THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS

School of Social Welfare

SW 985, History and Philosophy of Social Work II

Spring 2007

Instructor: Edward R. Canda, Ph.D., Professor

Meeting: Mondays, 2:30-5:20, Room 208, Twente Hall

I. RATIONALE AND PLAN FOR THE COURSE

This course continues the purpose of the History and Philosophy curriculum area to explore and critique conceptual frameworks for social work. History and Philosophy I focused on the historical development and contemporary manifestations of conceptual frameworks that operate within the social work profession, while drawing on interdisciplinary views. History and Philosophy II extends this process by focusing on current transdisciplinary perspectives that have recently begun to influence significant innovations in social work. This will broaden the students’ familiarity with philosophical, theoretical, and conceptual perspectives that can assist her or him to innovate beyond conventional thinking in social work, not only for oneself, but also as a basis for the scholarly mission of improving and expanding the conceptualization and implementation of social work. By the end of the semester, students will develop a paper that demonstrates innovative thinking and transdisciplinary knowledge regarding some key conceptualization, model, or theory for social work.

A guiding theme for this course will be current postmodern trends in critical thinking and re-envisioning social work. Postmodernism is a transdisciplinary intellectual movement that challenges the taken-for-granted assumptions of conventional Eurocentric, nationalistic, patriarchal, technocratic, and egocentric worldviews. In keeping with the themes that guide our school, we will use a postmodern lens to view intellectual innovations for social work regarding the understanding of human strengths and optimal potential, the possibility of liberation and justice for all people on a global scale, respect and appreciation for all forms of human diversity, and creative reflection on and transformation of self and world. This includes a critique of postmodernism itself.

The educational approach in this course emphasizes seminar style learning through presentations by both faculty and students with active discussion. We also will invite presenters who have made significant contributions to innovative thinking in social work in order to learn from their experience and advice. The course is designed to provide a common foundation of theoretical topics for discussion and then to assist each student to identify a particular theme for individual exploration and sharing with the class. This will enable students to continue working toward an area of special scholarly interest and an idea for the History and Philosophy Qualifying Paper.
II. ORGANIZATION OF THE COURSE

This course is organized into two sections. Section 1 provides a concise comparative critique of three major innovative transdisciplinary perspectives that are influencing social work innovations: ecophilosophy (drawing on dynamic systems theory, deep ecology, and ecofeminism); social constructionism; and transpersonal/integral theory. These three perspectives will serve as exemplars of innovative thinking, including their controversies and implications for social work. Comparative critique will provide students with a deepened understanding of these theoretical perspectives as well as experience in systematic analysis of theory in relation to criteria for theoretical rigor and in relation to their own evolving conceptual frameworks as social work scholars. It is not intended that students should agree or disagree with any of these perspectives. Rather, the student should be able to understand, articulate, and critique the perspectives, and then apply the resulting insights to their emerging agenda for innovation as a scholar. The intention is to make sure all of us have a common base of ideas and themes from which each student branches out to her or his own interests.

In Section 2, students will challenge and extend some aspect of the intellectual base of social work that has special interest within their emerging scholarly agendas. Students will identify a key concept (such as “person-in-environment”), practice model (such as “empowerment practice”), or theoretical perspective (such as “Wilber’s integral theory of human development”). They will then write a paper in a format suitable for publication in a scholarly social work journal that contributes a conceptual innovation that extends current thinking. Students will present their work in progress to the class (orally and with a written outline). Section 2 will help students prepare for the History and Philosophy Qualifying Paper as well as publication of conceptual innovation type articles in social work journals.

II. EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES

By the conclusion of SW985, doctoral students will be able to:

1. Understand, articulate, and critique selected transdisciplinary perspectives relevant to social work within the context of postmodern intellectual trends.

2. Identify, describe, and extend current innovations in the intellectual base of social work.

3. Formulate a conceptual innovation for the profession that contributes to or goes beyond current developments in social work as well as the personal conceptual framework with which the student began the course.

4. Understand and apply technical and creative aspects of writing for publication of conceptual innovation type articles in academic social work journals.

5. Understand and apply technical and creative aspects of oral presentation of conceptual material in social work educational contexts and conferences.

III. TEXTS

Required:

Coates, J. (2003). Ecology and social work: Toward a new paradigm. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada: Fernwood.

Gergen, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Robbins, S., Chatterjee, P. & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary human behavior theory: A critical perspective for social work, second edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Wilber, K. (2000). Integral psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy. Boston: Shambhala.

Recommended:

Canda, E. R. & Smith, E. D. (Eds.). (2001). Transpersonal perspectives on spirituality in social work. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

Additional readings are listed on the session schedule. Others may be assigned to supplement presentations by the instructor, students, and guests. Required readings in this course will be limited so that students can do extensive additional reading based on the papers and presentations they develop for this course.

ASSIGNMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS

1. Presentation of a Response to a Theoretical Perspective (10% of course grade)

During Section 1, students will deliver a concise oral response to required readings relating to one of the three transdisciplinary theoretical perspectives (up to 30 minutes, including ten minutes discussion time), such as might be expected of a respondent or panelist in a conference. This will highlight each student’s interests and reactions. It will also provide experience in constructing and delivering a concise scholarly presentation. For example, the student could focus on (1) a specific point of interest raised in a particular passage of a reading, a controversy, critical appraisal, or application to social work, or (2) an idea related to her or his development of a topic for the final paper. In either case, it is wise to use this as an opportunity to move toward a topic for the final paper. Note: Broad, general, comprehensive, or wide-ranging presentations are not feasible for this assignment.

The presentation must include well designed slides (e.g. by Power Point) including a topic, background material related to the chosen theoretical perspective, points for class discussion, and a list of scholarly references (at least 3 beyond required readings) that support the presentation. The student must bring hard copies (double sided, with readable size print) of the presentation for class members.

Evaluation. Presentations will be evaluated by the instructor in relation to quality of written and other materials, oral presentation, and facilitation of discussion. Percentage of total course grade = 10%. Presenters will also receive spontaneous feedback from fellow students.

2. Essay Comparing and Critiquing Theoretical Perspectives (40% of course grade)

Students will write an essay that compares two of the three conceptual frameworks (i.e. social constructionism, ecophilosophy, and transpersonal/integral theory). The student can design this essay by (1) a general comparison of the components of each theory; or (2) a focus on some particular component or issue addressed by each theory. Some suggestions for evaluative criteria and ways of organizing comparisons of theories will be given in class and in readings.

The paper must be typed according to APA guidelines for format (14-18 pages double spaced, plus attachments and references). The paper should adapt the following outline: (1) Summary of major insights for social work of each perspective [30% of content]; (2) Strengths of each perspective [20% of content]; (3) Weaknesses of each perspective [20% of content]; (4) Aspects of the student’s own background that predispose her or him to this evaluation [10% of content]; (5) Implications for continued development of the student’s scholarly agenda [10% of content]; (6) Attach a precise and polished statement of the topic chosen for the final course paper, including a topic title and a tentative abstract (120 words) [10% of content]. This may or may not be related to the three theoretical perspectives. Be sure this topic is consistent with your emerging scholarly agenda and goals for completing the doctoral program.

The student must cite all relevant material from required course readings and handouts, plus at least 5 other scholarly sources (including at least 1 work by an originator of the perspective and some social work sources). Criteria and evidence to support the comparative evaluation must be explicit. Mere opinions or criticizing are not adequate for this assignment.

Evaluation. Each essay will be evaluated according to accuracy, clarity, depth, conciseness, creativity, self-reflective insight, and format. Every content area in the above outline must be addressed. Percentage of total course grade = 40%.

*Note: The student may propose an alternative way of comparing and critiquing the theoretical perspectives. The student needs to propose the alternative to the instructor at least three weeks prior to the due date. If approved, the product will be due at the same time as the standard essay. Item 6 above must be included in any alternative.

3. Manuscript for Conceptual Innovation in Social Work (50% of course grade)

The final assignment will require the student to articulate an innovation in some concept, conceptual model, framework, or theoretical perspective that influences the profession (such as person in environment, professional use of self, restorative justice, diversity, empowerment practice, mental health, strengths perspective, spiritually sensitive practice, transpersonal theory, etc.). The student is encouraged to build on work from History and Philosophy I and Section 1 of this course. The student may also use this assignment to build ideas toward the History and Philosophy Qualifying Paper (see the doctoral handbook). This manuscript is not a substitute for that Qualifying Paper, but it can provide important background work for developing the proposal to the Qualifying Committee and considering possibilities for the History and Philosophy Qualifying Paper itself.

The paper should be written as though it would be submitted to a journal, following APA guidelines and NASW policy for nondiscriminatory language. The target journal must be identified and the journal’s guidelines for authors must be attached to the paper. Length may not exceed 25 pages, including tables, figures, and references.

In preparation for the final version of this paper, students will present orally a draft of ideas for the manuscript to the class, with a detailed outline or Power Point presentation handout (2-5 pages). The handout must include: (1) article title; (2) an abstract up to 120 words; (3) an outline of the manuscript including all headings, subheadings, and major points under each heading and subheading; (4) a thorough list of references. Copies must be provided to the class members.

Feedback about this presentation will help the student to complete final revisions. The presentation is not graded. But high quality is critical if it will serve well to prepare for the final paper.

Evaluation. Each manuscript will be evaluated according to quality of content (including significance of innovation) and format, using criteria similar to those used in editorial reviews of manuscripts submitted to journals for possible publication. These will be provided in advance. Percentage of total course grade = 50%.

*Note: I invite students to submit a partial draft of the manuscript at least three weeks prior to the due date. The student must schedule this with me, so I can be sure to complete my review and response early enough. I also encourage students to schedule individual consultation sessions with me throughout the semester, as needed.

Final Grading Scale

90-93, A- 94-96, A 97-100, A+ 69 and below, F

80-82, B- 83-86, B 87-89, B+

70-72, C- 73-76, C 77-79, C+

In general, a grade range of B indicates an adequate to very good overall quality. (B- is marginally adequate.) A grade range of A indicates excellent to exceptionally outstanding overall quality.

Other Expectations and Information

Participation and Creating a Conducive Learning Environment. Students are expected to attend every class (with the exception of an emergency or event absolutely critical to scholarly goals such as a refereed conference presentation, as approved in advance by the instructor) and to participate actively. If a student misses a class, the student must arrange to obtain the missed content (e.g. by sharing students’ notes or audio-taping). Final course grades will be reduced by 10/100 points for each unexcused absence.

Learning will be collaborative, so everyone’s input and mutual support are essential. An atmosphere of respect for colleagues and openness to new ideas and alternative points of view should prevail. Note that scholarly critique and critical thinking are not the same as mere criticizing. We need to engage ourselves, each other, and the readings in a way that fosters mutual understanding and growth. Students should complete readings and other preparation prior to each relevant class session, so that discussion can be well informed.

One of the insights of some postmodern perspectives is the importance of a holistic approach to learning. In that spirit, there will be some experiential and self-reflective educational activities that engage aspects of the person in addition to analytical thinking, as negotiated with class participants. These may tap our capacities for creativity, play, and intuition. Students also are encouraged to pay attention to stress levels and to support each other in stress management.

Due dates. Assignments are due at the time and place specified on the session schedule. Any assignment that is submitted after the time due without prior agreement with the instructor will be reduced 20/100 points for each day late. The only exception is a bona fide last minute emergency, such as a medical crisis. In this case, the student or a representative of the student must contact the instructor as soon as possible to request an extension. Extensions without penalty are only granted for documented bona fide emergencies or crisis situations outside the student’s control. Under special extenuating circumstances, brief extensions may be permitted with advance negotiation, involving a grade reduction of 5/100 points per day. Incomplete grades are assigned by agreement with the instructor only in the event of an emergency or crisis. The instructor will set a specific and brief timeline for completion of the course and will determine if grade reduction is appropriate.

All materials must be submitted in hard copy.

Special learning needs. Students must notify the instructor within the first two weeks of the course if there are any special learning needs which the instructor or students should consider. For example, these might relate to religious observance, disabilities, and English as a second language.

Inclement weather policy. In case of hazardous inclement weather, please check first with the university information number (864-SNOW) about class cancellation. If KU classes are not cancelled, check the instructor’s voice mail for a message about class cancellation. In general, if travel is a safety concern, check with public safety information for road conditions. A student is not expected to attend class if there is a genuine risk to safety. In the event of missing a class, check with other students for class materials and arrange an audio tape recording of the class if possible. The student is responsible for any material missed during an absence.

Contacting the Instructor. I wish to be available for in depth support during appointments outside of class meetings. It is usually easiest to arrange an appointment or have a brief consultation by requesting one during a class break or contacting me by email: edc@ku.edu. If I do not respond to email promptly, call me by telephone. It is important that students consult me for advice in preparing all assignments.

Other contact information:

Office Hours: I will usually be available on Tuesdays 1:30-3:30 p.m., Room 203 Twente Hall; others by appointment. If you want to be sure to meet me, contact me ahead of time for an appointment.

Office Phone and Voice Mail: 785-864-8939; General School Office Phone: 785-864-4720; Home Phone: unlisted 785-312-9489, use for urgent situations; Fax: 785-864-5277.

Homepage: www.socwel.ku.edu/canda; note: there are many resources relevant to this course via my homepage and the link for Spiritual Diversity and Social Work Resource Center.

IV. COURSE SCHEDULE

Section 1: Transdisciplinary Conceptual Innovations in Social Work

Session 1: Jan 22 – Introduction to Critique and Comparison of Theories for Social Work.

Introduction to the course and each other’s scholarly interests; postmodern issues in social work; criteria for evaluation and comparison of theories; critical perspective versus criticizing.

Session 2: Jan 29 -- Social Constructionism and Postmodern Theory in Social Work

Scheduling student responses to theoretical perspectives.

Reading: ROBBINS, chs. 1, 8, 9, 10, and 13.

Session 3: Feb 5 -- Student Reflection on Theoretical Issues in Relation to Scholarly Goals

Due to a prior commitment for school administration, we will not meet for this session. In replacement, we will decide whether to meet during our exam period or at another time for a field study excursion.

Students should use this week to catch up on readings and to reflect on a theoretical issue or topic that fits with your scholarly goals and that can be pursued in this course.

GERGEN, prologue plus chs. 1-3.

Session 4: Feb 12 – Social Constructionism continued

Reading: Complete GERGEN.

Student response presentations: 2 likely.

Session 5: Feb 19 – Ecophilosophy and Dynamic Systems in Social Work

Reading: ROBBINS, chs. 2, 3, 4; COATES, preface, introduction, and chs. 1-2. Plus:

Besthorn, F. & Canda, E. R. (2002). Revisioning environment: Deep ecology for social work education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 22(1/2), 79-101. (online via KU library)

Besthorn, F. H. & Pearson McMillen, D. (2002). The oppression of women and nature: Ecofeminism as a framework for an expanded ecological social work. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 83(3), 221-232. (online via KU library)

Session 6: Feb 26 – Ecophilosophy continued

Reading: COATES: complete book.

Student response presentations: 2 likely

Session 7: Mar 5 – Transpersonal/Integral Theory and Social Work

Reading: ROBBINS ch. 12 and review ch. 13; WILBER, Note and parts 1 and 2. (Read relevant charts and endnotes.)

Session 8: Mar 12 – Transpersonal/Integral Theory continued

Reading: WILBER, part 3. (Read relevant charts and endnotes.)

Student response presentations: 2 likely.

*SPRING BREAK, March 19, no class

Section 2: Formulating Conceptual Innovations

Session 9: Mar 26 – The Nature of Scholarship. Suggestions for Creative Process and Innovative Scholarly Writing. (*Critique and Comparison Essay due in class.) Discussion of final paper topics included with essay.

Reading:

Canda, E. R. (2002). Toward spiritually sensitive social work scholarship: Insights from classical Confucianism. Electronic Journal of Social Work, 1(1), second article, 23 pages. (via my homepage, online articles link)

Canda, E. R. (2003). Heed your calling and follow it far: Suggestions for authors who write about spirituality or other innovations for social work. Families in Society, 84(1), 80-85. (online via KU library)

Session 10: Ap 2: Technical Aspects of Writing Conceptual Articles for Social Work; Preparing for the History and Philosophy Qualifying Paper; Discussion of final paper topics.

Reading:

See www.utoronto.ca/writing/essay.html and www.wisc.edu/writing/Handbook/DocAPA.html

and related websites for tips on writing academic essays and using APA style.

See Section E on “The Qualifying Papers” and pages 94-97 in the Fall 2005 Doctoral Handbook.

Bern-Klug, M. (2004). The ambiguous dying syndrome. Health and Social Work, 29(1), 55-67). (online via KU library)

Nakashima, M. (2003). Beyond coping and adaptation: Promoting a holistic perspective on dying. Families in Society, 84(3), 367-376. (online via KU library)

Session 11: Ap 9 – Student and Guest Presentations.