The Integrative Case Analysis Model for Linking Theory and Practice

References

• Barsky, A., Rogers, G., Krysik, J., & Langevin, P. (1997). Evaluating the integration of social work theory and practice: Multi-modal teaching techniques in the classroom. Canadian Social Work Review, 14, 185–200.
   Google Scholar
• Beder, J. (2000). The integration of theory into practice: Suggestions for supervisors. Professional Development: The International Journal of Continuing Social Work, 3, 40–48.
   Google Scholar
• Berlin, S. B., & Marsh, J.C. (1993). Informing practice decisions. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, M. L. (1984). The integration of didactic and experiential learning in the teaching of group work. Journal of Social Work Education, 20, 56–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogo, M., & Power, R. (1992). New field instructors' perceptions of institutional supports for their roles. Journal of Social Work Education, 28, 178–189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogo, M., & Vayda, E. (1989). Developing a process model for field instruction. Canadian Social Work Review, 6, 224–232.
   Google Scholar
• Bogo, M., & Vayda, E. (1998). The practice of field instruction in social work: Theory and process (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fortune, A. E., McCarthy, M., & Abramson, J. S. (2001). Student learning processes in field education: Relationship of learning activities to quality of field instruction, satisfaction, and performance among MSW students. Journal of Social Work Education, 37, 111–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelfand, B. (1990). The reflective log: An essential teaching instrument in assisting students to integrate theory with practice in a communication laboratory. Canadian Social Work Review, 2, 273–282.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, W., & Gordon, M. (1982). The role of frames of reference in field instruction. In B. Sheafor & L. Jenkins (Eds.), Quality field instruction in social work: Program development and maintenance (pp. 1–36). New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Gregorc, A. (1982). An adults' guide to style: Development, technical and administrative manual. Maynard, MA: Gabriel Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Jarman-Rohde, L., McFall, J., Kolar, P., & Strom, G. (1997). The changing context of social work practice: Implications and recommendations for social work educators. Journal of Social Work Education, 33, 29–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Lowy, L., Bloksberg, L. M., & Walberg, H. J. (1971). Integrative learning and teaching in schools of social work. New York: Associated Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mary, N. L., & Herse, M. H. (1992). What do field seminars accomplish? Students and instructor perspectives. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 6, 59–73.
   Google Scholar
• Mok, B. J. (1993). Integrative seminar: A cognitive approach to linking theory and practice in social work. International Social Work, 36, 333–340.
   Google Scholar
• Osmo, R., & Landau, R. (1998, July). The need for explicit argumentation in ethical decision making in social work. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Council for Social Welfare, Jerusalem, Israel.
   Google Scholar
• Raschick, M., Maypole, D., & Day, P. (1998). Improving field education through Kolb learning theory. Journal of Social Work Education, 34, 31–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raskin, M. S. (1994). The Delphi study in field instruction revisited: Expert consensus on issues and research priorities. Journal of Social Work Education, 30, 75–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reisch, M., & Jarman-Rohde, L. (2000). The future of social work in the United States: Implications for field education. Journal of Social Work Education, 36, 201–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, G., & McDonald, P. L. (1995). Expedience over education: Teaching methods used by field instructors. The Clinical Supervisor, 13, 41–65.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, G., & Thomlison, B. (1998, March). Promoting critical reflection in the practicum. Paper presented at the annual program meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, Orlando, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Skolnik, L., Wayne, J., & Raskin, M. S. (1999). A worldwide view of field education structures and curricula. International Social Work, 42, 471–483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, D., & Kolb, D. A. (1986). User's guide for the learning style inventory: A manual for teachers and trainers. Boston: McBer.
   Google Scholar
• Tolson, E. R., & Kopp, J. (1988). The practicum: Clients, problems, interventions and influences on student practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 24, 123–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vayda, E., & Bogo, M. (1991). A teaching model to unite classroom and field. Journal of Social Work Education, 27, 271–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walden, T., & Brown, L. N. (1985). The integration seminar: a vehicle for joining theory and practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 21, 13–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G., Strom-Gottfried, K., & Sullivan, M. (1998). Assembling pieces in the diversity puzzle: A field model. Journal of Social Work Education, 34, 353–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, R. J., Birkenmaier, J., Banks, R., & Berg-Weger, M. (2001, March). MSW integrative seminars: A social work odyssey through the curriculum. Paper presented at the annual program meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, Dallas, TX.
   Google Scholar