Benchmark II Review Council on Social Work Education Commission on Accreditation

Benchmark II Review Council on Social Work Education Commission on Accreditation 2008 EPAS Program University: The University of Texas at El Paso Address: Department of Social Work College of Health Sciences, Room 306 1101 N. Campbell City, State: El Paso, TX 79902 Program Chief Administrator Name: Title: Email Address: Candyce S Berger, Phd Associate Profess and MSW Program Coordinator csberger2@utep.edu Level of Program (check one) Baccalaureate Degree Program XX Master s Degree Program Benchmark II Review Brief for 2008 EPAS 10.08.2008 LAW Page 1 of 19

The University of Texas at El Paso embraces its bi-national, multi-cultural setting and has maintained a long standing and sustained commitment to quality social work instruction at the Bachelor s level. As it moves toward developing its MSW program, a meeting with President Natalicio illuminated the institutional mission of interdisciplinary and inter-professional knowledge development, teaching and service in its commitments to the border region. It is clear that the mission of the proposed MSW program focusing on border social work is in alignment with the institutional mission and priorities. The President is well aware of the social work challenges which she includes as part of the Health Sciences commitment to an improved quality of life for the border population. The President is deeply committed to the MSW program and asserted her desire to promote the continued development of the MSW program through institutional resources and essential accommodations. Dean Curtis from the College of Health Sciences reaffirmed her commitment to the SSW s mission of human services consistent with other disciplines in the College. She presented as very supportive of the MSW program and described ways the College has already supported the SSW, including accommodations planned for in the new College of Health Sciences building. Advanced classroom technology, centralized Social Work faculty space, and opportunities for interdisciplinary research and teaching were projected to enhance the Department of Social Work s contribution to the college and university. The Dean was asked to speak specifically to issues of faculty professional development and efforts to assist them as they progress through the tenure process. Dean Curtis identified multiple opportunities available in the institution to support faculty interests and appeared committed to faculty development to assure the program s continuity. President Natalicio and Dean Curtis were well aware of the proposed MSW program s need to sustain the highest standards of social work professional education with dedicated, highly proficient educators. A meeting with Director Lusk, Coordinator Berger and the current faculty give every indication that their dedication presents a solid foundation upon which their program can be built. Dr. Lusk reflected confidence in the MSW program s (and SSW) autonomy in curricular development as well as faculty hiring, promotion and tenure, and affirmed the Program s role in curricular design focused on border social work. Dr. Lusk s leadership on the subject of border social work adds significantly to the development of their concentration. While this concentration requires more in-depth development, it is a clear priority among the faculty. Discussion with Dr. Lusk about the budget suggested it was an area that needed further attention especially in terms of administrative support staff, faculty development and resource acquisition. Meetings with Field Director Cude-Islas, students, field instructors and the Advisory Council reveal a well-established desire and dedication to support the MSW Program s success. Specific strengths and suggested areas requiring further attention follow, as they relate to specific standards. Benchmark II Review Brief for 2008 EPAS 10.08.2008 LAW Page 2 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards The Compliance Statement column in section 2 of the Benchmark II Review Brief lists each accreditation standard (AS), related educational policies (EP), and compliance statements for accreditation standards under Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards in Benchmark II. In the Location column, the program indicates the document name and page number where each compliance statement is addressed in the program s Benchmark II. In the C/NC column the commission visitor types compliance or noncompliance in the C/NC column, next to each compliance statement, to report how well the program meets and addresses each item. The commission visitor indicates her or his reasoning in the Comments column for any compliance statement marked noncompliance. The commission reader uses a different font to distinguish his or her comments from those made by the commission visitor. 2. Explicit Curriculum Accreditation Standard B2.0 Curriculum The 10 core competencies are used to design the professional curriculum. Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments B2.0.5: [The program] describes and explains how its curriculum content (knowledge, values, and skills) implements the operational definition of each of its competencies. Narrative described and explained how the curriculum provides the necessary knowledge, values and skills to operationalize each competency. Accreditation Standard M2.0 Curriculum The 10 core competencies are used to design the foundation and advanced curriculum. The advanced curriculum builds on and applies the core competencies in an area(s) of concentration. Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments M2.0.6: [The program] describes and explains how its curriculum content (relevant theories and conceptual frameworks, values, and skills) implements the operational definition of each of its competencies. Narrative described and explained how the curriculum provides the necessary relevant theories and conceptual frameworks, values, and skills to operationalize each competency. w/ Concern Narrative describes and explains how the curriculum provides necessary relevant theories and conceptual frameworks, values and skills to operationalize each competency. The overarching conceptual framework for the curriculum is missing and needs to be clearly articulated. Page 3 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 2. Explicit Curriculum Educational Policy 2.3 Signature Pedagogy: Field Education Signature pedagogy represents the central form of instruction and learning in which a profession socializes its students to perform the role of practitioner. Professionals have pedagogical norms with which they connect and integrate theory and practice. In social work, the signature pedagogy is field education. The intent of field education is to connect the theoretical and conceptual contribution of the classroom with the practical world of the practice setting. It is a basic precept of social work education that the two interrelated components of curriculum classroom and field are of equal importance within the curriculum, and each contributes to the development of the requisite competencies of professional practice. Field education is systematically designed, supervised, coordinated, and evaluated based on criteria by which students demonstrate the achievement of program competencies. Accreditation Standard 2.1 Field Education Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments 2.1.1: [The program discusses how its field education program] connects the theoretical and conceptual contribution of the classroom with the practice setting, fostering the implementation of evidence-informed practice. w/ Concern Narrative demonstrated that the connection between theoretical and conceptual contributions of classroom and practice setting fosters the implementation of generalist or advanced practice. The connection between theoretical and conceptual contributions of classroom and practice settings lacks clarity in distinguishing between advanced generalist practice and advanced practice behaviors indicated in both foundation and concentration courses. The narrative should clarify the distinction the program makes between advanced generalist practice and advanced practice behaviors. In addition, the narrative should clearly articulate the connection between theoretical and conceptual contributions of classroom and practice settings that fosters the implementation of advanced generalist practice as defined in the narrative. Page 4 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.2 Student Development Educational preparation and commitment to the profession are essential qualities in the admission and development of students for professional practice. To promote the social work education continuum, BSW graduates admitted to MSW programs are presented with an articulated pathway toward a concentration. Student participation in formulating and modifying policies affecting academic and student affairs are important for the student s professional development. Accreditation Standard 3.2 Student Development: Admissions; Advisement, Retention, and Termination; and Student Participation Admissions Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments B3.2.1: The program identifies the criteria it uses for admission. Narrative identified the criteria for admission. M3.2.1: The program identifies the criteria it uses for admission. The criteria for admission to the master s program must include an earned bachelor s degree from a college or university accredited by a recognized regional accrediting association. 3.2.2: The program describes the process and procedures for evaluating applications and notifying applicants of the decision and any contingent conditions associated with admission. Narrative identified criteria for admission. Narrative for master s programs included the criterion of an earned baccalaureate degree from an educational institution regionally accredited. Narrative described the program s process and procedures for evaluating applications. Clear Clear V1, p.15 Concern Refer to the weighting for the Academic Essay Evaluation, Experience and References. The rationale for weighting is unclear. Regarding the cut point for rejection it is unclear how it was determined. Narrative described the program s process and procedures for notifying applicants. The criteria for extending the conditional admission, as written in the narrative, appears ambiguous. (continued on next page) Page 5 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments M3.2.3: BSW graduates entering MSW programs are not to repeat what has been mastered in their BSW programs. MSW programs describe the policies and procedures used for awarding advanced standing. These policies and procedures should be explicit and unambiguous. Advanced standing is awarded only to Narrative described the program s explicit and unambiguous policies and procedures for preventing the repeat of what has been mastered at BSW level. V1, p.15; Appendix 3.2-3 w/ Concern graduates holding degrees from Narrative described the baccalaureate social work programs program s policies and accredited by CSWE, those recognized procedures for awarding through its International Social Work Degree advanced standing. Recognition and Evaluation Service, or covered under a memorandum of understanding with international social work accreditors. 3.2.4: The program describes its policies and procedures concerning the transfer of credits. 3.2.5: The program submits its written policy indicating that it does not grant social work course credit for life experience or previous work experience. The program documents how it informs applicants and other constituents of this policy. Narrative discussed how advanced standing is only awarded to graduates of programs accredited or recognized by the CSWE. Narrative described policies and procedures for the transfer of credits. Written policy indicating that the program does not grant social work course credit for life or previous work experience was submitted. The narrative provides policies and procedures for preventing the repeat of what has been mastered at the BSW level. Ratings that assess advanced practice should clarify the program s explicit and unambiguous policies and procedures for preventing what has been mastered at BSW level. Narrative documents how applicants informed of policy. (continued on next page) Page 6 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Advisement, retention, and termination Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments 3.2.6: The program describes its academic and professional advising policies and procedures. Professional advising is provided by social work program faculty, staff, or both. Narrative described the academic and professional advising policies and procedures. V1, pp19-20 w/ Concern Clarify the policy re: advisor contact. 3.2.7: The program spells out how it informs students of its criteria for evaluating their academic and professional performance, including policies and procedures for grievance. Narrative described how advising is handled by social work faculty, staff or both. Narrative spelled out how students are informed of criteria for evaluating their academic and professional performance. V1, p.21 w/ Concern Narrative indicates that the criteria for evaluating performance is written in the syllabi. Syllabi review indicates inconsistency in informing students of criteria for evaluating performance. 3.2.8: The program submits its policies and procedures for terminating a student s enrollment in the social work program for reasons of academic and professional performance. Student participation 3.2.9: The program describes its policies and procedures specifying students rights and responsibilities to participate in formulating and modifying policies affecting academic and student affairs. 3.2.10: The program demonstrates how it provides opportunities and encourages students to organize in their interests. Narrative spelled out policies and procedures for grievance. Policies and procedures for termination of a student s enrollment for academic or professional performance were submitted. Narrative described program s policies and procedures that specify students rights and responsibilities for formulating and modifying academic and student affairs. Narrative demonstrated how students are encouraged and provided opportunities to organize in their own interest. V1, pp.21-22 V1, p.24 w/ Concern University policies were noted although it was pointed out that three different policies were evident in the narrative. It was agreed that University policy was ambiguous. The narrative specifies students participation on committees relevant to academic and student affairs although does not indicate if there are limitations on number of students attending meetings nor does it explain voting privileges of students. Page 7 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.3 Faculty Faculty qualifications, including experience related to the program s competencies, and an appropriate student-faculty ratio are essential for developing an educational environment that promotes, emulates, and teaches students the knowledge, values, and skills expected of professional social workers. Through their teaching, scholarship, and service as well as their interactions with one another, administration, students, and community the program s faculty models the behavior and values expected of professional social workers. Accreditation Standard 3.3 Faculty Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments M3.3.3: The master's social work program identifies no fewer than six full-time faculty with master's degrees in social work from a CSWE-accredited program and whose principal assignment is to the master's program. The majority of the full-time master's social work program faculty has a master's degree in social work and a doctoral degree preferably in social work. No fewer than 6 full-time principally assigned faculty with a CSWE accredited MSW to the program were identified. (No fewer than 3 at Commission Visit I, 5 at Commission Visit II, and 6 at Commission Visit III.) V1, p.84 for CVII w/ Concern 3.3.4: The program describes its faculty workload policy and discusses how the policy supports the achievement of institutional priorities and the program's mission and goals. Narrative presented evidence that the majority have a CSWE accredited MSW degree and a doctoral degree. Narrative described the program s workload policy. Narrative discussed how workload supports the achievement of institutional priorities and its mission and goals. V1, p.28, p.86 w/ Concern The table outlining faculty student ratios project that for 2012, the increase in enrollment targets a number that will bring UTEP out of compliance. The narrative does not discuss the institutional priorities therefore lacks clarity about workload and its support for the achievement of institutional priorities and its mission and goals. Page 8 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.4 Administrative Structure Social work faculty and administrators, based on their education, knowledge, and skills, are best suited to make decisions regarding the delivery of social work education. They exercise autonomy in designing an administrative and leadership structure, developing curriculum, and formulating and implementing policies that support the education of competent social workers. Accreditation Standard 3.4 Administrative Structure Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments 3.4.1: The program describes its Narrative described the administrative structure and shows how it provides the necessary autonomy to achieve the program s mission and goals. administrative structure. Narrative showed how the program s administrative structure provides autonomy. 3.4.2: The program describes how the social work faculty has responsibility for defining program curriculum consistent with the Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards and the institution s policies. 3.4.3: The program describes how the administration and faculty of the social work program participate in formulating and implementing policies related to the recruitment, hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of program personnel. Narrative described how the social work faculty is responsible for defining the program s curriculum. Narrative described how the administration and faculty of the social work program participate in formulating and implementing policies related to the recruitment, hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure. V1, pp32-33 V1, p.36 Discussion with faculty demonstrated how the administration and faculty of the social work program participate in formulating and implementing policies related to the recruitment and hiring of recent faculty. The faculty and administration clarified faculty roles in retention, promotion and tenure. Page 9 of 19

Section 2 - Compliance with the Following Accreditation Standards 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.5 Resources Adequate resources are fundamental to creating, maintaining, and improving an educational environment that supports the development of competent social work practitioners. Social work programs have the necessary resources to support learning and professionalization of students and program improvement. Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location C/NC Comments 3.5.1: The program describes the procedures for budget development and administration it uses to achieve its mission and goals. The program submits the budget form to demonstrate sufficient and stable financial supports that permit program planning and faculty development. Narrative described the procedures for development and administration of a sufficient and stable budget to achieve mission and goals. V1, pp.36- Discussion with Dean Lusk clarified the SW admin role in determining procedures for development and administration of a sufficient and stable budget to achieve mission and goals. 3.5.4: The program submits the library form to demonstrate comprehensive library holdings and/or electronic access and other informational and educational resources necessary for achieving its mission and goals. 3.5.5: The program describes and demonstrates sufficient office and classroom space and/or computer-mediated access to achieve its mission and goals. 3.5.6: The program describes its access to assistive technology, including materials in alternative formats (e.g., Braille, large print, books on tape, assistive learning systems). Budget form was submitted. Library form was submitted. Narrative described and demonstrated sufficient office and classroom space and/or computermediated access. Narrative described access to assistive technology. Noncompliant The budget form was not submitted. Regarding the budget presented in the Benchmark document (V!) the table was unclear in its amount allocated for administrative support staff, faculty development and resource acquisition. V1, p.37 Discussion with librarians clarified how holdings are assessed in terms of adequacy. Page 10 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) The Compliance Statement column in section 3 of the Benchmark II Review Brief lists each accreditation standard (AS), related educational policies (EP), and compliance statements for accreditation standards under Draft of the Following Accreditation Standards in Benchmark II. In the Location column, the program indicates the document name and page number where each compliance statement is addressed in the program s Benchmark II. The commission reader types suggestions to improvement to be used for the next Commission Visit in the Comments column. 2. Explicit Curriculum Educational Policy 2.3 Signature Pedagogy: Field Education Signature pedagogy represents the central form of instruction and learning in which a profession socializes its students to perform the role of practitioner. Professionals have pedagogical norms with which they connect and integrate theory and practice. In social work, the signature pedagogy is field education. The intent of field education is to connect the theoretical and conceptual contribution of the classroom with the practical world of the practice setting. It is a basic precept of social work education that the two interrelated components of curriculum classroom and field are of equal importance within the curriculum, and each contributes to the development of the requisite competencies of professional practice. Field education is systematically designed, supervised, coordinated, and evaluated based on criteria by which students demonstrate the achievement of program competencies. Accreditation Standard 2.1 Field Education Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments B2.1.2: [The program discusses how its field education program] provides generalist practice opportunities for students to demonstrate the core competencies. Narrative discussed how generalist practice opportunities are provided for students to demonstrate core competencies. M2.1.2: [The program discusses how its field education program] provides advanced practice opportunities for students to demonstrate the program s competencies. 2.1.3: [The program discusses how its field education program] provides a minimum of 400 hours of field education for baccalaureate programs and 900 hours for master s programs. Narrative discussed how advanced practice opportunities are provided for students to demonstrate program s competencies. Narrative discussed how C baccalaureate degree students complete a minimum of 400 hours of field education and master s students complete a minimum of 900 hours of field education. (Continued on next page) V1, pp.44- Program was encouraged to clarify advanced generalist practice relevant to the concentration, and link to specific examples of field opportunities unique to advanced practice that allow students to demonstrate program competencies focused on border social work. A discussion of course objectives of foundation SW Practice 1 and 2 (V1, pp. 48-48) are not consistent with objectives indicated on syllabi. The program is encouraged to review syllabi for consistency in stating course objectives. Page 11 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 2. Explicit Curriculum Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 2.1.4: [The program discusses how its field education program] admits only those students who have met the program s specified criteria for field education. Narrative discussed how the field program only admits students who meet its specified criteria. Appears in compliance. 2.1.5: [The program discusses how its field education program] specifies policies, criteria, and procedures for selecting field settings; placing and monitoring students; maintaining field liaison contacts with field education settings; and evaluating student learning and field setting effectiveness congruent with the program s competencies. Congruent with the program s competencies, the narrative discussed its written policies, criteria and procedures for: 1. Selecting field settings; 2. Placing and monitoring students; 3. Maintaining field liaison contacts with field education settings; and 4. Evaluating student learning and field setting effectiveness. (Continued on next page) V1, p.51 & pp. 55-56 Appears in compliance. Page 12 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 2. Explicit Curriculum Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 2.1.6: [The program discusses how its field education program] specifies the credentials and practice experience of its field instructors necessary to design field learning opportunities for students to demonstrate program competencies. Field instructors for baccalaureate students hold a baccalaureate or master s degree in social work from a CSWE-accredited program. Field instructors Narrative discussed how the credentials and practice experience of its field instructors enables them to design appropriate student learning opportunities to demonstrate program competencies. for master s students hold a master s degree Narrative discussed how in social work from a CSWE-accredited program s field instructors, for program. For cases in which a field instructor does not hold a CSWE-accredited social work degree, the program assumes responsibility for reinforcing a social work baccalaureate students, hold a CSWE-accredited baccalaureate or master s social work degree. perspective and describes how this is accomplished. Narrative discussed how the program s field instructors, for master s students, hold a CSWE-accredited master s social work degree. V1, p.54 In describing agency selection criteria, the narrative describes 14 ways the program ensures a quality learning experience presumably to design appropriate student learning opportunities to demonstrate program competencies. The narrative was unclear about how these learning experiences were ensured and were encouraged to clarify, using specific examples. Appears in compliance Appears in compliance Narrative discussed how the program reinforces a social work perspective when field instructors do not hold a CSWE- accredited baccalaureate or master s social work degree. V1, p.51 & pp. 55-56 (Continued on next page) The narrative indicated that in placements that do not have an MSW supervisor on site to provide supervision, alternative arrangements may be made such as faculty providing the supervision. The program clarified this statement to suggest they will comply with expectations regarding MSW supervision and will clarify language to reduce ambiguity on this issue. Page 13 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 2. Explicit Curriculum Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 2.1.7: [The program discusses how its field education program] provides orientation, field instruction training, and continuing dialog with field education settings and field instructors. Narrative discussed how the program orients, trains and dialogues with field settings and instructors. 2.1.8: [The program discusses how its field education program] develops policies regarding field placements in an organization in which the student is also employed. To ensure the role of student as learner, student assignments and field education supervision are not the same as those of the student s employment. Narrative discussed how its policies regarding field placements in an agency in which the student is also employed ensures that assignments and field instruction differ from those responsibilities and supervision associated with the student s employment. V1, p.57 The narrative discussed how the program orients, trains and dialogues with field settings and instructors however mechanisms and procedures for maintaining continuous contact were unclear and the program was encouraged to clarify these mechanisms and procedures. Appears in compliance Page 14 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.1 Diversity The program s commitment to diversity including age, class, color, culture, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity and expression, immigration status, political ideology, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation is reflected in its learning environment (institutional setting; selection of field education settings and their clientele; composition of program advisory or field committees; educational and social resources; resource allocation; program leadership; speaker series, seminars, and special programs; support groups; research and other initiatives; and the demographic make-up of its faculty, staff, and student body). Accreditation Standard 3.1 Diversity Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 3.1.1: The program describes the specific and continuous efforts it makes to provide a learning environment in which respect for all persons and understanding of diversity and difference are practiced. V1, pp.58-69 3.1.2: The program describes how its learning environment models affirmation and respect for diversity and difference. 3.1.3: The program discusses specific plans to improve the learning environment to affirm and support persons with diverse identities. Narrative described specific and continuous effort to provide respect and understanding of diversity (see list in EP3.1) and difference in the learning environment (see list in EP3.1). Narrative described how learning environment models affirmation and respect for diversity and difference. Narrative discussed specific plans to improve the learning environment to affirm and support persons with diverse identities. V1, pp. 69-79 V1, pp.79-80 The narrative focuses on course offerings. The program was encouraged to describe additional specific and continuous efforts to provide respect and understanding of diversity (see list in EP3.1) and difference in the learning environment (see list in EP3.1). The narrative described how learning environment models affirmation and respect for diversity and difference. The program was encouraged to highlight specific examples of how the learning environment models affirmation and respect for diversity and difference. The program was encouraged to strengthen their specific plans to improve the learning environment to affirm and support persons with diverse identities. Page 15 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 3. Implicit Curriculum Educational Policy 3.3 Faculty Faculty qualifications, including experience related to the program s competencies, and an appropriate student-faculty ratio are essential for developing an educational environment that promotes, emulates, and teaches students the knowledge, values, and skills expected of professional social workers. Through their teaching, scholarship, and service as well as their interactions with one another, administration, students, and community the program s faculty models the behavior and values expected of professional social workers. Accreditation Standard 3.3 Faculty Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 3.3.1: The program identifies each full and Each full time and part time V1, Appears in compliance part-time social work faculty member and faculty was identified. pp.80-82 discusses her/his qualifications, competence, expertise in social work education and Narrative discussed the practice, and years of service to the program. qualifications, expertise, Faculty who teach social work practice service and experience (as courses have a master s degree in social related to the program s work from a CSWE-accredited program and competencies) for each at least two years of social work practice faculty. experience. 3.3.2: The program discusses how faculty size is commensurate with the number and type of curricular offerings in class and field; class size; number of students; and the faculty s teaching, scholarly, and service responsibilities. To carry out the ongoing functions of the program, the full-time equivalent faculty-to-student ratio is usually 1:25 for baccalaureate programs and 1:12 for master s programs. Narrative discussed that faculty who teach practice courses have a CSWE accredited MSW degree and at least two years social work practice experience. Narrative discussed how faculty size is commensurate with the number and type of curricular offerings in class and field, class size, number of students and faculty teaching, scholarly and service responsibilities. Narrative provided evidence that full-time equivalent faculty to student faculty ratio is usually 1:25 at the BSW and 1:12 at MSW level. (continued on next page) Appears in compliance; the table summarizing qualifications, etc is helpful See above V1, p.82 The narrative describes a workload shift of faculty from BSW teaching to MSW. The program was encouraged to address how this transition will occur. The narrative projects a ratio in 2012 to be non-compliant with the MSW expectation. The program was encouraged to consider how to plan for an enrollment that will maintain compliance with CSWE expectations. Page 16 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 3. Implicit Curriculum Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments M3.3.3: The master's social work program identifies no fewer than six full-time faculty with master's degrees in social work from a CSWE-accredited program and whose principal assignment is to the master's program. The majority of the full-time master's social work program faculty has a master's degree in social work and a doctoral No fewer than 6 full-time principally assigned faculty with a CSWE accredited MSW to the program were identified. (No fewer than 3 at Commission Visit I, 5 at Commission Visit II, and 6 at Commission Visit III.) degree preferably in social work. Narrative presented evidence that the majority have a CSWE accredited MSW degree and a doctoral degree. 3.3.5: Faculty demonstrate ongoing professional development as teachers, scholars, and practitioners through dissemination of research and scholarship, exchanges with external constituencies such as practitioners and agencies, and through other professionally relevant creative activities that support the achievement of institutional priorities and the program s mission and goals. 3.3.6: The program describes how its faculty models the behavior and values of the profession in the program s educational environment. Narrative demonstrated that faculty engage in ongoing professional development as teachers, scholars, and practitioners in the achievement of institutional priorities and the program s mission and goals. Narrative described how faculty model the behavior and values of the profession. V1, pp85-91 V1, pp. 91-95 The program was encouraged to provide specific examples of how on-going professional development as teachers, scholars, and practitioners is consistent with the achievement of institutional priorities and the program s mission and goals. The program was encouraged to highlight activities since faculty were hired. The narrative identifies opportunities within the institution to support faculty development and was encouraged to specify ways in which SW faculty utilized these opportunities. The narrative describes how faculty and students model the behavior and values of the profession. Educational Policy 3.5 Resources Adequate resources are fundamental to creating, maintaining, and improving an educational environment that supports the development of competent social work practitioners. Social work programs have the necessary resources to support learning and professionalization of students and program improvement. Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 3.5.3: The program demonstrates sufficient support staff, other personnel, and technological resources to support itself. Narrative demonstrated sufficient support staff, other personnel, and technological resources. The program was encouraged to clearly demonstrate sufficient support staff, other personnel, and technological resources Page 17 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) 4. Assessment Educational Policy 4.0 Assessment Assessment is an integral component of competency-based education. To evaluate the extent to which the competencies have been met, a system of assessment is central to this model of education. Data from assessment continuously inform and promote change in the explicit and implicit curriculum to enhance attainment of program competencies. Accreditation Standard Compliance Statement Location Comments 4.0.1: The program presents its plan to assess the attainment of its competencies. The plan specifies procedures, multiple measures, and benchmarks to assess the attainment of each of the program s competencies (AS B2.0.3; AS M2.0.4). Presented the plan (procedures, multiple measures, benchmarks) to assess the attainment of each of the program s competencies as operationalized through measurable practice behaviors. Extensive discussion focused on assessment. Efforts are currently underway in this area. The program was encouraged to clearly present its plan to assess the attainment of its competencies. The plan should specify procedures, multiple measures, and benchmarks to assess the attainment of each of the program s competencies (AS B2.0.3; AS M2.0.4). Other aspects discussed included the need to clarify who initiates data collection, process for repository, data summary, interpretation, and dissemination Table 4.0.1 indicated courses relevant to competencies but omits the behavior measures so its unclear what is being measured, where in the program, and how. Re: field evaluation confusing; where are the competencies and how are they measured? Same for field-based evaluation Re: Learning Agreement confusing in the document submitted for review. Re: process recordings what is the specific relationship between the content as measures of competencies? Re: quantifying implicit curriculum consider linking to EP / AS criteria specified in narrative Re; Appendix 4.0.3 missing pages Re: Benchmarks what are they and how were they determined? Re: Analysis and Action Plan discuss when it would likely be scheduled. Discuss how action plan will be implemented and monitored (e.g., faculty committee charge?). Page 18 of 19

Benchmark II Itinerary (Note: Minor modifications were made during the actual visit) University of Texas at El Paso College of Health Sciences, Department of Social Work Agenda for CSWE Site Visitor Dr. Robert Ortega January 27, 2011 7:30-8:30 Breakfast with Dr. Candyce Berger and Dr. Mark Lusk 8:30 9:00 Dr. Bill Dethlefs, Director of Disabled Student Services (Union-East, 106) 9:00-9:45 Librarian Ms. Alissa Fial, Librarian assigned to Social Work and Ms. Carol Kelley, Associate Library Director for Collection and Bibliographic Services (Administrative Conference Room on the 3 rd floor of the library ) 10:00-10:45 Dr. Diana Natalicio, President UTEP (Adm. 500) 11:00-11:30 Ms. Donna Cude-Islas, Coordinator of Field Education. (CHS 315) 11:30 12:30 Social Work faculty teaching in the MSW Program (CHS 111): Ms. Donna Cude- Islas, Dr. Candyce Berger, Dr. Faith Lucas, Dr. Eva Moya, Dr. Kathryn Schmidt, and Dr. Griselda Villalobos 12:30 1:30 Lunch with Dr. Berger 1:30 2:00 Ms. Ana Matos (CHS 102) 2:00 2:30 Representatives from the Department of Social Work Field Instructors (CHS 708) 2:30-3:00 Students from the MSW Program (CHS 615) 3:00 3:30 Dr. Kathleen Curtis, Dean for the College of Health Sciences (CHS 112) 3:30 4:00 Department of Social work Advisory Council (CHS 708) 4:00 4:45 Dr. Lusk (CHS 300) 4:45 5:00 Prep for Exit Meeting conference (CHS 708) 5:00 5:45 Exit Meeting (CHS 708) Field Instructor Attendees: Ms. Priscilla Estrello, Children s Protective Services Mr. James Varela, Children s Protective Services Ms. Herlinda Gutierrez, University Medical Center Ms. Amelia Castillo, El Paso County Public Defender s Office Advisory Council Attendees: Ms. Amelia Castillo, El Paso County Public Defenders Office Ms. Rosa Flores, Workforce Solutions Mr. Steve Kahoe, El Paso Community College Ms. Janine Gallinar, Private Practice Ms. Virginia Martinez, Crime Victims Unit at University Medical Center Ms. Rita Ruelas, Domestic Relations Mr. Hector Zamora, Dismas Charities Page 19 of 19