FROM : Policy In Action: Using Reflection of Experiences to Teach Social Welfare Policy

Reviewer-1

Kolb’s Cycle and the learning centered approach should be better integrated throughout the paper.

Thank you for this helpful feedback.  Kolb’s Cycle of Experiential Learning Theory has been introduced in the Abstract and cited (along with other teachers and researchers using his ideas) in the Introduction section, and the Materials and Methods sections.

I also think it is a great idea to discuss the CSWE Competencies in relation to the activities, discussion, etc. but the introduction of the competencies in the paragraph about the “letters” activity seems to come out of left field. It would be helpful to possibly move that information to its own paragraph at the end of the section on evaluation, where some basic information about CSWE Competencies can be given to introduce the topic and then the author can describe how each of the focused-on assignments meets competency criteria.

The CSWE Competencies were moved to a separate paragraph and discussed as an introduction to the primary assignments for this course. Refer to lines 323 -336.

 

When discussing the final group project, it may be helpful to provide some examples of what is in the rubric/how the assignment is scored.

Examples of what is in the rubric and how the assignment is scored were added. Refer to line 296-300.

I am also unclear if the author is suggesting ways to evaluate the classroom learning experience or actually conducted evaluation of their own classroom. Please provide some clarification in this part and, if evaluation was done, please provide some information on what was found. Also, please provide some examples of questions that will be/were asked in the Qualtrics survey.

The evaluation section was changed to Teaching Reflections with a discussion the review of grades. Refer to line 322 – 323.

The cultural diversity section would be better off moved to before the evaluation piece of the paper for better flow.

The cultural diversity section was moved. Refer to line 301.

Instead of “discussion” use the term “conclusion” as this section is more a concluding paragraph than a discussion.

Conclusion replaced discussion. Refer to line341.

Remove the section header “results” unless a study was conducted, and the author has results to present. Instead incorporate the information from the results section into the end of the previous section.

Might be helpful to provide some examples of the beginning policy practice skills taught in the course in the introduction where this is introduced.

The section header “results” was removed and information added into the conclusions section.Examples of the beginning policy practice skills are discussed in the introduction. Refer to line 49.

You also may want to define experiential learning, as not everyone knows that that means (and the information jumps from introducing the topic to a more advanced discussion of the topic) and provide a more seamless transition/explanation of how experiential learning is imbedded into the classroom to allow students to develop skills that move outside the classroom).

Thank you for the suggestion, this has been done in the Introduction section and the Materials and Methods section.

It might also be helpful to describe how the students have responded to these different activities/assignments and more discussion of what the assignment/activities entail (for example the policy language exercise and role plays).

 

Students’ responses to the activities/assignments are discussed and an explanation of the policy language exercise and role plays is provided. Refer to line 57 -163.

 

Minor formatting (for example, there is a floating sentence at the end of the abstract that needs to be combined with the main body of the abstract) and spelling issues. Also, some paragraphs that have run-on sentences or sentences that do not flow well which can hinder readers from understanding the sentence (for example: “Students are introduced to the legislative process through the exploration of the social welfare delivery system through policy analysis, a policy framework, and policy practice skills.”).

The floating sentence and the run-on sentence mentioned have been corrected.  A thorough review for editing has also been done.

Reviewer-2

The current social welfare issues in the context of their history and underlying rationale and values that support different approaches were not addressed in the paper. It appeared the paper focused more on policy making process and student engagement. There should be emphasis on major fields of social work service like healthcare, child welfare, income maintenance, among others.

I agree that the paper focused more on policy making process and student engagement.  It’s not entirely clear to me, is the reviewer asking for additional information to be provided that would change the paper from a conceptual piece on teaching strategies to one that discusses current social welfare issues?  In other words, the paper is about the process of teaching social welfare policy, rather than the content. The suggestion doesn’t seem to fit with the intent of this paper, but perhaps I am misunderstanding.  If it is absolutely necessary, I can add that information.  I request further advice from the editor on this.

Finally, addressing the strengths and weaknesses in the current social welfare system with respect to diversity and multiculturalism, social justice, rehabilitation programs and services in relation to diverse dimensions (Probably the last week of the semester).

As above, this seems to be a suggestion about what content to include in this paper.  Advice is appreciated.