model, suggesting how these additions and/or
refinements fit with existing theories or conceptual perspectives in the area of study.
Students will also identify research questions that need to be addressed to advance
knowledge of the social problem for purposes of informing the science of intervention
practice.
REQUIRED TEXTS:
Main Text
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P., & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary human behavior
theory: A critical perspective for social work (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson. (ISBN 0-20540816-8, Paperback, $82.40)
Supplement Texts (Required)
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)
Lipper, J. (2003). Growing up fast. New York: Picador. (ISBN 0-312-42223-9,
Paperback, $10.50).
SUPPLEMENTAL READINGS (REFERENCE ONLY):
Bengtson, V. L., Acock, A. C., Allen, K. R., Dilworth-Anderson, P., & Klein, D. M.
(Eds.). (2005). Sourcebook of family theory & research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications. (ISBN 0761930655, Paperback, $64.95) (ISBN 0761930655, Hardcover,
$125.00)
Description from Sage Web Site
(http://www.sagepub.com/booksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book226285)
Sponsored by the National Council on Family Relations, the Sourcebook of Family Theory and
Research is the reference work on theory and methods for family scholars and students around the
4
world. This volume provides a diverse, eclectic, and paradoxically mature approach to theorizing
and demonstrates how the development of theory is crucial to the future of family research. An
accompanying website, http://www.ncfr.org/sourcebook, offers additional participation
and interaction in the process of doing theory and making science.
Briggs, H. E., & Rzepnicki, T. L. (Eds.). (2004). Using evidence in social work practice:
Behavioral perspectives. Chicago: Lyceum. (ISBN 0-925-06544-7, Paperback, $64.95)
RECOMMENDED READINGS:
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little,
Brown and Company. (ISBN 0-316-17232-4, Paperback, $15.57)
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.
CLASS MEEINGS:
August 25 (no class), September 1, September 8, September 15, September 22,
September 29, October 6, October 13, October 20, October 27, November 3, November
10 (no class), November 17, November 24, December 1, December 8
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 with inclement weather or threatening
and/or unsafe conditions. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT:
Class Attendance
Students are expected to attend all class sessions, and classes will begin and end on time.
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 (919-962-6542). 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 or @ unc.edu.
5
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. At the beginning of
each class session, time will be allocated to address questions about readings and
assignments.
APA Format
All written assignments should conform to the style guidelines of the American
Psychological Association (6th ed.). If you do not have a copy of this manual, I would
suggest that you buy one. 5
American Psychological Association (2009). Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC. Author. [www.apa.org/books/]
Softcover: $28.95)
ASSIGNMENTS:
Assignment 1: Article Review (Due: September 15)
Each student has been assigned an article that represents an exemplary example of
theory-driven research. All articles include data and analysis that tests an underlying
“theory of the problem.” Our main focus is on the intentional and intelligent use of theory
to frame and inform the social problem. Please prepare a 12-to-15 slide PowerPoint
presentation, including the following:
(a) Statement and significance of the problem, including a statement of the central
research question (2 slides),
(b) Theoretical perspective(s), including major assumptions and concepts (2-3 slides),
(c) Substantive/theoretical model derived for testing in the form of a figure (1 slide),
(d) Definitions of key variables in the substantive/theoretical model (2 slides),
(e) Summary results or discussion (2 slides),
(f) Discussion of results in the context of theoretical perspectives(s) (1 slide), and
(g) Implications for informing social interventions (1 slide).
The required number of slides may vary depending on the particular article. Each student
will have 30 minutes for presentation and for leading a discussion about the implications
of the article for advancing knowledge of the issue, problem, or phenomenon and
informing the design of social intervention. Please review all articles before coming to
class. Send the PowerPoint to the professor as an email attachment in advance of class.
Please bring the presentation to class on a USB flash drive or memory stick or other
portable drive. A computer/LCD will be available for all presentations.
5
I ordered my copy on August 18, 2009. At this point, APA has a backlog of orders.
6
Assignment 2: Social Work Journal Review 6 (Due: September 22)
In a recent issue of Research on Social Work Practice (Vol. 15, July 2005, pp. 310-311),
Bruce Thyer identified more than 70 journals, which he labeled as “disciplinary social
work journals published primarily in English.” He excluded “interdisciplinary” and “field
of practice” journals that may have affiliations other than social work, such as Family
Relations, Child Welfare and Journal of Community Practice. Working from his list, each
student will be assigned one journal for review. Journal assignment will be done
randomly, although students may switch assigned journals (see below). Four journal have
been selected:
Children and Schools (Sarah) (review three years: 2006, 2007, 2008)
Research on Social Work Practice (Melissa) (review two years: 2007, 2008)
Social Service Review (Kate) (review two years: 2007, 2008)
Social Work Research (Ahmed) (review three years: 2006, 2007, 2008)
Please note that the number of volumes to cover varies by journal assigned. Two of the
journals include more articles per issue than the other two.
First, count the number of empirical articles in the journal for the reference years—an
empirical article manipulates data (quantitative or qualitative) in its analysis. Do not
include book reviews, theoretical essays, or articles that pertain to a review of a particular
method (e.g., randomized experiments) or analysis procedure (structural equation
modeling). What proportion of these articles use quantitative methodologies exclusively,
what proportion use qualitative methodologies exclusively, and what proportion use a
combination of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies?
Second, of the empirical articles identified, count the number of articles that identify an
explicit underlying theoretical base (middle-range theory, formal propositional theory,
analytical typology, or conceptual framework) and makes intelligent use of the theory or
theories to frame the research question, to inform the data collection and analysis
decisions made, and to interpret the results. Please list the reported theoretical
frameworks in a summary table, including the number of articles that reference each
theory. In the table, identify the number of empirical articles that made no mention of an
explicit theory.
Third, what patterns, if any, do you see between the use of explicit theories and the type
of methodology primarily employed: quantitative, qualitative, and both quantitative and
qualitative.
Last, using Burrell & Morgan’s logical classification of major sociological paradigms or
world views, what quadrants of the matrix are most represented by the theories identified
in your review?
6
This assignment is modeled after a similar review of theory in family research. See Taylor, A. C., &
Bagd, A. (2005). The lack of explicit theory in family research: A case analysis of the Journal of Marriage
and the Family 1990-1999. In V. L. Bengton et al. (Eds), Sourcebook of family theory & research (pp. 2225). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
7
Please prepare a report of no more than 3-5 pages that summarizes your findings. Include
the following subheadings: Introduction (purpose), methods (your procedures for
conducting the review), results (include summary table), discussion (what do you make
of the results, including your conclusions), limitations, and implications for further
review. (See Taylor & Bagd, 2005, for a model.) Please send me an electronic copy of
your report and I will post it on the web site. Be prepared to present your report to the
class on September 22 (approximately 15 minutes).
Identify what you consider to be an “exemplary theory-based empirical research article”
from your journal review and be prepared to discuss this example in class. Please make a
copy of the article/manuscript for all students in class. We are particularly interested in
empirical investigations examining hypotheses from two or more competing theoretical
perspectives.
Assignment 3: Family Studies Journal Review 7 (Due: September 22)
For purposes of comparison to leading social work journals, each student will be assigned
one journal for review from the field of family studies— (all articles appearing in 2008
only). Journal assignment will be done randomly, although students may switch assigned
journals (see below). Four journals have been selected:
Journal of Marriage and Family (Sarah)
Family Relations (Melissa)
Journal of Family Issues (Ahmed)
Journal of Family Psychology (Kate)
First, count the number of empirical articles in the journal for 2008—an empirical article
manipulates data (quantitative or qualitative) in its analysis. Do not include book
reviews, theoretical essays, or articles that pertain to a review of a particular method
(e.g., randomized experiments) or analysis procedure (structural equation modeling).
What proportion of these articles use quantitative methodologies exclusively, what
proportion use qualitative methodologies exclusively, and what proportion use a
combination of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies?
Second, of the empirical articles identified, count the number of articles that identify an
explicit underlying theoretical base (middle-range theory, formal propositional theory,
analytical typology, or conceptual framework) and makes intelligent use of the theory or
theories to frame the research question, to inform the data collection and analysis
decisions made, and to interpret the results. Please list the reported theoretical
frameworks in a summary table, including the number of articles which referenced each
theory. In the table, identify the number of empirical articles that made no mention of an
explicit theory.
Be prepared to present your summary table to the class on September 22 (approximately
15 minutes). Please note that no summary report is required.
7
This assignment was modeled after a similar review of theory in family research. See Taylor, A. C., &
Bagd, A. (2005). The lack of explicit theory in family research: A case analysis of the Journal of Marriage
and the Family 1990-1999. In V. L. Bengton et al. (Eds), Sourcebook of family theory & research (pp. 2225). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
8
Identify what you consider to be an “exemplary theory-based empirical research article”
from your journal review and be prepared to discuss this example in class. Please make a
copy of the article/manuscript for all students in class. We are particularly interested in
empirical investigations examining hypotheses from two or more competing theoretical
perspectives.
Assignment 4: Conceptual Framework Presentation (October 6)
Students will be paired together to provide an overview of a conceptual framework.
Please work together to discuss the history and development of the conceptual
framework, including its principal founders/developers, basic assumptions, and core
concepts. In what areas of scholarship has this conceptual framework most often been
applied? Using Burrell & Morgan’s logical classification of major sociological paradigms
or world views, what quadrant of the matrix does this conceptual framework best fit?
Please apply the conceptual framework as a “lens” to understanding and examining
teenage pregnancy. In relationship to teenage pregnacy, what becomes the central focus
of your attention from the perspective of the conceptual framework? Please develop a
15-20 PowerPoint slide presentation for class on October 6. Please develop questions to
stimulate class discussion and integration. You have 45 minutes for presentation.
Assignment 5: “Storylines of Research” (Due: October 20)
Working from the context of your specialized area of study, please identify and discuss at
least two “meta-narratives” from the literature and explain how researchers from each
“tradition” have, in the words of Greenhalgh et al. (2005), “conceptualized, explained
and investigated [your specialized area of study] differently and used different criteria for
judging the quality of empirical work” (p. 417). In this section of the report, try to
capture what Greenhalgh et al. describe as “the prevailing language and imagery used by
scientists to ‘to tell the story’ of their work” (p. 420). Choose one of these “traditions”
and describe the “storyline of research” in the specialized area and key elements of the
research paradigm (conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and instrumental). Identify at
least one example of pioneering and seminal theoretical and empirical work, including
the names and affiliations of scholars associated with this work, that significantly
advanced the work of scholars in that particular tradition and that may have had
significant implications for the work of researchers in other traditions or for the field at
large. In addition, please identify at least one “breakaway” researcher whose work
significantly advanced or challenged the prevailing paradigm within this tradition.
9
Introduction (1/2 page)
Research Question (1/4 page)
Purpose of Assignment (1/4 page)
Method (1/2 page)
Results
o Meta-Narratives: Two Research Traditions (1 page)
o Prevailing language and imagery
o A Storyline of Research (3 page)
o The storyline
o Key elements of the research paradigm:
 Conceptual
 Theoretical
 Methodological
 Instrumental
o Example of pioneering and seminal work
o Example of a “breakaway” researcher
Conclusions (3/4 page)
Lessons Learned (1/4 page)
Prepare a PowerPoint summary of your paper (8-10 slides) to present in class (30 minutes
for presentation).
Assignment 6: Class Presentation (Due: October 27 to November 24)
From October 27 to November 24, we will cover four social problems: school success,
marital happiness, crime and delinquency, and mundane extreme environment stress.
Each student will be assigned one of the four social problems for presentation. Topics for
each social problem include: statement and significance of the social problem (15
minutes), substantive model (30 minutes), empirical support for the substantive model
(30 minutes), and conceptual framework(s) that inform the substantive model (45
minutes). Students will be responsible for summarizing the assigned reading(s) and
facilitating discussion around topics. The amount of time allocated to topics will vary
from week to week depending on the number of readings/reference materials and their
relative importance to the discussion.
All students are requested to review all assigned readings/reference materials for each
class session. Such preparation will facilitate the work of the presenter. In preparing for
these classes, student participants are encouraged to consider the following questions:
a. What is the level of congruence and coherence among the statement and signficance
of the problem, the substantive model, the empirical support for the substantive
model, and the conceptual framework(s) for informing the substantive model?
b. What are your suggestions for refining the substantive model so that it better explains
the phenomenon or problem and/or fits with the data, including the integration of
alternative substantive models and/or conceptual framworks?
c. What research questions need to be addressed to advance knowledge of the issue,
problem or phenomenon?
d. What research methods could be used to address those research questions?
10
e. What are the implications of the empirical research for interventions at the policy,
program, or direct practice level?
Presenters will have approximate 120 minutes to work with. Please use the following
outline to frame and inform your presentation:
Statement and significance of the problem: What is nature of the social problem,
including a review of its incidence and/or prevalence? What are the implications of the
social problem and the short- and long-term consequences of not attending to it for
individuals, families, communities and society? What research questions appear most
pressing at the current time? Please identify and discuss at least one Web-based resource
for further information about the statement and significance of the social problem.
Substantive model: What basic assumptions and concepts anchor the substantive model?
What, if any, conceptual frameworks are identified as informing the substantive model?
How does the substantive model explain variation in the social problem? If possible,
please represent this explanation in the form of a diagram (middle range theory,
analytical typology) or a conceptual/empirical model (causal model). What research
questions are most pressing from the perspective of the substantive model?
Empirical support for the substantive model: How effectively do the authors use the
substantive model to build a context for the research? What is the degree of fit between
the research design and data collection/analysis strategies and the substantive model? To
what extent were hypotheses derived from the substantive model supported by the
findings? In other words, please evaluate the model’s precision of prediction/the accuracy
of explantion. What possible refinements to the substantive model are indicated by the
results?
Conceptual framework for informing the substantive model: Please discuss the history
and development of the conceptual framework, including its principal founders/
developers, basic assumptions, and core concepts. In what areas of scholarship has this
theory most often been applied? Using Burrell & Morgan’s logical classification of major
sociological paradigms or world views, what quadrant of the matrix does this conceptual
framework best fit? What is the link between each conceptual model and the substantive
model? In other words, what assumptions and concepts from the conceptual framework
do you see reflected in the substantive model? If possible, please show these linkages via
a conceptual diagram.
A PowerPoint presentation summary (20-25 slides) is required for distribution to all class
participants, including any diagrams, tables, figures or graphs that may facilitate review
and understanding of the reading. Please develop questions to stimulate class discussion
and integration. Please include any references not included on the syllabus.
Evaluation Criteria for Class Presentations:

Demonstrates understanding of assumptions/concepts/findings from the assigned
readings/reference materials

Effectively communicates ideas/findings—free of ambiguity
11

Integrates readings/reference materials in the context of other topics (e.g., discusses
support for the substantive model in the context of an understanding of the
substantive model)

Stimulates class discussion and integration

PowerPoint presentation (20-25 slides) that effectively summarizes the
reading/reference materials.
1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Very Good, and 5 = Clearly Exceptional
Assignment 7: Qualifying Paper (Due: Exam Date)
The major deliverable for the course is the preparation of an abbreviated version of the
qualifying paper (approximately 20 double-spaced pages, excluding references, diagrams,
and appendices). Although students may evolve from their original intent during their
doctoral studies (this is not unusual), the requirements and format of the qualifying paper
will remain the same. Consequently, this assignment provides a “dress rehearsal” for
completion of the qualifying paper, which has been modified in outline to fit the design
of the course. (Attachment A includes the description of the qualifying paper from the
doctoral program manual.)
Students will work on this paper during the course of the semester. Your work on the
“stories of research” paper will provide a foundation for your work on this assignment.
Beginning in November, time will be set aside at the end of classes to discuss progress on
this assignment. Please use the following headings in preparation of the paper. Page
number guidelines are offered. For a good example of this qualifying paper assignment,
see Hoffman, K. L., & Edwards, J. N. (2004). An integrated theoretical model of sibling
violence and abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 185-200 (see assignments for Week
3, September 8).
a. Introduction. Provide an opening that introduces the topic, identifies the focus of your
review, including the population of interest, and provides the reader with a roadmap
for your review. (1.5 pages)
b. Statement of the social problem. Describe/illustrate the phenomenon or problem.
Present what is known about the scope or the problem (e.g., the incidence and
prevalence of the problem). (1.5 pages)
c. Significance of the problem. What relevance/implication does the social problem
have for social welfare and social intervention. (1 page)
d. Background review. What is currently known and understood about the phenomenon,
problem or issue? Identify unresolved research issues (gaps in knowledge, unresolved
puzzles, measurement problems, research design/methodological issues, analysis
limitations) (3 pages)
e. Research question. Specify a research question for framing and informing your
review. Discuss this research question in the context of the backgroup review, and
provide definitions of key concepts. (1.5 page)
f. Theoretical perspective. A presentation and critical analysis of a theory or conceptual
perspective that frames and informs the research question and the research strategies
12
g.
h.
i.
j.
for addressing it. This analysis may involve the use of a grand theory (e.g., Piaget’s
theory of cognitive development), a conceptual framework (e.g., social exchange
theory), and/or a substantive model (e.g., social development model). Please note that
you may use more than one theory or conceptual perspective, if you so choose.
Discuss the conceptualization of the research question from the perspective of this
theory or conceptual perspective. In other words, rather than review the theory per se,
apply the theory to your topic at hand, although it is important to specify key
assumptions and concepts from the theory that frame and inform your analysis. (3
pages)
Theoretical model. Include the development of a heuristic in the form of a
conceptual/empirical model that explains variation in the social problem. Identify the
major components and variables of this model in a table and provide a diagram that
specifies the proposed linkages among the components. Discuss each component of
this model, as well as proposed linkages among the components. (3 pages)
Empirical support. How does the theoretical model fit with the available data?
Evaluate the empirical support for the theoretical model. (3 pages)
Conclusion: Provide suggestions for refining the theoretical model so that it better
addresses the research question and fits with the data, including the integration of
alternative theories or conceptual perspectives for examining the social problem. (2
pages)
References. Format all references using APA guidelines.
Prepare a PowerPoint summary of your paper (10-12 slides) to present in class (30
minutes for presentation). (Due: December 1 or December 8)
Assignment 8: Discussant Comments (Due: December 1 or December 8)
Two students will be asked to play the role of lead discussants on each student’s
PowerPoint summary of the qualifying paper (10 minutes). Consequently, each student
will serve as a discussant on two PowerPoint summaries. These assignments will be
made in advance based on students’ areas of expertise. Discussants will need a copy of
the PowerPoint Presentation at least 24 hours in advance of class. Discussants are asked
to submit a one page, single-spaced summary of their main points—discussants may use
a bulleted format. We will allocate an additional 10 minutes for general discussion.
GRADING SYSTEM:
The core assignments and their relative weights in the grading system are listed below:
1. Article Review (9/15)
2. Social Work Journal Review (9/22)
3. Family Studies Journal Review (9/22)
4. Conceptual Framework Presentation (10/6)
5. Storylines of Research (10/20)
6. Class Presentations (10/27 to 11/24)
7. Qualifying Paper (12/1 or 12/8)
8. Discussant Comments (12/1 or 12/8)
9. Class Participation
13
5.0%
7.5%
5.0%
7.5%
20.0%
20.0%
25.0%
5.0%
5.0%
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 unless approved for late delivery in advance of the due date.
POLICY ON ACADEMIC DISHONESTY:
All academic work submitted by students will be conducted within the letter and spirit of
the Honor Code, which is described in The SSW Manual and the Graduate School
Record. 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 (//signed//) 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.
POLICY ON ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
Students with disabilities that affect their participation in the course and who wish to
have special accommondations should contact the University’s Disabilities Services and
provide documentation of their disability. Diabilities 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.
POLICY ON THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES IN THE CLASSROOM
Computers and other electronic devices may be used in the classroom only for purposes
of presentation and note taking. The use of electronic devices for non-class related
activities (e.g., checking email, playing games) is prohibited.
14
COURSE OUTLINE AND READINGS 8
Week 1: August 25
No Class
Week 2: September 1
Introductions and Syllabus Review
Class Discussion
Please describe your perspective toward conceptualizing social problems to inform
interventions. What particular theories, models, or empirical findings have most
influenced your perspective? The same for people—what theorists, researchers, or
practitioners have had a particular impact on your perspective? How do you present
yourself and your scholarly work from a theoretical point of view? What assumptions and
concepts anchor your perspective and provide coherence to your presentation of self and
ideas in professional exchanges?
Week 3: September 8
Introduction to Theory
Preparation Assignment
Please access SAMHSA’s (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration)
National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (http://nrepp.samhsa.gov).
From the [Find Interventions] link, please identify an evidence-based program/practice
for review in class (10 minutes). Note that you may click on [View All]. Why did you
choose this particular program? How intuitive is the suggested approach to intervention
in the context of your own natural inclinations?
From an earlier website (CSAP’S Western Center for the Application of Prevention
Technologies), the following statement was made:
“Published literature on the program should provide a description of its theoretical
underpinnings; if not, an inquiry to the program developer may yield this information.
This may or may not include a logic model that describes in linear fashion how the
program works. The theory and logic model are not in themselves core components of a
program, but they can help identify what the core components are and how to measure
them. This step also identifies core values or assumptions about the program that can be
used to help persuade community stakeholders of the program's fit and importance for
their environment.”
In the context of the program/practice that you selected above, how explicit is this
underlying theory or logic model?
Preparation Assignment
8
* = Priority reading.
15
In 1979, Gibson Burrell and Gareth Morgan published a highly influential text entitled
Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. In this text, they presented four
paradigms for organizing approaches to understanding organizations. How did Burrell
and Morgan define a “paradigm,” and what were the two dimensions that formed their
logical typology? Please do a web-based search to see what you can learn about Gibson
Burrell and Gareth Morgan’s work . Also, see Martin & O’Connor (1989) below.
Required Readings
*Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 1: The Nature of Theories
*Marsh, J. C. (2004). Theory-driven versus theory-free research in empirical social work
practice. In H. E. Briggs & T. L. Rzepnicki (Eds.), Using evidence in social work
practice: Behavioral perspectives (pp. 20-35). Chicago: Lyceum Books, Inc. (On
Reserve)
Doherty, W. J., Boss, P. G., LaRossa, R., Schumm, W. R., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1993).
Family theories and methods: A contextual approach. In P. G. Boss et al. (Eds.), Source
of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 3-30). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications. (Focus on “Definitions and Types of Family Theories,” Goals of
Social Science Theories,” and “Evaluating Social Science Theories” [pp. 19-26]). (On
Reserve)
Bengtson, V. L., Acock, A. C., Allen, K. R., Dilworth-Anderson, P., & Klein, D. M.
(Eds.). (2005). Sourcebook of family theory & research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications. (pp. 3-22) (On Reserve)
*Martin, P. Y., O’Connor, G. G. (1989). The social environment: Open systems
applications. New York: Longman. (Chapter 3: The Philosophical Foundations of Open
Systems Theory) (On Reserve)
Kazdin, A. E. (1997). A model for developing effective treatments: Progression and
interplay of theory, research, and practice. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26, 114129.
Feature Articles
*Hoffman, K. L., & Edwards, J. N. (2004). An integrated theoretical model of sibling
violence and abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 185-200.
*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.
Supplemental Readings
16
Thyer, D., & Morris, T. (1997). Is it possible to know when theories are obsolete? In M.
Bloom & W. C. Klein (Eds.), Controversial issues in human behavior in social
environment (pp. 64-80). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (On Reserve)
Assignment 1 (see class assignments): Article Review (Due: September 15)
Week 4: September 15
Theory-driven Research: Exemplary Examples
Required Readings
Cast, A. D. (2004). Role-taking and interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67, 296309. (Kate)
Yoshihama, M., Hammock, A. C., & Horrocks, J. (2006). Intimate partner violence,
welfare receipt, and health status of low-income African American women: A life course
analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 95- 109. (Melissa)
Lee, J-S., & Bowen, N. K. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the
achievement gap among elementary school children. American Education Research
Journal, 43, 193-218. (Sarah)
Cantillon, D. (2006). Community social organization, parents, and peers as mediators of
perceived neighborhood block characteristics on delinquent and prosocial activities.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 111-127. (Ahmed)
Optional Readings
Van Dorn, R. A., Bowen, G. L., & Blau, J. R. (2006). The impact of community diversity
and consolidated inequality on dropping out of high school. Family Relations, 55, 105118.
Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (2006). Sex differences in the effect of education on
depression: Resource multiplication or resource substitution? Social Science & Medicine,
63, 1400-1413.
Assignment 2: Social Work Journal Review (Due: September 22)
Assignment 3: Family Journal Review (Due: September 22)
17
Week 5: September 22
Theory-based Research in Social Work
Preparation assignment: What do you consider to be criteria for exemplary social work
research?
Required Reading
Craig, C. D., Cook, P. G., & Fraser, M. W. (2004). Research awards in the Society for
Social Work and Research, 1996-2000. Research on Social Work Practice, 14, 51-56.
The Search for Theory in Social Work Research: A Social Identity Perspective
Visit by members 2007 SOWO 900 Cohort: Carrie Pettus Davis, Tiffany Washington,
Ijeoma Nwabuzor (9:45-10:30 AM)
Theory and Publications in Social Work and Family-Related Journals
Assignment 2 Review: Social Work Journal Review
Assignment 3 Review: Family Journal Review
Supplemental Readings
Gilgun, J. F. (2005). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of Family
Psychology, 19(1), 40-50.
Matthews, S. H. (2005). Crafting qualitative research articles on marriages and families.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 799-808.
White, L. (2005). Writes of passage: Writing an empirical journal article. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 67, 791-798.
Week 6: September 29
Conceptualizing Social Problems: Former SOWO 900 Students’ Journey
Visit by members of 2008 SOWO 900 Cohort(9:15-10:00 AM)
Conceptualizing Social Problems to Inform Interventions:
An Example
Video
Growing up fast (30 minutes)
Required Reading
18
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)
Supplemental Reading
Franklin, C., Corcoran, J., & Harris, M. B. (2004). Risk and protective factors for
adolescent pregnancy: Bases for effective intervention. In M. W. Fraser (Ed.), Risk and
resilience in childhood (2nd ed., pp. 281-313). Washington, DC: NASW Press. (On
Reserve)
Participation Assignment:
Theory Supporting the Taking Charge Curriculum. Each student has been assigned a
theory from the Taking Charge manual for presentation and discussion (15 minutes):
Developmental Framework (Ahmed)
Solution-Focused, Brief Therapy Framework (Kate)
Social Learning and Cognitive-Behavioral Theories (Sarah)
Social Learning Theory
Self-efficacy Theory
Transactional Coping Theory (Melissa)
Social Problem-Solving Model (Kate)
Assignment 4: Conceptual Framework Presentation (Due: October 6)
Week 7: October 6
Continued Discussion from September 29
Required Reading
Lipper, J. (2003). Growing up fast. New York: Picador. (ISBN 0-312-42223-9).
[Paperback]
Conceptual Frameworks
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 9: Symbolic Interaction (Melissa & Sarah)
Chapter 4: Theories of Empowerment (Kate & Ahmed)
19
Week 8: October 13
Storylines of Research
Required Readings
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., Kyriakidou, O., & Peacock, R.
(2005). Storylines of research in diffision of innovation: A meta-narrative approach to
systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 61, 417-430.
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., Kyriakidou, O., & Peacock, R.
(2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and
recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82, 581-629.
Storyline of Research: An Example
Dr. Bowen Presents
Military Family Resiliency and Community Capacity Building
in the Shadows of War
Required Readings 9
*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.
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. In S. Stith & D. Tritt (Eds.),
Prevention of intimate partner violence (pp. 203-227). New York: Haworth Press.
Bowen, G. L., Mancini, J. A., Martin, J. A., Ware, W. B., & Nelson, J. P. (2003). An
empirical test of a community practice model for promoting family adaptation. Family
Relations, 52, 33-52.
Assignment 5: “Storylines of Research” (Due: October 20)
9
These readings will provide a broader perspective on Dr. Bowen’s presentation. They do not require a
comprehensive or detailed review.
20
Week 9: October 20
“Storylines of Research” (Continued Discussion from October 13)
Preparation Assignment
Identify what you consider to be an exemplary theory-based empirical research example
in your area of study and be prepared to discuss this example in class. Please bring the
article/manuscript to class. We are particularly interested in empirical investigations
examining hypotheses from two or more competing theoretical perspectives.
Preparation Assignment (Optional)
Interview with a Scholar in the Specialized Area: Develop a short interview guide and
interview a research scholar who is conducting research in your specialized area and who
has published the results of her/his research in a peer-review journal. Ask her/him about
the use of theory to conceptualize the social problem and to inform the research design.
Preparation Assignment (Optional)
Interview with a Practitioner in the Specialized Area: Develop a short interview guide
and interview a social worker who is practicing in your specialized area. Ask her/him
about the use of theory to conceptualize the social problem and to inform practice
strategies, including the use of evidence-based practice strategies.
Storylines of Research
Assignment Presentations (30-minute PowerPoint Presentations)
(Ahmed, Melissa, Kate, Sarah)
Class 10: October 27
School Success (Kate)
Statement and Signficance of the Social Problem
Center for Child and Family Policy (2008). Dropout prevention: Strategies for improving
high school graduation rates (A Briefing report prepared for the North Carolina Family
Impact Seminar). Durham, NC: Author.
Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing our future: How minority
youth are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil
Rights Project at Harvard University.
21
Substantive Model
*Richman, J. M., Bowen, G. L., & Woolley, M. E. (2004). School failure: An ecointeractional developmental perspective. In M. W. Frasier (Ed.), Risk and resilience in
childhood: An ecological perspective (2nd ed.) (pp. 133–160). Washington, DC: NASW
Press.
Bowen, G. L. (2009). Preventing school dropout: The Eco-Interactional Developmental
Model of School Success. The Prevention Research, 16(3), 3-8.
Jozefowicz-Simbeni, D. M. H. (2008). An ecological and development perspective on
dropout risk factors in early adolescence: Role of school workers in dropout prevention
efforts. Children & Schools, 30, 49-62.
Empirical Support for Substantive Model
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.
*Woolley, M. E., & Bowen, G. L. (2007). In the context of risk: Supportive adults and
the school engagement of middle school students. Family Relations, 56, 92-104.
Woolley, M. W., Kol, K. L., & Bowen, G. L. (2009). The social context of school success for
Latino middle school students: Direct and indirect influence of teachers, family, and friends.
Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 43-70.
Conceptual Frameworks that inform Substantive Model
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 2: Systems Theory
Chapter 7 Theories of Life Span Development (pp. 198-208 only)
Bowen, G. L. (2010). Social organization and schools: A general systems theory
perspective. In P. Allen-Meares, Social work services in schools (6th ed., pp. 48-64).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
22
Class 11: November 3
Marital Happiness (Melissa)
Statement and Significance of the Social Problem
*Proulx, C. M., Helms, H. M., & Buehler, C. (2007). Marital quality and personal wellbeing: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 576-593.
Dush, C. M. K., Taylor, M. G., & Kroeger, R. A. (2008). Marital happiness and
psychological well-being. Family Relations, 57, 211-226.
Hawkins, D. N., & Booth, A. (2005). Unhappily ever after: Effects of long-term, lowquality marriages on well-being. Social Forces, 84, 445-465.
Substantive Model
Levinger, G. (1965) Marital cohesiveness and dissolution. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 27, 19-28.
Empirical Support for Substantive Model
Previti, D., & Amato, P. R. (2003). Why stay married? Rewards, barriers, and marital
stability. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 561-573.
Conceptual Frameworks that inform Substantive Model
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 11: Behaviorism, Social Learning, and Exchange Theory
Bowen, G. L. (1991). Navigating the marital journey. New York: Praeger. (Chapter 3)
Class 12: November 10
No Class (National Council on Family Relations Conference)
23
Class 13: November 17
Crime and Delinquency (Ahmed)
Statement and Significance of the Social Problem
Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation (2004). Crime in the United States
2004. Washington, DC: Author. [Download 11 July 2006] from
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/
Substantive Model
Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. 10
Empirical Support for Substantive Model
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent
crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 1–7.
Cantillon, D., Davidson, W. S., & Schweitzer, J. H. (2003). Measuring community social
organization: Sense of community as a mediator in social disorganization theory. Journal
of Criminal Justice, 31, 321–339.
Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing socialdisorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 774-802.
Conceptual Frameworks that inform Substantive Model*
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 3: Conflict Theories
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.
10
See Canillon et al. (2003) and Sampson & Groves (1989) for a review of social disorganization theory.
Shaw and McKay (1942) is out-of-print.
24
Class 14: November 24
Mundane Extreme Environment Stress:
The Case for African American Family Functioning (Kate)
Statement and Significance of the Social Problem*
Hunter, A. G. (2006). Teaching the classics in family studies: E. Franklin Frazier’s The
Negro Family in the United States. Family Relations, 55, 80-92.
Substantive Framework or Perspective
*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.
Patterson, J. M. (2002). Integrating family resilience and family stress theory. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 64, 349-360.
Supplemental Readings and Resources
Murry, V. M. (2000). Challenges and life experiences of Black American families. In P.C
McKenry & S. J. Price (Eds.), Families & change: Coping with stressful events and
transitions (pp. 333-358). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Video: McCubbin, H. I. (2001). Family Stress, Ethnicity & Resiliency: Dangers and
Opportunities in the Advancement of Theory, Research & Practice. [Marie Peters Award
Address]
Empirical Support for Substantive Model*
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.
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 that inform Substantive Model*
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 5: Theories of Assimilation, Acculturation, and Bicultural Socialization and
Ethnic Minority Identity
Chapter 10: Phenomenology, Social Constructionism, and Hermeneutics (For class
review only)
25
Class 15: December 1
Student Qualifying Paper Presentations
(Ahmed, Sarah, Melissa)
Class 16: December 8
Student Qualifying Paper Presentations
(Kate)
Toward an Integrative Perspective
Preparation Assignment
Please describe your understanding of and perspective toward conceptualizing social
problems to inform interventions at the beginning of the semester. How, if at all, has your
perspective been influenced by your readings and experiences this semester? Of all the
theory and research that we have reviewed, what particular concepts, assumptions, and
findings have most influenced your perspective? The same for people—what theorists
and researchers have had a particular impact on your perspective? What readings do you
consider as pivotal for your experience this semester? Please be prepared to discuss with
another student, as well as share with the class.
Required Reading
Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior
Theory: A critical perspective for social work.
Chapter 13: Application of theories
Next Steps: Taking Charge of your Program of Study
Final Exam
Qualifying Paper Due
26
Attachment A
Process for the Qualifying Examinations
http://ssw.unc.edu/doctoral/curriculum/qualrate.html
Content of the written examination
The doctoral qualifying paper will consist of a single paper that demonstrates the
capacity of the student to integrate information from research, relevant literature, and
course materials in order to frame the statement of the problem, literature review and
theoretical frameworks sections of the dissertation. The paper will formulate an issue or
problem of importance for social work and identify a specific issue for research. The
qualifying paper will include a critical examination of problem to be investigated and
follow a sequence of steps that provide a careful review and analysis of the research that
has been conducted on that problem, the theoretical frameworks that have attempted to
explain the problem, relevant interventions that have addressed the problem, and research
strategies that have been used to examine the problem. The qualifying paper is to include
at least the following sections:
a)
Statement of the research problem and its significance
b)
Critical review of previous research addressing the problem or issue
c)
Critical analysis of theoretical frameworks or perspectives for examining
this problem, selecting 2-4 major theoretical perspectives
d)
Critical review of intervention programs, strategies, or approaches in the
problem area
e)
Critical review of research methodologies or approaches for examining
this problem or of the important methodological issues in doing research
in this area of interest (roughly three approaches or issues, if appropriate)
f)
Conclusions and implications.
The qualifying paper should be a disciplined and focused analysis of the relevant
scholarship involved in your qualifying area. The paper should be reasonably
comprehensive, but must also be disciplined -- the final product should provide a
foundation for the dissertation research, but may contain material that is not necessarily
to be included in the dissertation proposal. The anticipated length of the qualifying paper
is to approximately 50-60 pages, including references. This means that a careful
synthesis is necessary rather than an extensive narrative description.
This proposed outline is to be applied flexibly to fit the particular research problem and approach of each dissertation.
27
Criteria for evaluating the written exam
a)
It should demonstrate critical thinking.
b)
It should include content addressing oppressed populations.
c)
The review of literature should show evidence of the use of empirical
data.
d)
It should be carefully and clearly written, with style and citations
consistent with the APA style manual.
The student and their qualifying examination committee should review the Written
Qualifying Examination Rating Form for specific guidance on the criteria that will be
used to evaluate the quality of the qualifying paper. This Rating Form offers criteria that
can be used for each section of the qualifying paper and provides the committee members
with a simple tool for assessing their ratings of the paper and providing recommendations
to students as they prepare their paper for the examination.
The qualifying examination paper does not have to be publishable at the time of the
examination. At some time before completion of the dissertation, the student is strongly
encouraged to revise the examination paper into a review article for publication and to
submit it to a refereed journal. Additionally, students are encouraged but not required to
make a public presentation on their qualifying paper; this may be at the school or at a
professional meeting.
28
Attachment B
Resource/Reference Materials
Science and Social Work Scholarship
PBS Home Video (2000). The first measured century: The other way of looking at
American history. (Running Time: 3 hours) 11
Proceedings of the Conference on Improving the Teaching of Evidence-Based Practice in
Social Work, Sponsored by the University of Texas School of Social Work, Austin,
Texas, October 16-18, 2006. (Special Issue of Research on Social Work Practice, 17,
September 2007)
Classic Theory Texts from my Library
Adams, B. N., & Sydie, R. A. (2001). Sociological theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine
Forge Press.
Boss, P. G., Doherty, W. J., LaRossa, R., Schumm, W. R., & Steinmetz, S. K. (Eds.).
(1993). Source of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 3-30).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Theories Covered: Symbolic Interactionism; Structural-Functionism; Family
Development Theory; Systems Theory; Social Conflict Theories of the Family; Exchange
and Resource Theories; Human Ecology Theory; The Life Course Perspective; Family
Therapy Theory; Social-Cogntive-Behavioral Psychology; Communication Theory;
Feminist Theories; Theories for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Families;
Phenomenology, Ethnomethodology, and Family Discourse; Biosocial Perspectives on
the Family.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature
and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (Ed.). (2005). Making human being human: Bioecological
perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Note. This is an example of deductive theory around specific substantive topic, such as
marital satisfaction and ease of role transition.
Burr, W. R., Hill, R., Nye, F. I., & Reiss, I. L. (Eds). (1979). Contemporary theories
about the family (Vol. 1): Research-based theories. New York: The Free Press.
Note. This is an example of deductive theory around specific substantive topic, such as
social processes and power in families.
11
The video will be placed on reserve for viewing.
29
Burr, W. R., Hill, R., Nye, F. I., & Reiss, I. L. (Eds.). (1979). Contemporary theories
about the family (Vol. 2): General theories/theoretical orientations. New York: The Free
Press.
Theories Covered: Choice, Exchange, and the Family; Symbolic Interaction and the
Family; The General Systems Approach to the Family; Conflict Theory and the Study of
Marriage and the Family; Toward a Phenomenological Sociology of Family: A
Programmatic Essay.
Cook, K. S. (Ed.). (1987). Social exchange theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ingoldsby, B. B., Smith, S. R., & Miller, J. E. (2004). Exploring family theories. Los
Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.
Theories Covered: Structural/Functionalism Theory, Family Development Theory,
Exchange Theory, Symbolic Interactionism Theory, Conflict Theory, Family Stress
Theory, Family Systems Theory, Feminist Family Theory, Biosocial Theory.
Newman, B. M., & Newman, P. R. (2007). Theories of human development. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Theories Covered: Evolutionary Theory, Psychosexual Theory, Cognitive Developmental
Theory, Learning Theories, Social Role Theory, Life Course Theory, Psychosocial
Theory, Cognitive Social-Historical Theory, Dynamic Systems Theory.
Salkind, N. J., (2004). An introduction to theories of human development. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Approaches Covered: The Maturational and Biological Approaches, The Psychodynamic
Approach, The Behavioral Perspective, The Cognitive-Developmental View.
White, J. M. (2005). Advancing family theories. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
White, J. M., & Klein, D. M. (2002). Family theories (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: CA:
Sage.
Theories Covered: The Social Exchange and Choice Framework, The Symbolic
Interaction Framework, The Family Life Course Developmental Framework, The
Systems Framework, The Conflict Framework, the Feminist Framework, The Ecological
Framework.
Note. Good supplemental reading for main theory text: Robbins et al.
Winton, C. A. (1995). Frameworks for studying families. Guilford, CT: The Dushkin
Publishing Group, Inc.
Theories Covered: Developmental Theories, Structure-Functional Theory, Conflict
Theory, Social Exchange Theory, Symbolic Interaction Theory.
Theory Reviews
Family Development Theory
Aldous, J. (1990). Family development and the life course: Two perspectives on family
change. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 571-583.
30
Life Course Theory
Elder, G. H., Jr. (1998). Life course theory and human development. Sociological
Analysis, 1(2), 1-12.
Elder, G. H., Jr. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69,
1-12.
Elder. G. H., Jr. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life
course. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 4-15.
Elder, G. H., Jr., Johnson, M. K., & Crosnoe, R. (2003). The emergence and development
of Life Course Theory. In J. Mortimer & M. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the Life
Course (pp. 3-19). New York: Plenum. (see principles of Life Course Theory, pp. 1-14)
Shanahan, M. J. (2000). Pathways to adulthood in changing societies: Variability and
mechanisms in the life course theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 667-692.
Social Work Theory Texts from my Library
Saleeby, D. (2001). Human behavior and social environments: A biopsychosocial
approach. New York: Columbia University Press.
Theories Covered: Part/Whole Analysis, Psychodynamic Theory, Ecological Theory,
Cognitive Theory, Radical/Critical Theory
Substantive Models: Classics
Constantine, L. L. (1986). Family paradigms: The practice of theory in family theory.
New York: Guilford Press. (out of print)
Olson, D. H., & McCubbin, H. I. (1983). Families: What makes them work. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage. (Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems)
Qualifying Paper Examples from the Published Literature
Hoffman, K. L., & Edwards, J. N. (2004). An integrated theoretical model of sibling
violence and abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 185-200.
Townsend, A. L., Biegel, D. E., Ishler, K. J., Wieder, B., & Rini, A. (2006). Families of
persons with substance use and mental disorders: A literature review and conceptual
framework. Family Relations, 55, 473-486.
Examples of Theoretically-informed Literature Reviews
Arditti, J. (2005). Families and incarceration: An ecological approach. Families in
Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 86, 251-260.
31
Fraser, M. W., Richman, J. M., & Galinsky, M. J. (1999). Risk, protection, and
resilience: Toward a conceptual framework for social work practice. Social Work
Research, 23, 131-144.
Jozefowicz-Simbeni, D. M. H. (2008). An ecological and development perspective on
dropout risk factors in early adolescence: Role of school workers in dropout prevention
efforts. Children & Schools, 30, 49-62.
Role of Theory in Social Work Research: Debates
Gomory, T. (2001). A fallibilistic response to Thyer's theory of theory-free empirical
research in social work practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 26-50.
Marsh, J. C. (2004). Theory-driven versus theory-free research in empirical social work
practice. In H. E. Briggs, & T. L. Rzepnicki (Eds.), Using evidence in social work
practice: Behavioral perspectives (pp. 20). Chicago: Lyceum Books.
Munro, E. (2002). The role of theory in social work research: A further contribution to
the debate. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(3), 461-470.
Thyer, B. A. (2001). What is the role of theory in research on social work practice?
Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 9-25.
Examples of Theoretically-informed Published Empirical Articles
in Social Work Journals
Ecological Theory
Powers, J. D., Bowen, G. L., & Rose, R. A. (2005). Using social environment assets to
identify intervention strategies for promoting school success. Children & Schools, 27,
177–185.
Voisin, D. R., DiClemente, R. J., Salazar, L. F., Crosby, R. A., & Yarber, W. L. (2006).
Ecological factors associated with STD risk behavior among detained female adolescents.
Social Work, 51, 71-79.
Examples of Theoretically-informed Published Empirical Articles
in Other Journals
Developmental Theory
Huston, A. C., & Aronson, S. R. (2005). Mothers’ time with infant and time in
employment as predictors of mother-child relationships and children’s early
development. Child Development, 76, 467-482. (Note: Reubin Hill Award Winner for
2005)
Ecological Theory
32
Crosnoe, R. (2004). Social capital and the interplay of families and schools. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 66, 267-280.
Gutman, L. M., McLoyd, V. C. & Tokoyawa, T. (2005). Financial strain, neighborhood
stress, parenting behaviors, and adolescent adjustment in urban African American
families. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 15, 425-449.
Volling, B. L. (2005). The transition to siblinghood: A developmental ecological systems
perspective and directions for future research. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 542549.
Woolley, M. E., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2006). Protective family factors in the context of
neighborhood: Promoting positive school outcomes. Family Relations, 55, 93-104.
Feminist Theory
Schubert, E. E., Protinsky, H. O., & Viers, D. (2002). Levels of differentiation and
marital egalitarianism in men who batter. Journal of Family Theory, 14, 1-19.
Human Capital Theory
Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (2006). Sex differences in the effect of education on
depression: Resource multiplication or resource substitution? Social Science & Medicine,
63, 1400-1413.
Social Exchange Theory
Van de Rijt, A., & Mucy, M. W. (2006). Power and dependence in intimate exchange.
Social Forces, 84, 1455-1470.
Life Course Theory
Amato, P. R., & Sobolewski, J. N. (2001). The effects of divorce and marital discord on
adult children's psychological well being. American Sociological Review, 66, 900-921.
Amato, P. R., & Cheadle, J. (2005). The long reach of divorce: Divorce and child wellbeing across three generations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 191-206.
Crosnoe, R., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (2004). From childhood to the later years: Pathways of
human development. Research on Aging, 26, 623-654.
Dennissen, J. J. A., Asendorpf, J. B., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2007). Childhood
personality predicts long-term trajectories of shyness and aggressiveness in the context of
demographic transitions of emerging adulthood. Journal of Personality, 76, 67-100.
Umberson, D., Williams, K., Powers, D. A., Chen, M. D., & Campbell, A. M. (2005). As
good as it gets? A life course perspective on marital quality. Social Forces, 84, 493-511.
33
Wickrama, K. A. S., Conger, R. D., Wallace, L. E., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (2003). Linking
early social risks to impaired physical health during the transition to adulthood. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 61-74.
Social and Cultural Capital Theories
Henly, J. R., Danziger, S. K., & Offer, S. (2005). The contribution of social support to the
material well-being of low-income families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 122140. (SSWR Award Winner for 2006)
Lee, J-S., & Bowen, N. K. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the
achievement gap among elementary school children. American Education Research
Journal, 43, 193-218.
Structural Effects (Radical Structuralist Paradigm)
Van Dorn, R. A., Bowen, G. L., & Blau, J. R. (2006). The impact of community diversity
and consolidated inequality on dropping out of high school. Family Relations, 55, 105118.
Symbolic Interactionism
Cast, A. D. (2004). Role-taking and interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67, 296309.
Cook, W. L., & Douglas, E. M. (1998). The looking-glass self in family context: A social
relations analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 12, 299-309.
Edwards, M L. K. (2004). We’re decent people: Constructing and managing family
identity in rural working-class communities. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 515529. [Winner of 2004 Anselm Strauss Award]
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
Examples of Theoretically-informed Social Intervention Models
Communities that Care
Hawkins, J. D. (1999). Preventing crime and violence through communities that care.
European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 7, 443-458.
Making Choices
Fraser, M. W., Nash, J. K., Galinsky, M. J., & Darwin, K. M. (2000). Making choices:
Social problem-solving skills for children. Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Fraser, M. W., Galinsky, M. J., Smokowski, P. R., Day, S. H, Terzian, M. A., Rose, R.
A., & Guo, S. (2005). Social information-processing skills training to promote social
34
competence and prevent aggressive behavior in the third grade. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1045-1055.
Lemerise, E., & Arsenio, W. (2000). An integrated model of emotion processes and
cognition in social information processing. Child Development, 71, 107-118.
MAP: A Corporate Support Program for Couples
Bowen, G. L. (1991). Navigating the marital journey. MAP: A corporate support
program for couples. New York: Praeger.
Taking Charge
Harris, M. B., & Franklin, C. (2007). Taking charge: A school-based, life skills group
curriculum for adolescent mothers. New York: Oxford press.
Suicide Prevention
Knox, K. L., Litts, D. A., Talcott, G. W., Feig, J. C., & Caine, E. D. (2003). Risk of
suicide and related adverse outcomes after exposure to a suicide prevention programme
in the US Air Force: Cohort study. British Medical Journal, 327 (December), 1-5.
Special Issues of Journals: Methodology
Snyder, D. K., & Kazak, A. E. (2005). Methodology in family science: Introduction to
the special issue. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 3-5.
Walker, A. (2005). Theoretical and methodological issues in studying families: An
introduction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 789-790.
Special Issues in Journals: Contextual Effects
Clampet-Lundquist, S., & Massey, D. S. (2008). Neighborhood effects on economic selfsufficiency: A reconsideration of the Moving to Opportunity experiment. American
Journal of Sociology, 114, (need page numbers).
Ludwig, J., Liebman, J. B., Kling, J. R., Duncan, G. J., Latz, L. F., Kessler, R. C., &
Sanbonmatsu, L. (2008). What can we learn about neighborhood effects from the Moving
to Opportunity experiment? American Journal of Sociology, 114, (need page numbers).
Sampson, R. J. (2008). Moving to inequality: Neighborhood effects and experiments
meet social structure. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 189-231.
Websites: Award Winning Empirical Articles
Research on Social Work Practice Research Awards
http://www.sswr.org/awards.php (1996-2006)
35
Craig, C. D., Cook, P. G., & Fraser, M. W. (2004). Research awards in the Society for
Social Work and Research, 1996-2000. Research on Social Work Practice, 14, 51-56.
The Rosabeth Moss Kanter Award for Excellence in Work-Family Research
http://www.cfs.purdue.edu/cff/pages/kanter/index.html
“The Kanter award is given to the authors of the best piece of work-family research
published during a calendar year (note that "family" is defined broadly). No external
nominations are accepted for the award. Instead, every article published in a large
number of scientific journals is scrutinized by a large committee of esteemed scholars
who generate a list of candidates for the award.” (Description from website)
Evidence-Based Practice
Critical Thinking
Gambrill, E. (2004). Contributions of critical thinking and evidence-based practice to the
fulfillment of the ethical obligations of professionals. In H. E. Briggs & T. L. Rzepnicki
(Eds.), Using evidence in social work practice: Behavioral perspectives (pp. 3-19).
Chicago: Lyceum Books, Inc.
Paul, R. W., & Heaslip, P. (1995). Critical thinking and intuitive nursing practice.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22, 40-47.
Science and Social Work Practice
Rzepnicki, T. L., & Briggs, H. E. (2004). Introduction: Using evidence in your practice.
In H. E. Briggs & T. L. Rzepnicki (Eds.), Using evidence in social work practice:
Behavioral perspectives (pp. ix-xxiii). Chicago: Lyceum.
Thyer, B. A. (2004). Science and evidence-based social work practice. In H. E. Briggs &
T. L. Rzepnicki (Eds.), Using evidence in social work practice: Behavioral perspectives
(pp. 74-89). Chicago: Lyceum Books, Inc.
Evidence-Based Practice Readings
Gambrill, E. (2006). Evidence-based practice and policy: Choices ahead. Research on
Social Work Practice, 6, 338-357.
Gibbs, L., & Gambrill, E. (2002). Evidence-based practice: Counterarguments to
objections. Research on Social Work Practice, 12, 452-476.
Gilgun, J. F. (2005). The four cornerstones of evidence-based practice in social work.
Research on Social Work Practice, 15, 52-61.
Howard, M. O., McMillen, C. J., & Pollio, D. E. (2003). Teaching evidence-based
practice: Toward a new paradigm for social work education. Research on Social Work
Practice, 13, 234-259.
36
McNeill, T. (2006). Evidence-based practice in an age of relativism: Toward a model for
practice. Social Work, 51, 147-156.
McNeece, C. A., & Thyer, B. A. (2004). Evidence-based practice and social work.
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 1(1), 7-25.
Mullen, E. J., & Streiner, D. L. (2004). The evidence for and against evidence-based
practice. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 4, 111-121.
Action-Oriented Research
Small, S. A., & Uttal, L. (2005). Action-oriented research: Strategies for engaged
scholarship. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 936-948.
Evidence-Based Research Web Sites
Evidence Based Practice Annotated Bibliography and Resource Guide
See http://www.columbia.edu/cu/musher/EBP%20Resource%20Guide%205_28_04.doc
from which the descriptions below of the Campbell Collaboration were copied.
*Campbell Collaboration (C2): The Campbell Collaboration Library and Database
Philidelphia, USA
http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/
“The C2 website posts a searchable database of randomized controlled clinical trials and
systematic reviews of social, psychological, education, and criminological research. All
research presented on the website has met rigorous methodological standards and are
designed to provide researchers, policy makers, and practitioners with critical reviews of
current research. Currently twenty one full reviews are available to download from the
website and several more are currently in progress.”
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and Center for
Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP): Model Programs and National Registry of
Effective Programs.
Maryland, USA
http://modelprograms.samhsa.gov/template.cfm?page=default
“The website provides information about substance abuse and mental health programs
tested in communities, schools, social service organizations, and workplaces in the
United States. Nominated programs are reviewed by research teams who rate the
programs primarily on methodological quality, but also consider other factors such as
theoretical development and community involvement. Programs are rated in increasing
order of quality as either: promising, effective, or model. Information briefs are provided
regarding each of the programs including an overview description, estimated costs,
background, target areas, references, and creator or developer contact information. The
website also includes information about funding, helpful topic-specific links, and
technical assistance information. Also available for download from this site is the
“Comparison Matrix for Science Based Prevention Programs,” an outline of research37
based programs and their comparative ratings by five different U.S. federal agencies as
well as their rating standards.”
The Cochrane Collaboration
http://www.cochrane.org/
“The Cochrane Collaboration is an international non-profit and independent organisation,
dedicated to making up-to-date, accurate information about the effects of healthcare
readily available worldwide. It produces and disseminates systematic reviews of
healthcare interventions and promotes the search for evidence in the form of clinical
trials and other studies of interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration was founded in
1993 and named for the British epidemiologist, Archie Cochrane.” (This description was
copied from the web site.)
Resource Websites
Sloan Work and Family Research Network (Boston College)
http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/
“The Sloan Work and Family Research Network maintains an online database which
contains the citations and annotations of work-family research publications.” (This
description was copied from the web site.)
38