Master’s in Social Work is an educational program that guides students through development of knowledge, values, and skills associated with the social work profession.
The online format enables a great deal of flexibility in order for working professionals to have access to the social work graduate degree and career preparation. Consider, however, whether any challenges might also accompany learning in an online format.
a description of a description of two strategies you plan to practice in order to enhance your online learning in the MSW program. Justify your use of each strategy. you plan to practice in order to enhance your online learning in the MSW program. Justify your use of each strategy.
Seipel, M. M., Johnson, J. D., & Walton, E. (2011). Desired characteristics for MSW students and social work employees: Cognitive versus personal attributes. Journal of Social Work Education, 47(3), 445–461.
There were no effects of the scenario event on integrity scores, so
integrity (M5 64.9, SD5 9.3) was used as a predictor in the major analyses. Females scored higher than males, F (1, 158)5 10.63, p5 .001, Z2 5 .06 (Ms5 66.5 and 61.1, SDs5 8.2 and 10.6). Ana- lyses were conducted using the SAS GLM procedure; the predictors
in the model were integrity (continuous, centered variable), ethical event (three levels: ethical decision and successful outcome, ethical
decision and unsuccessful outcome, and unethical decision and successful outcome), sex of respondent (effects coded), and all
342 Schlenker, Weigold, & Schlenker
interactions. The same significant overall effects and patterns de- scribed shortly were obtained if integrity was entered as a dichoto- mous variable (median split). None of the reported effects were
qualified by sex. The major dependent measures are presented in Tables 4 and 5,
which show F and p values for effects and GLM estimates of con- dition values, respectively. High and low levels of integrity were
defined as 1 SD above and below the mean (see Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003). Initial analyses also included scenario type (busi-
nessman or actress) and its interactions. The major results were not qualified by scenario type, so it was dropped.
Table 4 Study 2: Integrity by Event Interactions on Evaluations
Act Main Effect
F p F p F p
Principled 263.83 o.0001 16.52 o.0001 29.05 o.0001 Authentic 80.23 o.0001 3.28 .04 6.40 .01 Beneficent 86.17 o.0001 5.60 .005 6.60 .01 Likable 60.99 o.0001 13.02 o.0001 19.62 o.0001 Effective 32.49 o.0001 5.53 .005 7.29 .008 Intelligent 46.18 o.0001 3.95 .02 3.80 .05 Spiritual 97.31 o.0001 8.83 .0002 4.12 .04 Similar to self 83.53 o.0001 13.70 o.0001 16.40 o.0001 Characters’
59.83 o.0001 4.23 .02 8.29 .005
of the act
374.04 o.0001 10.58 .0001 20.61 .0001
Note: Tests of overall effects have 2 and 150 df except for spiritual (2, 148) and
similar (2, 148); interaction contrasts of integrity by ethical failure/unethical success
have 1 and 150 df except for spiritual (1, 148) and similar (1, 148).
What Makes a Hero? 343
Table 5 Study 2: Integrity by Event Interactions on Evaluations
Dependent Measure and
Low integrity 5.54a 2.95 5.93ac
High integrity 6.30b 1.98 6.30bc