Guidelines for the Program of Study
Leading to the General
Examination
Introduction
After the first year, the PhD Program is designed to support individualized courses of study that enable students 1) to develop expertise in selected substantive and interventive foci in social welfare and 2) to develop the ability to conduct significant research in these areas of interest. This substantive, interventive, and methodological preparation in an area of focus constitutes the program of study (POS): the means by which students specify, achieve, and demonstrate the acquisition of knowledge and skills that provide the foundation for subsequent research and scholarly endeavors. This document sets out an overall policy governing the POS in preparation for the General Examination. Guidelines are provided for the Individual Learning Plan (ILP), a short planning document that is submitted by the start of winter quarter in year two, and for the general and specific expectations appropriate to each of the three areas of the POS.
Students’ programs of study should help position them to address timely research questions important to the field of social welfare. Each student works closely with his/her advisor and subsequently with his/her Supervisory Committee to plan advanced coursework and to identify and define the questions and issues to be pursued in the POS. The student's studies within specialized areas of interest need to be placed squarely in the context of social welfare and are integrally related to the larger policy, theoretical, and methodological issues that permeate the field. Although specialization is a critical feature of the PhD Program, an excessively narrow education can be dysfunctional for the student, the program, and ultimately, the field of social welfare. An overly specialized approach to doctoral education is as counterproductive as one that emphasizes breadth at the expense of mastery.
Individualized Learning Plan
The Individualized Learning Plan (ILP), which the student and her/his advisor write together, supports initial planning and development of the POS. (The advisor may be the formal first-year advisor or another Social Welfare faculty member of the student’s choice.) Planning may occur informally across the first year of the program, and should certainly be a component of the student/advisor meeting for completion of the Advising Checklist at the end of the first year. Based on discussions with the advisor and other faculty mentors, the student prepares the ILP, a brief document that describes the area of specialization, potential advanced social/behavioral science theory and methods courses that will be used to satisfy the course requirements (at least 2 each), and tutorial reading courses that will be undertaken in preparation and execution of the required Qualifying Scholarly Paper (the written component of the General Examination). Several possible courses should be listed since the student will not yet know exactly which ones will be offered in the coming year. The ILP also describes the proposed research practicum, if known, and any other proposed training opportunities relevant to the ILP and program of study. Copies of these plans are kept in a binder in the Program Office library for students to review as examples when working on their own plans.
The ILP must be submitted to the PhD Program Director prior to
the first week of winter quarter of the second year in the program and must be uploaded to the student's Share Space.
ILP Format: Limit, 4 pages single-spaced Times 12 point font.
Content:
- Description of Area of Specialization within the field of Social Welfare
(limit to 2 pages):
- Social/behavioral science substantive area and theories
- Interventive strategies relevant to area of specialization
- Research methods relevant to investigate area of specialization
Note: If the student is a NIMH prevention trainee, the area of specialization must be related to mental health and prevention/health promotion. - Student/faculty suggestions regarding social/behavioral science courses.
- Student/faculty suggestions regarding advanced research methods courses.
Note: Include courses being targeted for CSSS track if appropriate. - Student/faculty ideas/suggestions regarding tutorial reading courses within the area of specialization and that also support preparation and writing of the required Qualifying Scholarly Paper.
- Proposed research practicum.
- Any other trainings to be undertaken.
- List of potential supervisory committee members.
ILP Revisions: During years 2 and 3 in the program, the student and
advisor/committee working together may revise the ILP as needed and place printouts of the revised document in the student's Mentor Reference Book and upload revised documents to the Share Space. For example,
relevant courses may be offered that were not available when the ILP was
first initiated. Any significant change in the area of specialization
requires that the student submit a written revision of the ILP to the
PhD Program Director for inclusion in the student's file.
Learning Objectives/Guidelines for Overall Program of Study
A. Substantive or Problem Area
1. Specification
The student’s “Substantive Area,” which defines the domain of scholarship to be examined during the POS, must pertain to the field of social welfare. Frequently, the substantive area brings together an interest in a particular population (e.g., youth, older adults) and a social issue or problem (e.g., sexual identity development, poverty). Many students also have an interest in particular life or social service settings (e.g., neighborhood and community, public child welfare, faith-based services). The following list, though by no means exhaustive, provides examples of topics that might be subsumed in the substantive area definition.
Examples of Substantive Areas:
| • child care and labor force participation | • multigenerational health, development, and equality |
| • child maltreatment | • neighborhood influences |
| • disabilities | • older adults |
| • health/mental health disparities | • people living with HIV/AIDS |
| • immigrant health | • poverty |
| • indigenous well-being | • racism |
| • inequality and social structure | • spirituality and mental health |
| • interpersonal violence and trauma | • substance use |
| • local and global community development | • well-being of marginalized/oppressed populations, e.g., GLBTQ, refugees |
| • youth development |
2. General Learning Expectations
The student is expected to acquire a basic understanding of how the substantive area is defined, its historical, policy, and institutional context, and its theoretical underpinnings. This includes, but is not limited to, the history of the substantive area, major governmental policies (e.g., laws, regulations, court decisions, treaties), and salient characteristics of the focal population that are most salient to the area of interest. The student obtains a critical understanding of major theoretical, ideological, and empirical perspectives that characterize the area of study. The POS should enable the student to master and critically assess the state-of-the-art knowledge regarding the specific substantive area, including adequate attention to factors such as ethnicity, race, gender, class, age, sexual orientation, and culture.
Given the breadth of these expectations, the student is not expected
to have an in-depth knowledge of all aspects of the substantive area.
The intent is that each student acquires a sufficient grasp of a particular
area of social welfare so that more specialized interests can be placed
in their larger context.
3. Specific Expectations
Since most substantive area topics are too broad to feasibly be mastered within an individual POS, the student and Supervisory Committee select a component part of the larger topic to serve as a focal point for the POS. This specification will not only aid the student in preparing to write the Qualifying Scholarly Paper but also may provide a foundation for his/her dissertation research.
Specification can take a number of forms. One approach is to focus on a policy or program issue that has special significance for a particular substantive area: for example, key legislation within immigration policy, welfare policy, or violence against women policy that implicitly and explicitly impacts immigrant and refugee women. Another approach might be to focus on the construction of the focal area: for example, the social construction of sexuality related to female sexual desire and agency or development of gendered norms of behavior through internalized racism. A third approach may be to focus on the historical context or evolution of the area, for example, the historical context of child care, or the genealogy of the discourses of “HIV/AIDS.”
However, care should also be taken to see that the student's study efforts
are not too specialized. This can be accomplished, in part, by ensuring
that preparation addresses the larger context within which the specific
interests are embedded.
B. Interventive Area
1. Specification
The term “interventive area” refers to strategies used to effect change in the target area of social welfare. Strategies include but are not limited to the following:
| • education | • clinical treatment |
| • dialogue | • advocacy |
| • administration | • case management |
| • conscientization | • organizational development |
| • policy | • community development |
| • prevention | • coalition-building |
Distinctions among strategies can be made on various grounds, e.g., ideological distinctions such as feminist practice, points of intervention such as prevention or crisis intervention, or population specifications such as service to the gay/lesbian community.
Each overall change strategy incorporates a range of theories, practice
approaches/models, and specific interventions or techniques. The distinctions
among these are often somewhat arbitrary. Students should be clear what
change strategies they are focusing on and why. Special emphasis should
be placed on the theoretical and empirical foundations that underlie the
strategy(ies) in question.
2. General Learning Expectations
Students are expected to acquire a basic understanding of a change strategy. This would include, for example, a general comprehension of the array of models of practice relevant to the strategy selected, including their essential similarities and differences, as well as emergent directions in this interventive area. When practice theory and research in the chosen interventive area have been developed largely outside the field of social welfare or the profession of social work, the student should also have an understanding of factors within the field and profession that are likely to affect the transferability and ultimate usefulness of this technology.
3. Specific Expectations
The student is encouraged to select a specific focus within the interventive area. This can take several forms. For example, the student might concentrate on one model of practice, such as current interventions to change cultural norms regarding sexuality and condom negotiation skills; investigate empirically based strategies and spiritual practices designed to increase personal empathy and compassion; or examine critical awareness as a transformative intervention that impacts individuals, communities, and structural concerns. The student may choose to focus on a more in-depth analysis of contextual issues that impact intervention delivery: e.g., identify and examine organizational factors related to quality of psychosocial care in skilled nursing facilities or community level factors that support wide spread diffusion of prevention strategies.
The students is expected to develop a thorough familiarity with the latest methods and procedures used in the interventive area, including the research and practice literatures on its application to various populations or systems, its variable effectiveness in different contexts, and the most recent technical developments. Lastly, there must be adequate correspondence between the substantive and interventive areas of the student’s POS: i.e., the change strategy addresses issues specified within the target social welfare area.
C. Research Methodology Area
1. Specification
The POS research methodology area must include the necessary tools for the rigorous investigation and study of the target field of social welfare. This involves choice of an approach to be used in the inquiry (e.g., exploratory, descriptive, experimental, quasi-experimental, ethnographic, interpretive) including the procedures to be used for selecting the population to be studied, for collecting data, and for analyzing the data. Research methodology can be applied in a broad range of studies, including those of historical, policy, community, or organizational nature.
2. General Learning Expectations
Students are expected to acquire basic knowledge concerning fundamental research concepts and procedures, and to draw appropriately on this knowledge base in addressing applications of research methodology relevant to their field of study. This knowledge will build upon the minimum research competencies that have been outlined within the initial foundation of the program (see Appendix: Research and Teaching Competencies).
3. Specific Expectations
In addition to developing the student's general knowledge of research concepts and procedures, the research methods learning objectives need to include acquisition of the knowledge and skills in relation to issues, methods, and techniques that are especially pertinent to the conduct of research in her/his substantive/interventive areas. This aspect of learning is critical since it will enable the student to acquire the skills necessary to do sound research in her/his specialized area of interest, a major objective of the doctoral program. Finally, the student develops a good grasp of the significant existing research studies in her/his special area as well as the major issues and questions being posed by the community of scholars in this field.
Specificity might include acquiring skills in a particular type of analysis
strategy (e.g., growth-curve mixture modeling within the range of longitudinal
analysis techniques; or to examine the use of critical discourses analysis
as an interpretive methodology). A student may choose to investigate common
difficulties encountered in quantitative policy research methods and examine
current methodological solutions for addressing these concerns.
