![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Integrative field seminars can help students with the difficult task of integrating learning between field and class. Are the seminars effective? We compared one cohort of MSW students who were required to attend an integrative field seminar (n = 101) with another cohort that was not offered a seminar (n = 147). We questioned each cohort at the end of the generalist practicum about skills and attitudes we thought the seminar would enhance. Students who attended a seminar reported better critical thinking, more identification with the profession, and more satisfaction with their field education. However, they were similar to students without a seminar on 10 other skills, including evaluations by their field instructors.
Notes
1 The data were examined for assumptions for multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Observations were independent; the frequencies in all cells were greater than the number of dependent variables (11). We had previously omitted cases that included univariate or multivariate outliers. With the highest correlation among dependent variables at .43 (self-reflection and perspective taking) and most correlations below .4, there was no evidence of multicollinearity. Equality of variance-covariance appeared adequate (Box’s M, p = .34).However, many of the outcome measures were not normally distributed. MANOVA is robust for departures from normality if the data is skewed and does not include outliers; this was the situation with our data (Hill & Lewicki, Citation2006). However, MANOVA can produce misleading results if means and variances are correlated; for example, in this data, critical thinking had a higher mean and standard deviation than other variables. In this situation, Hill and Lewicki (Citation2006) recommend checking the results using single-outcome analyses such as the t-tests that we used. In addition, for some of our variables, multivariate normality was not attained (Shapiro-Wilk test, p < .05). Again, MANOVA results are considered robust if groups are nearly equal in size, with the largest group no more than 1.5 times the smallest group (Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, Citation2005); our data met this criterion. In sum, our data met most assumptions for MANOVA and where they did not, MANOVA is considered robust for departures from the assumptions.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Anne E. Fortune
Anne E. Fortune is Professor and Associate Dean for Academic Programs, Crystal A. Rogers is Assistant Dean for Academic Programs, and Estella Williamson is Assistant Dean and Director of Field Education at University at Albany, State University of New York.
Crystal A. Rogers
Anne E. Fortune is Professor and Associate Dean for Academic Programs, Crystal A. Rogers is Assistant Dean for Academic Programs, and Estella Williamson is Assistant Dean and Director of Field Education at University at Albany, State University of New York.
Estella Williamson
Anne E. Fortune is Professor and Associate Dean for Academic Programs, Crystal A. Rogers is Assistant Dean for Academic Programs, and Estella Williamson is Assistant Dean and Director of Field Education at University at Albany, State University of New York.