The Effects of Poverty Simulation, an Experiential Learning Modality, on Students' Understanding of Life in Poverty

Abstract

This research examines the impact of the Poverty Simulation Project, an experiential learning modality, on students' understanding of life in poverty. A total of 101 students representing 5 undergraduate majors in the College of Health and Human Services completed measures of critical thinking, understanding of others, and the active learning scales. Results indicate that although students did not change their thinking about the causes of poverty, they changed their perceptions about the difficulties of the daily lives of the poor, increased their ability to analyze life situations, and stimulated their further thinking about poverty. Results demonstrate that social work majors did not differ from other majors in their gains from this experience. Implications for teaching about poverty and the poor, especially as it relates to experiential learning, are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• poverty
• education
• experiential learning
• critical thinking

INTRODUCTION

A substantial number of families with children in the United States are experiencing economic distress. In 2006, 35.5 million people were in poverty; 12.3% of the population lived below the poverty level. This included the working poor (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2006). Poverty statistics are based on a definition developed by Mollie Orshansky of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in 1964 and revised in 1969 and 1981 by interagency committees of the federal government. The poverty definition provided a range of income cutoffs or thresholds adjusted by factors such as family size, sex of the family head, number of children under 18 years old, and farm-nonfarm residence. At the core of this definition of poverty was the economy food plan, the least costly of four nutritionally adequate food plans designed by the Department of Agriculture (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2005). The poverty threshold for 2006 for a four-person family (two parents and two children) was $20,614 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2006). Low education, occupation, number of working members in a family, gender, race, and labor market conditions are all variables affecting the risk of being classified as poverty-stricken.

Poverty plays out in the family's ability to provide shelter, food, and medical care to its members as well as affecting family functioning (Conger, Ge, Elder, Lorenz, & Simons, 1994; Freisthler, Bruce, & Needell, 2007; Juby & Rycraft, 2004). Previous studies reveal a relationship between the detrimental effects of low-income and economic pressure on family functioning at many levels, in particular psychological well-being of the parents and the disciplinary practices they employ (Fisher, Fagot, & Leve, 1998; Peterson & Hawley, 1998; Wilson & Horner, 2005).

University students are mostly from the middle and upper class and have little or no experience of poverty and being on welfare. Lacking such personal experience, students often develop unrealistic ideas and expectations about the poor (Guttmann & Cohen, 1992; Hattery, 2003). They may not understand what it might be like to be a part of a typical low-income family. This lack of experience and understanding is likely to reduce students' potential for competent professional intervention with this client population. For social work educators such a predicament is especially challenging since one important role of social work education is to prepare students that are committed to promoting social and economic justice. Opportunities to develop competency with this population must be provided within the curriculum.

One copyrighted learning tool designed to increase awareness of the realities of life faced by low-income people and to review resources that are available to them is the Poverty Simulation Program (Iowa State University, 1998). This program was developed in 1997 by the Reform Organization of Welfare (ROWEL) Education Association of Missouri and is now owned by the Missouri Community Action Partnership (http://www.communityaction.org). Recognizing the need for students to develop an understanding of life in poverty, the Poverty Simulation Program was adopted by a prominent university in Virginia and implemented in the College of Health and Human Services of that institution.

The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of the Poverty Simulation Project on students' critical thinking about poverty, their understanding of the perspectives and experience of life in poverty, and their evaluation of the contribution of this active learning project to their continued engagement with the experiences gained. Further, in this study we will also examine whether there are differences in such effects between social work students and other health and human services students.

Critical thinking involves purposeful thinking and careful examination and evaluation of one's own beliefs and reasons for actions (Gambrill, 2006). Three principal activities are central to critical thinking. These include openness to diverse ideas, identifying and challenging assumptions taken for granted, and exploring and imagining alternatives (Brookfield, 1991; Gambrill, 2006). Active learning is defined as “in-class generated activities that involve the students in the learning process” (Nagda, Gurin, & Lopez, 2003, p. 171). These authors distinguish between the active learning concept and the engaged learning concept. Engaged learning is defined as “students' out of class engagement with issues related to the course, reflecting on concepts after class, applying concepts to real-life situations, and talking with others outside of class” (p. 171). Since the poverty simulation was not an integral part of any given course, active learning in this context is defined as “out-of-class experiential activities that focus on the engagement of students and on reflecting of experiences gained for the purpose of developing a broader perspective on a given phenomena.”

LITERATURE REVIEW

The social work profession has always been committed to promoting social justice. A social justice-oriented approach to social work “reflects the mandates of the Council on Social Work Education to better integrate themes of social justice and diversity, concerns of marginalized and vulnerable populations, and social justice knowledge into the theory and practice of social work” (Finn & Jacobson, 2003, p. xxxv). Although social workers have always been involved in working with victims of injustice and discrimination, social work educators recognized a gap between social workers' practice and the “theoretical insights into the causes of and strategies to transform unjust and oppressive social, economic, and political institutions” (Gil, 1998, p. 1). As indicated by Nagda et al. (1999), this gap between social workers' commitment to social justice and the actual practice of social justice “is the precise dilemma facing social work educators today” (p. 433).

Existing literature examining strategies for teaching poverty are embedded within the literature on teaching diversity, including social stratification, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and social justice. (For a thorough review of such literature the reader is referred to Abrums & Leppa, 2001; Davis, 1992; Garcia & Van Soest, 1999; Guttmann & Cohen, 1992; Hattery, 2003; Jessup, 2001; Latting, 1990; Lewis, 1993; Nagda et al., 1999; Nagda et al., 2003; Nakanishi & Rittner, 1992; Paul, Dodder, & Hart, 2004; Van Soest, 1996; Van Soest, Canon, & Grant, 2000). The following section addresses the conceptual framework for teaching diversity and social justice issues as used for the purpose of this article.

Education for Diversity and Social Justice

Attending to the cognitive and affective components of learning was the most important recommendation made by educators experienced in teaching about diversity. These include utilizing didactic methods to encourage students' intellectual development and experiential methods to encourage emotional responses to course content (Abrums & Leppa, 2001; Nagda et al., 1999). As emphasized by Nagda et al. (2003), in such a teaching/learning process students are “engaged as critical thinkers, participatory and active learners, and envisioners of alternative possibilities of social reality” (p. 167). This is a learner-centered approach to learning rather than a teacher-centered approach (Cossom, 1991). The main idea in such an approach is involving the student in self-directed inquiry. According to Knowles (1980), such “inquiry will produce the greatest learning” (p. 56). Knowles, considered by many to be the father of adult learning theory, insisted that adult learners need to connect who they are with what they learn. As Lindeman wrote in 1961 (as cited in Merriam & Caffarella, 1999), educators can assume that the resource of greatest value in adult education is the learner's experience and that experience becomes the adult learner's living textbook.

These ideas are enforced by other educators of diversity, emphasizing that when students explore their own respective cultural identity they are more open to move beyond the self and seek new information about others (McGoldrick, Giodano, & Pearce, 2005). Further, such exploration not only teaches diversity but also increases knowledge of human commonality and the strengths derived from diversities in society (Blake, 1994). Paulo Freire believed that the ultimate goal of education is liberation. Education from this perspective either domesticates by imparting the values of the dominant group, so learners assume things are right the way they are, or it liberates, allowing people to reflect critically and take action to move society toward a more just vision (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999). Carroll and Minkler (2000) describe Freire's approach to adult learning as involving small groups of individuals in a process of identifying and reflecting on aspects of their reality, like health care or poor housing. The groups were then assisted to examine the problems in order to identify their root causes (which tended to be political). The last step moved the group to develop a collective plan of action based on critical reflection and a feeling of solidarity with others (Carroll & Minkler, 2000). Liberating education transforms consciousness so students achieve a deep awareness of the sociocultural reality that shapes their lives and of their capacity to transform that reality.

Gaining factual information about others further expands the student's awareness beyond the self and enhances tendencies for inclusion of others (Nakanishi & Rittner, 1992). Course content based on factual information includes, yet is not limited to, information on cultural and ethnic values, traditions, histories, and the role of social institutions in promoting or repressing equality and social justice. When students are exposed to such an integrative teaching/learning experience they understand that “elements of human differences are attributable to cultural factors such as values, histories, and traditions while other differences are the consequences of the functioning of social institutions” (Blake, 1994, p. 133).

Merriam and Caffarella (1999) explain that transformational learning, originally developed by Jack Mezirow, gets set in motion by a disorienting dilemma that challenges a person's assumptions about the way things are. Adults deny the need for and postpone shifts in perspective, if possible. As students step into someone's shoes and attempt to find meaning from the experience, they have an opportunity for a change in perspective. Transformative learning is created when the learner engages in self-examination following a disorienting dilemma, assesses assumptions, recognizes that others have gone through something similar, explores options for new roles or actions, and moves toward a different plan of action in the future (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999).

Mountford (2005) documents an example of how transformational learning can be incorporated into the curriculum. The University of Missouri's Statewide Cooperative doctoral program in Education Leadership made this shift in recent years after an evaluation of the program found that students were not engaging in enough critical reflection regarding diversity, ethics, or organizational change. A guiding principle of the program was to offer opportunities for reflection on authentic cases that would challenge the students' thinking about moral dilemmas that leaders encounter. Not one student evaluation indicated any reflection on the moral dimensions of leadership. Faculty members redesigned the curriculum to encourage more personal connection with the academic content. Students were required to read more in the areas of diversity and change and they were provided with a safe form for reflection of their newly acquired knowledge. A personalized electronic portfolio was utilized as the safe forum to capture this reflection and students were required to provide evidence of how they were applying these ideas in their day-to-day practice. This change created a direct link from the curriculum to the students' daily work behavior that yielded positive results.

According to Brown (2006), schooling that values, rather than marginalizes, is necessary, but few scholars offer groundbreaking, pragmatic approaches to preparing and developing truly transformative leaders. In order to develop informed beliefs, the instructional approaches must move beyond knowledge acquisition at the formal cognitive level. By examining beliefs, values, and competing worldviews, future leaders can understand and grow in the ability to challenge various forms of social oppression. Thus the following simulation becomes an important contribution to the education of social work students and students from other disciplines.

The Poverty Simulation Project

Missouri Association for Community Action Poverty Simulation Project (2010) is a two-hour community education program designed to help participants begin to understand what it might be like to be a part of a typical low-income family. The objective of the Poverty Simulation Project is to increase students' awareness of the realities of life faced by low-income people and to review community resources that are available to them. As stated in the poverty simulation program introductory statement,

As communities organize to assist with welfare reform, residents can better help if they have a greater understanding of poverty and the state of confusion, defeat, frustration, exhaustion and despair the poor experience. The simulation will place you “in the shoes” of a person or family in poverty. (p. 4)

The Poverty Simulation Project challenges many commonly held beliefs about poverty and moves students toward a transformational learning process.

The Missouri Community Action Poverty Simulation Project requires involvement of 20 to 85 participants. The participants assume the roles of up to 26 different families living in poverty. The task of the “families” is to provide for basic necessities and shelter for one “month,” consisting of four 15-minute “weeks.” A large room is needed with tables and chairs to accommodate the number of participants and resource staffers.

The program starts with an explanation of the simulation and presentation on the background information of the local poverty demographics. The students participating in the simulation portray Virginians with low income representing various kinds of families. For example, some families are unemployed, elderly, or disabled. Other families have recently been deserted by the “bread-winner,” and others are recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).

The simulation is staffed with volunteers who portray community resources: grocery stores, police, food pantry, employment office, Social Services office, pawnshop, and others who create a local economy for participants. The families must meet specific goals for four 15-minute weeks; for example, a family needs to apply for welfare assistance and fill out the forms within 15 minutes. Similarly, a family needs to meet with a representative of an employment office and apply for work, or negotiate the payment of utility bills within this period of time.

At the end of the simulation a facilitator leads a discussion based on the families' experiences in the simulation. The community resources providers and participants share their insights as to how circumstances in the simulation compare to reality in their community. Discussion may follow that provides a list of priority needs.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Methods of Data Collection

Each year in the fall semester the university's Institute for Innovation in the Health and Human Services holds a poverty simulation workshop for the College of Health and Human Services students, including students majoring in health sciences, social work, nursing, physician assistance, and occupational therapy. All students are undergraduate students. Although there is no grade or other credit granted for participation in the poverty simulation, attending this workshop is mandatory.

Data for this research study was collected one month before the students attended the Poverty Simulation Project and right at the end of it. The data consisted of demographic information including a measure assessing a student's past exposure to poverty. In addition, three measurement scales, the Critical Thinking Scale, the Understanding of Others Scale, and the Active Learning Scale, were used. While the first two were used in the pretest and the posttest, the third measurement scale was used in the posttest only. The data for the pretest was collected in October, 2004 and the data for the posttest was collected immediately after the simulation ended in November, 2004.

Description of Participants

A total of 134 students participated in the pretest and 101 students participated in the posttest. The following description of participants is based on profiles of students who participated in the posttest.

The majority of the participants were women (89.1%, n = 90) with men comprising only 10.9% (n = 11) of the sample. Just as the sample lacked diversification in gender, it also lacked a multicultural representation. Of the 101 participants, 94 were White non-Hispanic (93.1%), 3 members were of Asian origin (3%), 1 participant was African American and the two others (2%) identified themselves as members of the “other” race group. The sample included representation of all majors of the College of Health and Human Services; of them, 49.5% (n = 50) were nursing majors, 22.8% (n = 23) were social work majors, 15.8% (n = 16) were physician assistant majors, 9.9% (n = 10) were occupational therapy majors, and 2% (n = 2) were health sciences majors.

Descriptive statistics were also used to provide a description of students' previous experiences with the issue of poverty. A frequencies analysis of students' past academic exposure to poverty suggests that more than a third of the students (36.6%, n = 37) attended at least one academic course relating to poverty, 79.2% (n = 80) read literature about poverty issues, and 90.1% (n = 91) also indicated that they had past experience volunteering with the poor. Further, students' past personal experience with poverty indicated that while 31.7% (n = 32) of them had a friend or a relative who was poor, only 5.9% (n = 6) actually experienced poverty in their own homes.

Measurement Scales

Two main measures were used to assess the impact of the poverty simulation on students' understanding of life in poverty. These included a measure relating to students' critical thinking about poverty, the Critical Thinking Scale (described in the next section), and the Understanding of Others Scale (also described in the next section), a measure that assessed students' ability to relate to the experiences and perspectives of the poor. These two measures were used before students participated in the poverty simulation and afterward. A third measure, the Active Learning Scale, was added in the posttest. This scale assessed students' feelings as to the importance of their participation in the poverty simulations in increasing their continued involvement with issues relating to poverty, such as stimulating further thinking about solutions to the poverty problem and actual actions needed to help the poor. The construction of the measurement scales for this study was influenced by the vast literature on teaching diversity, the theory of transformational learning, and the conceptual framework for teaching diversity and social justice issues as developed for the purpose of this article, all described in the preceding sections. Further, Nagda, Gurin, and Lopez's conceptual framework as described in their 2003 article and the measurement scale included there served as an additional example for the development of the measures of this study.

A factor analysis on each of the three measures was performed using principle components extraction (eigenvalues > 1) with varimax rotation converged to 10 iterations. Items below .5 were discarded (e.g., people are poor because they are on welfare; people who are poor are responsible for solving their financial problems; the social structure contributes to the existence of poverty). As a result of the factor analysis, the following scales and subscales were used in this study.

Measures

The Critical Thinking Scale assessed students' understanding of individual and structural contributions to poverty. This measure included 12 items assessing a student's thinking about his/her understanding of the role that personal characteristics and personal responsibility contribute to a life in poverty as well as the role social factors and social organizations in contributing to and alleviating poverty. Items were rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree) with higher scores indicating higher levels of critical thinking.

Four subscales assessing students' critical thinking emerged as a result of the factor analysis. These included a 4-item subscale assessing a student's perception of causes of poverty. Examples of items included in this subscale are “People are poor because they lack education,” and “People are poor because they earn minimum wage.” Cronbach's alpha for the Critical Thinking—Causes subscale was .62. The second subscale, the Critical Thinking—Personal Responsibility subscale, included two items (e.g., “People are poor because they are lazy,” and “Only single mothers are poor). Cronbach's alpha for the Critical Thinking—Personal Responsibility subscale was .40. The third subscale, the Critical Thinking—Personal Characteristics subscale, included four items reflecting on personal characteristics that contribute to poverty and are beyond an individual's control. Examples for such items included “People are poor because they have physical or mental health problems,” and “People are poor because they lack the necessary thinking skills to make money.” Cronbach's alpha for the Critical Thinking—Personal Characteristics subscale was .54. The fourth and last subscale measured responsibility for solving the problem of poverty. Two items were included in this subscale: “The government is responsible for solving the problem of poverty,” and “Religious and nonprofit organizations are responsible for solving the problem of poverty.” Cronbach's alpha for the Critical Thinking—Responsibility for Solving Poverty subscale was .45.

The Understanding of Others scale was a measure assessing students' ability to identify with the experiences and perspectives of those living in poverty. This measure included 5 items rating from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree) on a Likert-type scale with lower scores indicating better ability to identify with the experiences and perspectives of those living in poverty. Examples for items included in this scale were “I am able to value new viewpoints,” and “Poor people face so many obstacles when trying to overcome poverty.” Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .87.

The Active Learning measure assessed students' evaluation of how participating in the poverty simulation contributed to their future thinking about poverty and stimulating further thinking about solutions or actual actions needed to help the poor. This measure included seven items rated from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree) on a Likert-type scale with lower scores indicating higher active learning. A rating of 0 was assigned for not applicable. Examples for items included in this scale were “I am able to apply the ideas and knowledge I gained in this workshop to analyzing real-life situations,” and “As a result of participating in this workshop I plan to engage in some type of social action.” The overall Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .86.

RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS

Nonpaired t-test analyses were applied to analyze the differences between the students' critical thinking about poverty. As can be seen in Table 1, students' critical thinking about poverty, namely, their understanding of the individual and the social factors contributing to poverty, did not change after participating in the poverty simulation. That was true for all four submeasures of the Critical Thinking Scale.

TABLE 1 t-Test Effects of Poverty Simulation on Students' Critical Thinking About Poverty and Ability to Understand Others Who Experience Life in Poverty

Change in Understanding and in Identifying with the Poor	t	df	Significance
Critical thinking: Causes	1.55	233	.12
Critical thinking: Personal responsibility	−.80	233	.42
Critical thinking: Personal characteristics	−.27	233	.79
Critical thinking: Responsibility in solving poverty	.06	233	.96
Understanding others who experience life in poverty	−4.2	233	.00

Next, a nonpaired t-test analysis was performed to assess the contribution of the poverty simulation to students' ability to understand and identify with the experiences and perspectives of those living in poverty. As can further be seen in Table 1, results of the t test (t (233) = −4.2, p = .00), indicate that there was a statistically significant change in students' ability to understand and identify with the experiences of people living in poverty. Students were better able to relate to the poor after they participated in the poverty simulation.

Nonpaired independent t tests do not provide the clarity that paired t tests would, but as is often the case with this type of sample, it is hard or impossible to control students' attendance, resulting in an inconsistency between the two student populations. Therefore, comparisons were made at the level that was possible.

Finally, Table 2 includes the means and percentages of students' evaluation of their Active Learning, namely, their continued engagement with the experiences gained through the poverty simulation.

TABLE 2 Active Learning: Means and Percentages of Students' Evaluation of Their Continued Engagement With the Experiences Gained Through the Poverty Simulation

Statement	Percentage strongly agree or agree	Percentage strongly disagree or disagree	Missing
1. Participating in the learning activities helped me better understand the effects of poverty on peoples' lives.	87.2 (n = 88)	7.9 (n = 8)	4 (n = 4)
2. The poverty simulation is an important tool in understanding the phenomenon of poverty.	88.1 (n = 89)	8.9 (n = 9)	3 (n = 3)
3. I am now able to apply the ideas to analyzing real-life situations.	84.2 (n = 85)	12.9 (n = 13)	3 (n = 3)
4. I am gaining a good understanding of the role of social structures in contributing to poverty.	89.1 (n = 91)	6 (n = 6)	4 (n = 4)
5. The workshop stimulated my thinking about poverty and solutions.	82.2 (n = 83)	14.9 (n = 15)	3 (n = 3)
6. As a result of this workshop I plan to engage in some type of social action.	58.4 (n = 59)	29.7 (n = 30)	11.9 (n = 11)
7. As a result of this workshop I now understand that poverty is a complex phenomenon.	87.1 (n = 89)	9.9 (n = 10)	2 (n = 2)

In addition to assessing the effect of the poverty simulation on students' critical thinking about poverty, their understanding of the perspectives and experiences of life in poverty, and their evaluation of the contribution of the poverty simulation to their continued engagement with the experiences gained, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine whether there were differences in such effects between social work students and other health and human services students regarding their evaluation of gains in active learning. Results of the one-way ANOVA demonstrated a statistically significant difference existing between students in the various majors' gains in active learning (F (3, 96) = 4.51, p = .002). However, as demonstrated by the Tukey posthoc analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between social work students and students from any other majors in their gains in active learning. Results of Tukey posthoc analysis demonstrated a positive statistically significant difference between occupational therapy and nursing students (p = .009) and a negative statistically significant difference between occupational therapy and physician assistant students (p = .016).

Measurement scales specific to studies of teaching poverty do not exist, so the construction of the measurement scales used here was influenced by theories of teaching diversity, transformational learning, and an existing measurement scale that assessed teaching diversity in general (Nagda et al., 2003). As a result some scales and subscales (especially the Critical Thinking Scale) demonstrated low Cronbach's alpha values. In future research such values could be increased through adding, subtracting, or refining existing items.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONs FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of the Poverty Simulation Project on students' critical thinking about poverty, their understanding of the perspectives and experiences of life in poverty, and their evaluation of the contribution of this active learning project to their continued engagement with the experiences gained. This study also examined whether there were differences in such effects between social work students and other health and human services students regarding their evaluation of gains in active learning.

Data analyses results were surprising. They indicated that the poverty simulation did not affect students' “thinking,” namely, demonstrating an understanding of why people are poor. However, data analyses did demonstrate that the poverty simulation changed how students felt about the plight of people living in poverty and how they related to the poor as a result of experiencing the daily hassles of the poor when trying to feed, clothe, and provide shelter to their families.

What this suggests is that although students formulated their own ideas about poverty in society, they did not actually feel the experience of trying to survive while being poor. They did not experience standing in long lines only to be told to fill out lengthy forms, or that qualifying for assistance is a lengthy process involving numerous trips to various community organizations while commuting with public transportation and trying to attend to their young children all at the same time. This is how the poverty simulation contributed to their education. In the simulation they gained awareness of how frustrating basic survival can be to those living in poverty, and how humiliating it can be to ask for help from public organizations mandated to provide help. Being able to understand others' perspectives and experiences created a paradigm shift in the way they related to the poor. This is the purpose of transformative education. Clark (as cited in Merriam & Caffarella, 1999) says that transformational learning shapes people and they are different afterward.

The power of personal experience in changing perception about the poor was further supported by the results to answers provided to the Active Learning questionnaire. As can be seen in Table 2, the vast majority of the students indicated that the experience they gained through the poverty simulation contributed to their continued engagement with the experiences gained in the workshop. This included acknowledging this experience's contribution to their understanding of the effects of poverty on people's lives, the increased ability in analyzing life situations, and stimulating further thinking about poverty.

However, an interesting result was that although respondents were more emphatic with and understanding of poverty's effects on the poor, they were not necessarily stimulated toward social action to change the conditions that create poverty. Only 58.4% of the respondents indicated that they are prepared to engage in social action, while 82.2% of the respondents indicated that the experience stimulated further thinking. Such results need to be pondered. In the words of Dewey (1909, p. 2), “The business of the educator … is to see to it that the greatest possible number of ideas acquired by … youth are acquired in such a vital way that they become moving ideas, motive-forces in the guidance of conduct.” Over half of the students were so motivated by the poverty simulation. What can we do about the 41.6% of the students who did not respond in this manner? These writers believe that it is our responsibility as educators to create deliberate links between academic content and social change behavior. Integrating service learning projects throughout the social work curriculum is one way of encouraging students to engage in actual social action behaviors. The field placement is another ideal laboratory for that to happen.

Results of this study support existing models for teaching about diversity (Nagda et al., 2003), as well as models of teaching that support the use of transformational learning experiences for expanding students' learning (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999). This study's results demonstrated how gaining information about others expands the student's awareness beyond the self and enhances tendencies for inclusion of others (Knowles, 1980; Nakanishi & Rittner, 1992) and how reflecting on such information creates a feeling of solidarity with others (Carroll & Minkler, 2000). For example, existing studies relating to students' attitudes toward the elderly and their willingness to work with the elderly indicate that exposure to this population leads to changing attitudes and to increased willingness to expand the knowledge of aging and eventually engaging in direct work with them (Gorelik, Damron-Rodriguez, Funderburk, & Solomon, 2000; Vandsburger & Wakefield, 2005). Following the conclusions of these studies, it is encouraging to presume that if students are exposed to the experience of being poor and they incorporate such experiences, they are more prepared to engage in working with the poor upon graduation. Drawing again on Dewey's wisdom (1909, pp. 49–50), “… we know practically that the kind of character we hope to build up through our education is one that not only has good intentions, but that insists upon carrying them out.”

Finally, as stated before, this study's sample consisted primarily of White female students. The results of the study can be enriched by increasing the diversity of the sample. It is important for future research to address this gap and include students from different races and ethnic backgrounds, as well as a more diverse socioeconomic class.

Implications for Teaching About Poverty and Social Justice

Results of this study demonstrated that the Poverty Simulation Project is an effective tool for engaged learning in social work, a profession committed to graduating students who have empathy for the experience of poverty. Social work faculty may wish to incorporate more of the adult learning methods in order to consciously provide more concentrated learning in this very important area of the curriculum. In considering how to further bolster the results, one ROWEL model revised by the Missouri Association for Community Action and studied by Chapman and Gibson (2006) encourages the participants (in this case, teachers) to read A Framework for Understanding Poverty by Payne (2005) prior to attending the simulation. This book offers insights regarding poverty's effects on classroom education. By using this book in the debriefing, the school system included an opportunity to address issues specific to the school system and allowed teachers and administrators to develop concrete plans to improve circumstances at their school. This method builds on the theory that adult learners need to connect their experience with the education they received in order to increase the engagement of class participants. As stressed by Abrums and Leppa (2001) and Blake (1994), attending to the cognitive and affective components of learning is important to encouraging students' intellectual development and emotional responses to course content.

Curriculum content based on discussions and assignments for incorporating and building on the insights gained in simulations, including assigned reading and exploration of archival data relevant to poverty issues, is critical to increasing the impact of this experiential learning. Another way to increase student engagement with the topic of poverty might be to include movie clips as part of the instruction. Most educators would agree that students like to watch movies. The recent blockbuster movie, The Pursuit of Happyness (Blumenthal & Muccino, 2006), with Will Smith, portrays a young man who has slipped into poverty attempting to parent his young son in the wake of his wife leaving them. Smith applies for and receives an internship as a stockbroker in the middle of the poverty-induced chaos. The movie documents how incredibly difficult and crisis-prone his life in poverty was. Watching Smith study late at night while staying at the homeless shelter underlines how much harder he has to work than everyone else in the internship program. If social worker educators include media such as this to provoke thought before and after the poverty simulation, the impact of the model may be enhanced by providing further opportunities for students to critically reflect and engage in dialogue.

When students are exposed to integrative teaching and learning experiences such as this, they start to understand the complexity of living in poverty. This understanding provides a bridge to allow beginning social workers to work more effectively with clients, especially those who are different from them. Practice interventions based on the principles of social justice need to be articulated for students in order to allow them to move beyond “just wanting to help.” Positive intent paired with critical thinking and an informed conscience creates a greater likelihood that the students will be able to provide effective interventions to people of very different demographics from themselves. As stressed by Gambrill (2006), critical thinking involves one's examination and challenging of personal beliefs in order to develop openness to diverse ideas and to imagining an alternative course of action. The Poverty Simulation Project is one way to open a door for students to critically think about poverty.

The authors wish to thank Mr. Tony Daston, MS, Senior Licensed Psychological Examiner, Frontier Health, for his contribution in editing the data analysis and results sections. The authors also wish to thank Dr. Karen A. Ford, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, James Madison University, for her ongoing support of this project.