Rethinking the MSW Curriculum

Evaluation and Supporting Inquiry Courses in MSW Programs

“…Colby (2013), in a provocative paper, describes the accepted curricular design of MSW programs as stagnant, with most graduate instruction following a 2-year, foundation-specialization model that is grounded in Richmond’s 1897 vision for social work education. Colby and colleagues at the University of Houston put forth a new vision for MSW curricula that included a focus on advanced specialization through a one-semester foundation and a three-semester specialization approach (Colby, 2013). Moreover, the one-semester foundation encompassed a new design and pedagogic approach, including a 2-day intensive instruction in the history, professional organization, and basic concepts of social work, followed by a 6-week in-classroom module focused on social work content identified by CSWE (e.g., human behavior and social welfare policy), a semester-long practice lab, a semester-long research seminar, and a 180-hr fieldwork practicum (Colby, 2013).…”

“…Colby and colleagues at the University of Houston put forth a new vision for MSW curricula that included a focus on advanced specialization through a one-semester foundation and a three-semester specialization approach (Colby, 2013). Moreover, the one-semester foundation encompassed a new design and pedagogic approach, including a 2-day intensive instruction in the history, professional organization, and basic concepts of social work, followed by a 6-week in-classroom module focused on social work content identified by CSWE (e.g., human behavior and social welfare policy), a semester-long practice lab, a semester-long research seminar, and a 180-hr fieldwork practicum (Colby, 2013). These changes resulted in 80% of the fieldwork requirement in advanced specialization and 76% of the entire curriculum focused on advanced specialization (Colby, 2013).…”

“…Of the schools that used only one rubric, some organized the curriculum around systems (e.g., micro or macro), while others focused on method (e.g., group work), task (e.g., administration), or specific field of practice (e.g., aging; Hartman, 1983). Colby (2013), in a provocative paper, describes the accepted curricular design of MSW programs as stagnant, with most graduate instruction following a 2-year, foundationspecialization model that is grounded in Richmond's 1897 vision for social work education. Colby and colleagues at the University of Houston put forth a new vision for MSW curricula that included a focus on advanced specialization through a one-semester foundation and a three-semester specialization approach (Colby, 2013).…”

Teaching Note—Radically Rethinking the Foundation

“…Rather than a simple repackaging of content, this model is radically different, and it requires both faculty and students to rethink their roles as well as the traditional concepts of teaching and learning. As Colby (2013) has noted, although social workers are seen as "change agents" and change is fundamental to practice, the traditional curriculum structure of one year of foundation fol lowed by a year of specialization or advanced courses (the 50/50 model) has been the norm in social work education for more than 100 years and has been extremely resistant to change. In this broader article on the history of social work curriculum development and the challenges of cur ricular change, Colby described the structure of what is now known as the Houston model, which includes a brief overview of the foundation as well as the complete MSW curriculum model for full-and part-time students that was implemented at the University of Houston Graduate College of Social Work.…”

Students’ Perceptions of Service-Learning in an Advanced Research Course

“…Some have incorporated a weaving session (Colby, 2013) or transfer seminar (Coulshed, 1993) to support students in synthesizing content across courses or the curriculum. Coulshed (1993) referred to this metacognitive process as an opportunity for expanded learning.…”