Project

Ashley Taylor

PRACTICINGPOLICYPURSUINGCHANGEANDPROMOTING.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Sociology homework help >Project

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE, AND PROMOTING SOCIAL JUSTICE: A POLICY INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH

Gretchen Heidemann University of Southern Caiifornia

Raiph Fertig University of Southem Califomia

Bruce Jansson University of Southern California

Hansung Kim Caiifornia State University, Fulierton

Schools of social work are mandated to train students for policy practice. A new

instructional approach is needed so that social workers skillfully engage in pol-

icy change to address the growing economic, social, and cultural problems that

affect our clients. This article presents the Practicing Policy, Pursuing Change,

and Promoting Social Justice (3P) approach, which brings social work students

from multiple course sections together for unified policy advocacy on a target

issue. The 8 stages of the 3P approach are presented, along with a case study.

Suggestions for replication and implications for social work education are

discussed.

THE 2008 EDUCATIONAL POLICY and Accreditation

Standards of the Council on Social Work

Education (CSWE) identifies policy practice as

a core competency for social work students. It

calls on schools of social work to train students

to "analyze, formulate, and advocate for poli-

cies that advance social well-being" (CSWE,

2008, p. 6). Social workers are also mandated,

through the profession's Code of Ethics, to chal-

lenge social injustice and pursue social change

with and on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed

individuals and groups of people (National

Association of Social Workers [NASW], 1999).

Policy practice and policy advocacy have

been identified as prime methods of promot-

ing social justice and engaging social workers

in our social reform tradition (Jansson, 2008).

Weiss, Gal, and Katan (2006) argue that train-

ing in policy practice in schools of social work

is minimal, thus practitioners lack the tools

needed to intervene in the policy process.

These authors cite as major obstacles a chron-

ic lack of teaching staff with expertise in poli-

cy practice, the structural divide between

micro and macro practice, and a general hesi-

tancy to encourage students to take political

3 8 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

stands (Weiss et a l , 2006). As a result, policy

instruction is often a dry analysis and abstract

speculation, absent the personal involvement

that translates theory into practice and

empowers students with skills to pursue

meaningful social change. ''

Fortunately, experienfial policy advocacy

assignments and acfivifies that provide students

with direct, hands-on experiences are finding

their way into social welfare policy classrooms.

Numerous recent examples have been reported

in the literature and include providing ballot-

based advocacy assignments (Manalo, 2004),

developing policy briefs to be presented to elect-

ed officials (Sundet & Kelly, 2002), organizing

letter writing and phone-in campaigns (Rocha,

2000), and lobbying state legislators through an

organized legislafive lobby day (Moore &

Johnston, 2002). Others have developed even

more elaborate methods of teaching policy prac-

tice to social work students. Hoefer (1999)

describes the Social Work and Polifics Inifiafive,

a model for 2nd-year master's-level students

that combines a polifics and social work course

with field pracfica in state legislators' district

offices. Sherraden, Slosar, and Sherraden (2002)

present a coUaborafive model of policy advoca-

cy in which researchers, pracfifioners, advo-

cates, and students worked together over 5

years to pass legislafion at the state level. Finally,

Anderson and Harris (2005) describe two ap-

proaches for undergraduates: a service-learning

approach in which students in their junior year

work in groups and engage in community-

based research on a specific policy problem, and

a pracficum-based approach in which seniors

take a policy course in conjuncfion with a prac-

ficum in the community that focuses on analyz-

ing agency policy.

Evaluations of these experiential learning

activities and initiatives show that students

are more likely to engage in policy advocacy

acfivifies in the fiiture (Rocha, 2000; Manalo,

2004), to value polifical skills (Rocha, 2000), to

be able to interpret social policy (Anderson &

Harris, 2005), and to perceive themselves as

competent policy practitioners (Rocha, 2000).

A number of shortcomings can be identified,

however, in the approaches described previ-

ously. As a group, they fail to bring students

together for collective acfion on a specific

social problem in which they achieve real pol-

icy gains, and to do so within the context of a

course on social welfare policy. In the Social

Work and Politics Initiative described by

Hoefer (1999), as well as in the pracficum-

based approach described by Anderson and

Harris (2005), students worked individually,

rather than collectively, and worked on vari-

ous policy matters rather than on a single tar-

get issue in their legislator's district offices. It

is unclear to what extent student participation

in the collaboration described by Sherraden et

al. (2002) was fied to a course in social welfare

policy; however, the authors state that only

five students participated over the course of 2

years. Additionally, in the service-learning

approach described by Anderson and Harris

(2005), although students from a policy course

worked collectively to conduct community-

based research on a specific problem, they did

not engage in policy advocacy or direct action

to ameliorate the problem.

A new approach to the teaching and train-

ing of social work students in policy practice

is needed for two basic reasons. First, students

need to fully realize the link between the

plight of their clients and the policies that

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 39

affect them and to be comfortable engaging in policy change practices with and on clients' behalf. New pedagogical innovations in teaching policy practice are thus needed so that social workers make it an integral part of their professional practice, no matter their set- ting or specialization. Second, contemporary America is burdened by many economic, social, and cultural problems, both at home and abroad, and desperately needs social pol- icy solutions that draw from the values, knowledge, and practice of social work. Recent generational and political changes pro- vide a rare window of opportunity for change that can be lead by our profession if social workers are provided with the necessary pol- icy practice tools to be a part of that change.

This article presents an innovative in- structional approach for social welfare policy advocacy: Practicing Policy, Pursuing Change, and Promoting Social Justice (3P). We begin by describing the eight stages of the 3P approach in detail. Interwoven throughout are case study examples from one school of social work that adopted the 3P approach. We conclude by suggesting ways of replicating the 3P approach at schools of social work nationwide and discussing implications for social work research and education.

Description of the 3P Approach

3P is an eight-stage approach for teaching and training social workers in policy practice that aims not merely to teach students the theory of policy practice, but to help them develop skills and competencies to engage in it, as well as become motivated to make it an important part of their professional practice. The approach incorporates elements of a typical

master's-level social welfare policy course in that it provides instruction, from a theoretical perspective, on (1) identifying and analyzing social problems, (2) developing policy solu- tions, (3) understanding legislative policy are- nas, and (4) understanding the provisions of major social welfare policies in the United States and their effectiveness in addressing social problems. What makes the approach dif- ferent is its focus on policy not only as an abstract object, such as a piece of legislation, but also as a practice in which students are engaged with their peers. It goes beyond tradi- tional social welfare policy courses by teaching students how to build an agenda around a sin- gle target issue and articulate a rationale for engaging in policy advocacy on that issue. It also provides a context in which they practice policy directly through a range of in- and out- of-classroom activities. The approach brings social work students together from across mul- tiple course sections,, and over the span of many years, for targeted policy advocacy on a single issue. By participating in the 3P approach, students come to realize the effec- tiveness of working collectively to produce concrete policy changes.

The Eight Stages of the 3P Approach

Eigure 1 depicts the eight stages of the 3P approach, demor^trating its dynamic, reitera- tive nature. Stage 1 invites schools of social work and instructors of social welfare policy to consider adopting a new approach to the teaching and training of students in policy practice. Stages 2 through 4 entail the plan- ning and preparation that occur prior to the beginning of the course. Stages 5 and 6 involve developing and implementing a strat-

40 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

egy, and Stages 7 and 8 involve evaluation,

reflection, and revision. Our hope is that any

school of social work can employ the 3P

approach in its unique setting using the infor-

mation in the Figure 1, the description, and

the case study examples.

Stage 1 : Committing t e a New

Approach ' .>

Any school of social work wishing to imple- ment the 3P approach must fully commit to providing students with a rewarding policy advocacy experience that will make a concrete impact. Buy-in is needed from school admin- istrators, instructors, students, alumni, and other stakeholders. Before making such a commitment, however, the school should con- duct a sincere assessment of current policy classes, including the extent to which students and instructors may feel satisfied with these

courses, and whether it is a priority for the school to achieve meaningful policy gains in the local community and beyond.

If it is determined that a new approach is indeed desirable, school officials or instructors should begin taking stock of the vast resources of the school and the university, the wealth of expertise and knowledge of instructors, and the needs and abilities of students. In prepara- tion for the transition to the 3P approach, it should be kept in mind that although signifi- cant policy gains can certainly be accom- plished, they likely will not be fully realized over the course of a semester or school year. It should be anticipated that the first year or two will be arduous, requiring significant invest- ments of time, energy, and resources, and that significant gains may not be experienced. Thus, it is recommended that a multiyear com- mitment be made to the approach.

FIGURE 1 . The Eight Stages of the 3P Approach

Before the Course Begins

Stage 1: Committing to a New Approach

Stage 2: Choosing the

Issue

Stage 3: Identifying

Leadership and Instructors

Stage 4: Designing the

Course and Syllabus

During tiie Course

Stage 5: Developing a Strategy

Stage 6: Implementing the Strategy

After the Course Ends

Stage 8: Reflection and

Revision

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 4 1

Case study example. A school of social work

in southern California has been employing the

3P approach since 2006. A brief chronology of

events that occurred in each year is depicted

in Figure 2 to assist readers in understanding

the case study examples.

For many years, the lead policy instructor

witnessed students who were unsatisfied with

their experiences in the foundation-year social

welfare policy course. Historically, they select-

ed a campaign or cause in which they would

participate for 15 to 20 hours and about which

they would write a final paper. After working

individually on short-term assignments that

often provided litfle basis for drawing connec-

tions between course study and campaign

involvement, many students reported feeling

a lack of purpose or sense of accomplishment.

They often felt as if their intervention was

minimal, had little impact, and was lost to a

cause, the end results of which would rarely

be known to them. The lead instructor com-

mitted to developing a way to provide stu-

dents with a collecfive, hands-on policy advo-

cacy experience that would make a concrete

impact and adopted the 3P approach.

Stage 2: Choosing the Issue

The main objecfive of the 3P approach is to

have students direcfiy experience their impact

through organized, focused, and united acfion

on a persistent and severe social problem.

Bobo, Kendall, and Max (2001) draw a distinc-

tion between a social problem (what is wrong)

and an issue (a specific solufion to the prob-

lem). For example, an idenfified social prob-

lem may be poverty, while the issue is a living

wage. The 3P approach provides a method for

schools of social work to wage an issue

campaign—a series of connected events over a

period of time—to win victory on a particular

issue (Bobo et al., 2001). A target issue should

be chosen in response to several criteria, name-

ly the promise of meaningful impact, its high-

ly relevant nature to social workers and the

local/regional community, and the confidence

that policy change on the issue is achievable.

First, instructors should consider what

the most pressing social problems are in the

institution's local community, region, or state.

Selecting an issue and campaigning for a pol-

icy that would address this transcendent

FIGURE 2. Four-Year Chronology of the 3P Approach at a Case Study Institution

Year 1: 2006

• Issue: Permanent supportive housing for the homeless

• Students advocate for supportive housing bill AB 2634 in CA state legislature

• Bill passes both houses but is vetoed by governor

Year 2;2007

I Issue: Permanent supportive housing for the homeless

I Students advocate for supportive housing bill SB 2 in CA state legislature

' SB 2 is signed into law

Year 3: 2008

' Issue: Permanent supportive housing for the homeless

' Students advocate for local inclusionary zoning ordinance

' City council member delays vote; ordinance stalls

Year 4: 2009

' Issue: Permanent supportive housing for homeless children and families

' Students develop "Children's Right to Housing" resolution

' Resolution introduced in U.S. Congress

42 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

social problem present an opportunity for stu- dents and the institution to make a meaning- ful policy impact. Second, the issue should be one that is accompanied by a broad spectrum of social problems and populations with whom social workers are concerned. The stu- dents who participate in the 3P approach no doubt have various interests and serve diverse client populations at their field place- ments. Each should be able to find a niche in the study of the target issue. Thus, it should be one of relevance to most social work students. Third, the selection of a target issue should be made through careful consideration of the scope of desired change and the feasibility of accomplishing it. Through honest assessment of the resources at the institution's disposal (including financial, interpersonal, and tech- nological resources), schools can determine at what level they are capable of making tangi- ble policy gains. Schools should also take into consideration the issue itself and whether there already exists support for addressing it. It should not be one known to have no favor among the general public or key decision makers. The target issue should therefore be one with an achievable objective.

This stage occurs simultaneously with, and at times in response to, events in Stages 3, 5, and 6. Instructors hired to teach the policy course in Stage 3 may have expertise in certain policy issues, and it may be wise to take advantage of that expertise by choosing a matching target issue. Likewise, the relation- ships with policymakers and advocates devel- oped during Stage 5 might point toward con- sideration of a specific target issue. With regard to implementing strategy in Stage 6, it is possible that the efforts to enact a policy

change on the chosen topic may quickly be defeated, leaving no foundation on which to carry out the remainder of the course. Thus, Stage 2 may need to be repeated at any point. It should be noted that issues related to the arduous process of policy enactment and implementation are addressed in the class- room. Instructors of 3P are pragmatic about the realities of policy practice and prepare their students to confront challenges. When a setback or defeat is encountered in the 3P approach, it becomes a "teaching moment." Students participating in 3P learn not to be discouraged by losing, but rather are encour- aged and motivated to try again.

Case study example. Instructors at the case study institution held a series of discussions that led to the identification of homelessness as a major social problem and the selection of permanent supportive housing as the target issue because these met the three criteria dis- cussed earlier. First, homelessness was (and continues to be) a pressing social problem in the institution's local community, where as many as 90,000 persons are homeless on any given night. Campaigning for a housing poli- cy that would address this transcendent social problem presented an opportunity to make a meaningful impact. Second, because of the range of factors that underlie homelessness, most students found the focus relevant to their career paths. Third, they had identified a specific piece of legislation that recognized "housing by right" and mandated municipal- ities throughout California to develop plans to house homeless persons. By pooling the resources at their disposal, they believed they could win meaningful gains related to hous- ing for the homeless.

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 43

Partially because of the students' efforts, an updated version of the bill—State Senate Bill 2 (SB 2)—was signed into law during the second year of implementation. Having won a major piece of legislation, the team of instructors could have chosen to move on to a new piece of legislation related to homeless- ness or to an entirely new issue. Alternatively, had the legislation not passed, they would have had to consider whether to continue pressing for it or to shift the focus. They care- fully considered all opfions, using the criteria of impact, relevance, and achievability, and determined that the next step was to focus on implementation of the legislation they had fought so hard to pass. They felt that students would benefit from engaging in the process of implementation and witnessing the direct impacts of their efforts at the local level. Be- cause SB 2 leaves implementafion planning to local jurisdictions, they researched best- pracfice policies and focused on local inclu- sionary zoning ordinances as the target issue for the third year.

Stage 3: Identifying Leadership and Buiiding a Team of instructors

The matter of who ought to oversee the 3P approach depends on the circumstances of the institution. In some cases, it may be the chair of the macro practice specialization or the pol- icy instructor, if there is only one. Alterna- tively, if there is more than one policy instruc- tor, a single instructor may be appointed, or a committee of instructors may together assume the responsibility. The leader needs to be able to devote ample time to the endeavor and to have strong organizafional skills. Ideally, the leader is someone who is not intimidated by

pursuing relafionships with elected officials and community leaders. Regardless of who assumes leadership, a fully collaborative ap- proach is recommend in which all instructors and relevant faculty and staff are involved in planning, preparafion, implementafion, eval- uation, and revision. It is also recommend that leadership be shared and rotated on a period- ic basis and that leaders train their colleagues in the approach to ensure survival and confi- nuity in the event that the leader refires or resigns.

Once leadership has been identified, it is necessary either to bring on board faculty with experience in policy advocacy or to train existing instructors, if they lack these skills. Depending on the number of course sections involved, new instructors may need to be recruited. Guest lecturers and other speakers familiar with the target issue or experienced in policy practice on the issue should also be identified.

Case study example. The case study insfitu- fion was fortunate to have a dynamic and courageous policy instructor who stepped up to serve as the lead instructor and coordinator of the 3P approach. Having fought for social jusfice as a federal administrative judge, civil rights lawyer, freedom rider, and advocate for the homeless for several decades, he was well- versed in policy advocacy arenas. He also brought to the table a number of exisfing rela- tionships with community leaders, elected offi- cials, and prominent members of the faith com- munity. His wealth of expertise, extensive con- necfions, and passion for policy change and social jusfice went a long way in advancing the supportive housing agenda and eventually securing tangible policy gains. However, such

44 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

preexisting relationships are not necessary for successful implementation of the 3P ap- proach. Rather, a commitment to social change, basic familiarity and experience in policy advocacy arenas, and a willingness to forge new relationships are all that is required.

After adopting the approach, the lead instructor found it necessary to recruit several new instructors. The executive directors of two local organizations (a community devel- opment commission and a nonprofit develop- er of low-income housing) were hired, along with a former Arizona state senate intern. Fourteen course sections were taught by 10 instructors on the school's three campuses. Coordination of such a massive project re- quired all course instructors to dialogue with one another and be unified. Beginning- and end-of-semester staff meetings, monthly tele- conferences, and frequent e-mail communica- tion made this possible. -,

Stage 4: Designing the Course and Deveioping the Syllabus

Schools employing the 3P approach need to develop a course structure, identify course objectives, and devise course assigrunents and activities. Several recommendations are of- fered here. However, these should not be con- sidered mandatory or inflexible; each institu- tion employing 3P should carefully tailor the approach to meet its unique needs and objectives.

Course structure. The 3P approach as- sumes a multiyear commitment. There are many ways in which 3P could be built into a school of social work's curriculum. One method is to incorporate it into two semesters (or all quarters) of the foundation year. The

focus of the fall semester would be to identify, research, and analyze the social problem; devise policy solutions; and develop a strate- gy for policy change on the issue. In spring, students would enact the strategy. This method involves the entire cohort in the approach, allowing all students to experience direct, hands-on policy advocacy activities and contribute directly to any victories. Another method is to build the course into the spring semester of the foimdation year, and then into a specialized policy advocacy course for students in the specialization year. Again, the foundation-year course could focus on researching and analyzing the social problem and developing strategy, and the specializa- tion course could focus on enacting the strate- gy. A third option is to build the approach into the school's existing policy or macro practice course during a single semester of either foun- dation or specialization year. All activities, from identification and research to strategiz- ing and presenting policy proposals, occur within the single semester. However, the lapse in sustained effort might pose a problem and could require the effort of instructors to carry on any unfinished business.

Two points must be addressed regarding integration and ownership. Eirst, as with all courses at a given school of social work, it is beneficial to integrate the policy course employing the 3P approach into the overall curriculum. This could be done by reinforcing the target issue in other courses and drawing connections between direct practice, research, and policy practice for the vulnerable popula- tion. Second, the policy advocacy activities undertaken by students to advance their agenda on the target issue can be very time-

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 45

consuming and may require flexibility on the

part of instructors and administrators. The

school must consider, for example, whether

students will be given permission to attend a

legislative hearing if it is scheduled during

class or field time. Any institution adopting

the 3P approach must consider these matters

carefully. To that end, it is desirable for the

approach to be "owned" by the entire school

or department, its administration, and faculty.

Course objectives. The course objectives

should incorporate, but go beyond, those of a

traditional policy course. They should reflect

the experiential, collective nature of the

approach. We offer some suggestions; howev-

er, each school wishing to adopt the approach

needs to custom-develop course objectives to

match the desired outcomes.

1. Identify, research, and analyze a transcen-

dent social problem in the local community.

2. Develop a policy solution that addresses

the social problem.

3. Articulate a rationale for engaging in poli-

cy advocacy to alleviate the social problem.

4. Develop a strategy to advance the policy

solution.

5. Learn the roles and skills that social work-

ers use to influence the policy process

through direct policy practice and hands-

on experience.

6. Become comfortable engaging in policy

practice in a collective manner with fellow

students, policy advocates, decision mak-

ers, clients and consumers, and others.

Activities and assignments. Because the 3P

approach requires students to be directly

involved in a wide range of hands-on policy

advocacy experiences, students should be

encouraged to spend time outside the class-

room engaging in them. These policy practice

activities should not be the only ones in which

students engage, however. Within the class-

room, students should participate in exercises,

research, and discussions that deal with the

analytic aspects of policy practice, such as iden-

tifying social problems, formulating policy

solutions, articulafing a rationale for those poli-

cies, and evaluating them. Because the course

involves a combination of analytic and practi-

cal competencies and skills, these must be rein-

forced both inside and outside the classroom.

With regard to assignments, instructors

should place heavy emphasis on participation

in the experiential dimension of the class, along

with midterm and final examinations that eval-

uate students' ability to articulate a rationale

for policy advocacy, analyze social problems,

identify appropriate policy solutions, compre-

hend the theory of policy practice, and under-

stand the ecology of policy systems. These can

be supplemented by other assignments, such

as weekly quizzes, the keeping of a journal,

and in-class presentations.

Case study example. With the issue of per-

manent supportive housing for the homeless

chosen as the central focus at the case study

institution in year 2, the course was designed

in such a way that students would mobilize

support for SB 2. Each course section chose a

homeless subpopulation on which to focus

(such as veterans, emancipated foster youth,

or the persistently mentally ill), on which they

developed an extensive profile. Internet-based

research was supplemented with research "in

the streets": Students visited local homeless

service organizations, toured areas where

46 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

homeless people gathered, and interviewed key informants. During weekly report-back sessions in class, students developed a plan for presenting the findings of their research to elected officials. In-class presentations accounted for 5% of the final grade, while class participation accounted for an addition- al 10%.

For the experiential dimension of the course, students were expected to contribute at least 15 hours to hands-on advocacy activi- ties outside of the classroom. Either individu- ally or in teams, students were to work toward the adoption of SB 2. Students were to establish activifies, which could include: gen- erating support for the bill from social service, faith-based, or advocacy organizations; mobi- lizing support from the public at large; or gen- erating support directly from elected officials by meeting with staffers, testifying before leg- islative bodies, or conducting letter-writing or e-mail campaigns. The experiential dimension accounted for 20% of the students' grade. For their midterm, take-home examination, stu- dents formulated an action plan around SB 2 for their target subpopulation, which they would implement during the second half of the semester. The midterm accounted for 25% of the grade. A final paper, which accounted for 40% of the grade, critically examined the efforts in which the student was engaged and the extent to which the efforts affected on the target population. It involved a final policy change action plan and identification of skills required for effective advocacy.

Stage 5: Developing a Strategy

In this stage, a multifaceted strategy is devel- oped to mobilize support for the target issue.

Students enrolled in the course collectively devise this strategy based on the results of research they conduct on the target social problem and the objecfives of the proposed policy solution. This may involve developing a policy proposal or identifying one that already exists. Working in teams, students should outline a series of activities they will engage in to work toward enactment of the policy, such as lobbying elected officials, gath- ering signatures for a petifion, organizing an e-mail campaign, or providing written or oral testimony to a city commission. The exact types of activities will depend on a number of factors, including the selected target issue, what achievements have been made to date, and the length of the course. It is also prudent for students in this stage to become familiar with the key players and the ecology of the legislative arena they will approach. They might develop profiles of elected officials whose support they will seek, including their voting records on similar issues and their likely reaction to the proposed policy.

It would be unrealistic to expect social work students and instructors to single- handedly wage and win a campaign on the selected target issue. Doing so would also run counter to the profession's recognition of the importance of human relationships. There- fore, relationships should be sought with key decision makers, advocacy organizations or individuals, consumer groups, religious lead- ers, members of the media, neighborhood councils, and other interested persons. In essence, this stage includes an attempt to build a coalition. Where such a coalition already exists, the school can lend its credibil- ity as an academic institution, as well as the

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 47

energy and effort of the students to its cause. In most cases, however, these individuals and entities need to be brought together and solicited for participation in the campaign. Vital to the effort is the identification of a pub- lic official who will present legislation to a policymaking body that the students and coalition members will support.

Case study example. For several months

prior to the first semester of implementation at the case study institution, the lead instruc- tor met with city council members, directors of local advocacy organizations, and clergy of prominent local churches and synagogues to announce plans for school-wide action on the issue of supportive housing for the homeless. A unique opportunity presented itself when the lead instructor met with a California state senator who was in the process of drafting several pieces of legislation related to the problems of affordable housing and homeless- ness, one of which was Assembly Bill 2634. The senator and the school established a mutually beneficial relationship: The instruc- tors and students participating in 3P found a target piece of legislation that advanced their supportive housing agenda and on which they could actively engage in targeted advo- cacy, and the senator found a group of 300 master's-level social work students who would help champion his legislation.

Stage 6: Implementing the Strategy

This stage entails enacting the strategy and engaging in a series of focused policy advoca- cy activities to advance the agenda on the tar- get issue. Although the campaign is ongoing over many years, most of the policy practice work takes place while the course is in ses-

sion. The exact nature of the policy advocacy activities depends on the issue, what accom- plishments have been made to date, and prior knowledge and experience of students. There may be a heavier emphasis at some points on identifying and analyzing the problem, devel- oping policy proposals, and building an agenda—especially early in a school year or in the first year of implementation. Later in the year, as well as in subsequent years, greater emphasis may be placed on presenting and defending the policy proposal, employing political strategy, and engaging in direct advo- cacy. Efforts should be made, however, to involve students in as many of these process- es as possible so that they learn a range of advocacy skills.

Some of the challenges that may affect implementation of the strategy include (1) the limited time available in a single quarter, semester, or school year; (2) the time frame of the course, which might not match the time frame of a bill cycle or petition deadline, for example; and (3) the inevitable lapses in sus- tained effort during school breaks, such as summers and holidays. These challenges can be addressed by ensuring that the 3P approach occurs over the course of several years so that previous years' successes can be built on and any unfinished work can be carried on. As they wind up their term, one cohort may develop reports or presentations to deliver to successor classes. Additionally, certain activi- ties may need attention during breaks, such as sustaiiüng relationships with policymakers or tracking legislation, to ensure continuity from semester to semester and year to year.

Case study example. In the first year of

implementing their strategy at the case study

4 8 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

institution, students met with local elected officials and community leaders to seek sup- port for the housing bill and were often suc- cessful. Although the bill passed both houses of the California state legislature that spring, it was vetoed by the governor. The veto was a disappointment to the students but allowed for a fruitful discussion of the perils and pit- falls of policy advocacy, as well as an opportu- nity to regroup and strategize for the upcom- ing year.

The second year brought exciting success. Students and instructors approached key elected officials to secure their endorsement of SB 2. They organized a conference on home- lessness that filled a local temple where the mayor of Los Angeles and the incoming chair- man of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors pledged their support for SB 2. Students also tesfified before two city council committees to seek support for the bill. That April, a unanimous city council resolution urged the state legislature and the governor to pass SB 2. Early efforts were made to work with NASW to make SB 2 a focal point of the annual Lobby Days event, which meant that more than 800 social work students from around the state lobbied members of the California legislature to support the bill. Even after the semester ended, students volun- teered in a letter-writing campaign to the gov- ernor. SB 2 passed the California state assem- bly and senate with even wider margins than the previous version had in the prior year. That fall, the governor of California signed SB 2 into law.

Students in the third year unfortunately were met with setbacks. The students needed

the vote of at least 8 of the 15 city council members to pass the local inclusionary zoning ordinance. They prepared testimony to deliv- er to their respective council members. They also worked with social service and advocacy organizations to develop case studies in each of the council districts. However, a key mem- ber of the city council delayed a vote on the ordinance, and by the end of the semester (and even to this date) it still has not yet gone up for a vote.

Before commencement of the fourth year, the lead instructor met with the chairperson of the Congressional Committee on Housing and Community Opportunities to discuss supporting a policy establishing the right of children to housing. During the spring course, students researched the fiscal and psychologi- cal costs of children on the streets, document- ed the lack of shelters for them, built alliances with advocacy groups, developed draft legis- lation, and worked to broaden congressional support. The congresswoman convened a hearing in Los Angeles in which she received testimony from the students. That summer, the congresswoman introduced House Reso- lution 582—Right of Children to Housing— into the 111th session of Congress.

Stage 7: Evaluation

Evaluafion should take place after the first and each subsequent year. Evaluation can be formal, informal, or both, and can take on many forms. It may entail administering pre- and posttests, having students fill out open- ended questionnaires, conducting interviews with students and instructors about their sat- isfaction with the course, or carrying out a

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 49

process evaluation. Additionally, standard course evaluations could be modified or sup- plemented with questions pertaining to the impact of the 3P approach.

The matter of outcome measures and indicators of success should be carefully con- sidered. Any school employing the 3P approach must determine its own objectives and criteria for evaluation. Because the 3P approach is designed to provide students with hands-on policy advocacy experiences aimed at making concrete policy change on an identified social issue, we recommend evalu- ating the extent to which the approach affects two main areas: (1) student knowledge, skills, and perceptions of policy advocacy as a valu- able form of social work practice; and (2) advancing the policy agenda on the selected target issue. With regard to the first area, an evaluation might examine students' ability to articulate policy rationales, make connections between direct practice and policy practice, analyze social problems, develop policy solu- tions, and identify policy advocacy skills, as well as their attraction to policy advocacy as a future professional practice. With regard to the second area, a process evaluation might examine the extent to which policy objectives were met; what challenges were faced and how they were overcome; the pros and cons of establishing relationships with certain deci- sion makers; and the extent to which instruc- tors, students, and others felt the approach made concrete policy gains. The results of the evaluation can contribute important informa- tion to the process of reflection and revision. To that end, schools should explore what worked well and what did not, and what sug-

gestions students and instructors have to modify the course in the upcoming year.

Case study example. Eormal evaluation took place at the case study institution after the first year of implementation. With the assistance of a doctoral student, the lead in- structor designed a survey and administered it to more than 200 students in the course. The survey assessed students' knowledge and atti- tudes about social welfare policy and the like- lihood of their participating in policy advoca- cy in the future. This data were supplemented by in-depth interviews with both students and instructors. In the interviews, students reported that the model makes policy "come alive," that it helps them to find their individ- ual and collective voice, and that they are able to draw a clear connection between policy and direct practice. The results of the survey demonstrate that the course improves stu- dents' understanding of the benefits of policy to address social problems and their confi- dence in making ethically based, reasoned arguments for policy proposals (Heidemarui, Kim, Eertig, & Jansson, 2010).

Stage 8: Reflection and Revision

The process of reflection and revision involves ascertaining what needs to be changed from the previous year to the next so that the course can be more effective in strengthening stu- dents' policy advocacy skills and affecting policy change. The process can be aided by drawing from the results of evaluation to determine what worked well and what is in need of change. Plans for engaging in a new round of planning and preparation should take place during the reflection and revision

50 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

Stage. This may involve redevising political strategy, forging new relationships with deci- sion makers, hiring new instructors, refram- ing or refocusing the target issue, revamping course objectives, or altering assignments and activities. Ideally, the process of reflection and revision involves multiple stakeholders, including students, instructors, administra- tors, and campaign partners.

Case study example. Now in its fifth year of implementation, the case study institution has undergone numerous cycles of reflection and revision. Instructors and students have been met with great success and difficult setbacks, and as a result, each year they become both more politically savvy and logistically effi- cient. For example, within the first 2 years they learned the benefif of researching key elected officials so that they could more care- fully target their message. They have also devised new strategies for transmitting what they have learned and accomplished from year to year, such as holding a congregate stu- dent assembly at the beginning of the semes- ter. Finally, they have learned to build more flexibility and student autonomy into the course, such as by allowing students to focus on a subpopulation of their choosing and undertaking self-directed projects that con- tribute to the overall target issue.

Discussion

Although not a "manualized" instructional method of social welfare policy advocacy, the 3P approach is sufficiently detailed and yet flexible enough to be implemented at schools of social work anywhere. We discuss here two areas of challenge that accompany the ap-

proach and propose some solutions. The first challenge is the amount of time and effort that must go into the preparation stage. Some fac- ulty reading about 3P may fear it requires time commitments beyond their capability. How- ever, variations on the approach might be developed to mitigate some of these initial investments. For example, schools wishing to employ the approach might contact their state chapter of NASW fo find out which issues or pieces of legislation it is championing. Sup- porting NASW's efforts might diminish some of the tasks of the lead instructor in that an issue and a policy solution are already identi- fied, and there may be a professional lobbyist who can mentor students. In this variation, students can still work collectively to support the policy change by conducting research and mobilizing constituents in key legislators' districts. - , . • .

A second area of challenge is ensuring student involvement in all stages of the approach, not just while class is in session. As a learner-centered approach, students partici- pating in 3P are active agents whose involve- ment is recommended from the very begin- ning. Currently enrolled students and alumni should take part in determining whether the 3P approach is right for their school. This could be accomplished by conducting a stu- dent focus group or forming a student adviso- ry board. Students should also be involved in the planning and preparation, evaluation, and revision stages. They might participate in staff meetings or help to design the syllabus and evaluation survey, for example. Additionally, alumni might be involved by serving as guest lecturers and mentoring students in campaign

PRACTICING POLICY, PURSUING CHANGE 5 1

activities. Involving students in these ways

empowers them to take ownership of their

learning.

The 3P approach has the potenfial to both

accomplish tangible policy gains and equip

students with the knowledge and skills to be a

part of that change. Over the course of the 4

years that the model has been implemented at

the case study school, legislafion aimed at

addressing the problem of homelessness has

been proposed and lobbied, has passed at the

state level, and is now being considered at the

federal level. Although the students cannot

claim to have single-handedly brought about

these gains, their work was instrumental in

swaying local city council, the California state

legislature, and Congress to take acfion. They

raised awareness and educated the public on

the issue. Engaging in this form of targeted,

collecfive action not only contributed to con-

crete policy change, but it also positively affect-

ed students' perceptions of the importance of

engaging in policy practice and acquainted

them with the tools and skills to do so.

Clearly, more research is needed to deter-

mine the effectiveness of the 3P approach.

Some interesting avenues of research might be

to investigate whether students in this

approach view their courses as more relevant

and engaging than do students who take

courses with a traditional approach and

whether students in this approach participate

in more policy practice after graduation than

their counterparts do. It might also be worth-

while to conduct a process evaluation explor-

ing what tangible policy changes are achieved

collectively over time by schools that adopt

this approach, what strategies and tactics they

used to accomplish them, and what students'

and instructors' perceptions of these experi-

ences are.

Social work was birthed in a period of

social foment. Its founders recognized the

need for unified action to promote policy

change and pursue social justice. Amid bur-

geoning social problems at home and abroad,

the 3P approach offers the promise of moving

the field toward activities that promote social

justice. Students who engage in the 3P

approach follow in the footsteps of our early

reformers, effecting lasting policy change

through collective action.

References

Anderson, D., & Harris, B. (2005). Teaching

social welfare policy: A comparison of

two pedagogical approaches. Journal of

Social Work Education, 41, 511-526.

Bobo, K., Kendall, J., & Max, S. (2001).

Organizing for social change: Midwest Aca-

demy manual for activists. Santa Ana, CA:

Seven Locks Press.

Council on Social Work Education. (2008).

Educational policy and accreditation stan-

dards. Retrived from http://www.cswe.

org/Accreditafion/41865.aspx

Heidemann, G., Kim, H., Ferfig, R., & Jansson,

B. (2010). Impact of the 3P approach of social

welfare policy instruction: A mixed-methods

evaluation. Manuscript in preparation.

Hoefer, R. (1999). The social work and politics

initiative: A model for increasing political

content in social work education. Journal

of Community Practice, 6, 71-87.

Hoefer, R. (2005). Advocacy practice for social

justice. Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

52 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

Jansson, B. (2008). Becoming an effective policy

advocate: From policy practice to social jus-

tice. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Manalo, V. (2004). Teaching policy advocacy

^ through state legislative and local ballot-

based advocacy assignments. Social Policy

Journal, 3(4), 53-67.

Moore, L., & Johnston, L. (2002). Involving stu-

dents in political advocacy and social change.

Journal of Community Practice, 10, 89-101.

National Association of Social Workers. (1999).

Code of ethics. Washington, DC: Author.

Rocha, C. (2000). Evaluating experiential

teaching methods in a policy practice

course: The case for service learning to

increase political participation. Journal of

Social Work Education, 36, 53-63.

Sherraden, M. S., Slosar, B., & Sherraden, M.

(2002). Innovation in social policy: Colla-

borative policy advocacy. Social Work, 47,

209-221.

Sundet, P, & Kelly, M. (2002). Legislative pol-

icy briefs: Practical methodology in teach-

ing policy practice. Journal of Teaching in

Social Work, 22, 49-60.

Weiss, I., Gal, J., & Katan, J. (2006). Social pol-

icy for social work: A teaching agenda.

British Journal of Social Work, 36, 789-806.

Accepted: 0 1 / 1 0 ,

Gretchen Heidemann is a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern Califomia. Raiph Fertig is clinical associate professor and Bruce Jansson is professor at the University of Southern California. Hansung Kim is assistant professor at California State University, Fulierton.

Address correspondence to Gretchen Heidemann, University of Southern California, School of Social Work, Montgomery Ross Fisher Building, 669 West 34th Street, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0411; e-mail: [email protected].

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.