_________ Allison Berkowitz, DSW, Assistant Professor, University of North Alabama, Florence, AL. Copyright © 2024 Authors, Vol. 24 No. 1 (Spring 2024), 123-140, DOI: 10.18060/27271 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Increasing Political Practice and Policy Practice in Social Work Students Allison Berkowitz Abstract: Political practice and policy practice are critical components of the social work profession, yet social workers and social work students do not fully engage in them. Bachelor and Master of Social Work programs (BSW and MSW) cover these topics, often through lecture-based instruction; however, a growing body of literature suggests experiential learning is better for building efficacy and interest in them. This article reviews the literature on political practice and policy practice in social work (including teaching approaches), discusses the implications for social work of a decreased emphasis on macro social work, and then explores the results of a new study attempting to address this issue. A one-group, pretest-posttest study was conducted with BSW students (n=66) to evaluate the possible effectiveness of a new training. Key findings yielded an increase in the likelihood of the students engaging in political and policy activities in the future (with the most significant effect size related to the likelihood of sending a letter to the editor). Based on the literature review and study results, recommendations, with an emphasis on experiential learning activities, are offered for social work educators looking to increase the likelihood of political practice and policy practice engagement in their students during and after going through social work programs. Keywords: Macro social work; political practice; policy practice; social work education; legislative advocacy; political participation Public policies can have life-or-death consequences for social work clients. At the micro level, whether or not a state chooses to expand Medicaid can determine whether a client can access needed health care. At the mezzo level, the funding a county allocates to its schools can dictate teacher hiring practices, which can lead to negative ripple effects. For example, a teacher shortage can yield class crowding, learning disruptions, and unmet needs for students with disabilities (Lieberman, 2022). Or at the macro level, a country’s immigration policies can determine whether young people can be deported to a country their parents fled. These policies–and the elected officials who craft them–are highly relevant to the social work profession and those we serve. Nevertheless, social workers and social work students are not as interested in political practice and policy practice as they are in other social work subjects (Hill et al., 2017; Pawar, 2019). The disinterest is problematic since the public safety net, a set of policies on which social workers and their clients depend, is quickly degrading in the United States (Abramovitz, 2020). The degradation makes educating and activating social work students in political practice and policy practice all the more urgent. The present article reviews the literature surrounding political practice and policy practice in social work, mainly related to social work education, then shares the results of a study conducted to evaluate a political practice and policy practice training program. about:blank ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 124 Literature Review Social workers and social work students are uniquely qualified to engage in political and policy realms due to the intimate nature of their relationships with clients and the profession’s mission of attending to the vulnerable, oppressed, and impoverished (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 2021). The profession believes in this calling so strongly that engaging in political practice is included in the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics (NASW, 2021). Additionally, policy practice is one of the few core competencies set by the profession’s educational accrediting body (Council of Social Work Education [CSWE], 2022). Formal definitions will be given for political practice and policy practice since they can at times overlap or seem overly similar; however, in plain language this writer thinks of political practice as action taken to affect elections or elected officials and policy practice as action taken to affect policies directly. The formal definition being used here for political practice is the practice of political social work, or “social work practice that explicitly attends to power dynamics in policy-making […] expanding political participation, influencing policy agendas, working on campaigns or in electoral offices, and holding elected office” (Lane & Pritzker, 2018, p. 4). The definition being used here for policy practice is “using social work skills to propose and change policies in order to achieve the goal of social and economic justice” (Cummins et al., 2023, p. 5). Lastly, policy activity by social work students is considered here to be under the umbrella of the Gal and Weiss- Gal (2023) term academic policy involvement. Political Practice and Policy Practice of Social Workers and Social Work Students Findings on the political practice of social workers have variability, particularly when looking over decades, but tend to show that social workers engage in higher levels of political activity than the general public (Felderhoff et al., 2015; Hamilton & Fauri, 2001; Parker & Sherraden, 1992; Wolk, 1981). The most common political practice activity among social workers is voting (Ostrander et al., 2021). To a lesser extent, other political practice activities by social workers include voter engagement (Abramovitz et al., 2019), campaigning (McClendon et al., 2020), and running for elected office (Lane et al., 2018). Social work students tend also to show higher levels of political activity engagement than the general public, and similar to social workers, their most common political practice activity is voting (Bernklau Halvor, 2012; Wright, 2019) as well as news-watching and voter engagement (Ostrander et al., 2018). Less is known about the policy practice activity of social workers, due to research explicitly on policy practice being rare (Gal & Weiss-Gal, 2023). Research tends to show low engagement in policy practice among social workers (Weiss-Gal, 2017) as well as social work students (Schwartz-Tayri, 2021). One meta-analysis of the social work literature found only 51 studies on policy practice since the 1980s and noted that the studies reported low or very low levels of social worker policy practice engagement (Weiss-Gal, 2016). This trend of moderate to low engagement in policy practice, while showing some variations, has been observed in studies of countries such as Australia, Canada, China, Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 125 Finland, Germany, Israel, Portugal, Sweden, and the United States (Cai et al., 2022; Gal & Weiss-Gal, 2017; Gottwald & Sowa, 2019; Mendes et al., 2015; Ostrander et al., 2021; Shewell et al., 2021; Tham & Thorén, 2020; Weiss-Gal et al., 2020). Regarding which policy practice activity types are engaged in, contacting policymakers is one of the most common among social workers (Mendes et al., 2015; Ritter, 2007) and students alike (Bernklau Halvor, 2012; Wright, 2019). When looking at more nuanced activity though, with a more significant time commitment, levels of engagement tend to be extremely low. For instance, in reference to testifying before a public hearing, two studies of social workers found only 3-5% of their samples had done so (Hamilton & Fauri, 2001; Ritter, 2007) with similar results among social work students (Bernklau Halvor, 2012). Declining Emphasis of Macro Social Work Low levels of political practice and policy practice engagement could be partly due to a declining emphasis on macro social work in the overall profession. This could be particularly true of the sometimes-complex legislative advocacy activities needed to impact the creation of laws. For decades academics and practitioners have had concerns about the social work profession focusing far more on individual issues (micro practice) than on systemic ones (macro practice) (Apgar & Nienow, 2023; Reeser & Epstein, 1987; Reisch, 2016; Reisch & Andrews, 2002; Rothman & Mizrahi, 2014; Specht & Courtney, 1995). Micro practice is more popular than macro practice among social workers and social work students (Pritzker & Lane, 2014; Segal-Engelchil & Kaufman, 2008). Furthermore, social workers do not see macro activities as critical to their work (Hill et al., 2010) and students do not see them as relevant to their goals (Amerman Goerdt et al., 2019; Anderson & Harris, 2005). Even social work educators emphasize micro work more than macro (Hill et al., 2017; Pawar, 2019). One of the ways this depoliticization shows up in the field is the pervasive stigma in social workers being perceived as “being too political” at work (i.e., engaging with clients in simple, permissible, civic discussions, such as encouraging them to vote; Hylton et al., 2018). Rome et al. (2010) found that over half of the sample of professional social workers never engage in these kinds of discussions with clients. Macro work is missing from many social workers’ employers and many social work students’ field placements. One study found that only 2% of the social workers in their sample spent time each week engaging in macro tasks (Rothman & Mizrahi, 2014). Another study, with a sample of almost 40,000 Master of Social Work students, found that only 6% of them were in macro placements (McBeath, 2016). The implications of this decline in promoting macro social work are severe and far-reaching. Thankfully, the picture is not all bleak. In recent years, this trend has been acknowledged as problematic by a number of social workers and they have been taking exciting, organized steps to help turn the tide. Three projects which demonstrate this point well are: Campaign School for Social Workers, the Special Commission on Macro Practice, and the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign (NSWVMC). First, the University of Connecticut’s Nancy A. Humphreys Institute for Political Social Work ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 126 (NAHIPSW) regularly holds trainings for social workers interested in running for office or working on campaigns (McClendon et al., 2020). This training has been found to increase participants’ likelihood to engage in political practice (Lane et al., 2018). Anecdotally, this writer finds these trainings to be incredibly efficacious, as she attended one in 2017 and was running for state office in a matter of months. Next, the Special Commission on Macro Practice is a highly dynamic group seeking to promote macro social work and rebalance the profession’s current “Micro-Macro divide” (Bailey et al., 2022). Lastly, the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign (NSWVMC) works to educate social workers on how they can empower clients with non-partisan voter engagement (Hylton et al., 2022). This is just a glimpse of the phenomenal work being done to increase macro practice, but may offer optimism that there is indeed hope. Implications for the Social Work Profession At this time in the United States, there is an insufficient number of people-centered policies in place and a dearth of voices calling for them. This is reflected by startling statistics on vital social issues. For example, the United States is experiencing the highest wealth gap since before the Great Depression (Keshner, 2019). With income inequality greater than almost any other industrialized nation (Siripurapu, 2022), 43% of Americans have recently postponed health care they need (Brenan, 2023), 10% of Americans are food insecure (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2023), and half of American families have inadequate child care (Igielnik, 2022). Increased political practice and policy practice engagement of social workers and social work students could have untold, positive benefits for the profession and those we serve. As Representative Ayanna Pressley said, “The people closest to the pain should be closest to the power, and […] a diversity of voices in the political process is essential to crafting more effective public policy” (Committee to Elect Ayanna Pressley, n.d., para. 1). Greater engagement in political practice and policy practice is needed by social workers and social work students to ensure that public policies address the profession’s mission of enhancing human well-being and meeting the basic human needs of all people (NASW, 2021). Social workers prefer micro practice over macro, but the two are inextricably linked (Rothman & Mizrahi, 2014) as many academics argue that all social work is inherently political (Lane & Pritzker, 2018; Reisch, 2016). Through this lens (and as echoed by NASW and CSWE), the ability to effectively engage in political practice and policy practice is vital for all social workers and social work students. Theoretical Framework Experiential learning theory (ELT) denotes a process of activity involving learning while doing (Kolb, 1984). Researchers in social work have found that experiential learning is effective in teaching political practice and policy practice (Apgar & Parada, 2018; Beimers, 2016; Lim et al., 2018; Street et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2020; Weaver, 2005; Witt et al., 2020). Social work students who took policy courses with experiential learning methods were found to engage in greater levels of advocacy after graduation than those taught with traditional methods (Mink & Twill, 2012; Rocha, 2000; Weiss-Gal & Savaya, Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 127 2012). Significantly, this pedagogy has also been found to facilitate greater feelings of self- efficacy in social work students (Bernklau Halvor, 2016; Nowakowski-Sims & Kumar, 2020; Weaver, 2005). Traits of Effective Political and Policy Trainings Social work students perceive political practice (Meehan, 2021) and policy practice instruction as dry and abstract (Heidemann et al., 2011; Henman, 2012). Trainings must be efficacious to ensure that social workers are competent and confident to engage in political practice and policy practice. Historically, social work programs have taught political practice and policy practice courses with a heavy emphasis on theory and lecture (Apgar & Parada, 2018; Ritter, 2013) and as previously stated, this has not resulted in the level of political and policy engagement needed. What makes for effective political practice and policy practice training? Critical, evidence-based components are discussed below. Individualized Students can have trouble seeing the impacts of policies on their clients (Sherraden et al., 2015). Offering students the flexibility to learn about policy practice through the lens of an issue they care about is valuable and efficacious (Henman, 2012; Pawar & Nixon, 2020). Realistic As important as knowledge is, understanding how the system works is useless if participants cannot act. The resource of time is a major determining factor in whether or not a social worker will participate in political activities (Verba et al., 1995). Social work students have little free time (Diebold et al., 2018), thus effective training must be practical and instruct participants in activities that will be accessible in their day-to-day lives. Tone/Humor Policy practice can often seem dense, so using a light-hearted and humorous tone can be helpful. Humor helps to learn complex subjects (Berk, 2002) and aids learners to be less tense and reactive (Lujan & DiCarlo, 2016). One researcher found replicable findings that humor helped increase students’ final exam grades by 10% (Ziv, 1988). There is sometimes a fear that using humor in the classroom can threaten credibility, but students perceive educators with high humor as more competent than those with low humor (Wanzer & Frymier, 1999). Passionate Passion is a critical component of political activity, as passion for an issue helps develop feelings of political efficacy (Beaumont, 2011). Thus, effective training must tie in with the learners’ passions. Grounding a learning activity in a so-called “generative theme,” or something an individual has strong feelings about, helps to break through apathy ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 128 and generate energy and hope (Hope & Timmel, 1996, as cited in Bernklau Halvor, 2012). Secondary passion can also be beneficial. Students find instructors’ passion for policy to be influential and helpful in expanding their appreciation for political advocacy (Bernklau Halvor, 2016). Supportive Even if a training contains all the factors listed above, students will not participate politically if they do not feel confident in their abilities (Schwartz-Tayri et al., 2020). To help increase feelings of confidence and self-efficacy, effective trainings should help students feel supported. Bernklau Halvor (2016) found that students benefit from having instructors who believe their students can successfully impact the political system in a positive way. About the Present Study and Its Aims Social workers and social work students are under-engaged in political practice and policy practice. Considering the evidence-based qualities of effective trainings described above, a training was designed and implemented to increase political and policy engagement among social work students. The present study sought to evaluate this training. Research question: “What is the effect of a short, experiential training using evidence- based qualities towards increasing students’ intent to engage in greater levels of political practice and policy practice?” About the Training This training is, by design, introductory and brief. Its total duration is about one and a half hours. The training starts with a quick review of some basic political and legislative processes in the United States, but spends the bulk of time on specific political and legislative advocacy skills, such as (1) connecting one’s overall life interests with specific public policy areas, (2) finding organizations to collaborate with on legislative advocacy in areas of students’ interests, (3) finding one’s policymakers, (4) calling policymakers, (5) writing to policymakers, and (6) finding new political candidates who align with one’s values. Each skill is briefly introduced and modeled, and then participants are invited to practice the skill. For example, the facilitator discusses the importance of elected policymakers hearing from their constituents. The facilitator then calls a legislator’s office on speakerphone, shares the reason for calling, and describes the action being sought (e.g., “I want the representative to vote yes on…”) before ending the call. Participants are then invited to call one of the elected officials whose contact information they looked up earlier in the training. The training strongly emphasizes evidence-based qualities (e.g., using students’ interests, instructor humor, providing support, etc.) to optimize student engagement. While designed and pilot tested as an in-person training, it should be noted that this study was Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 129 facilitated virtually due to the timing being early in the COVID-19 pandemic. All six trainings were facilitated by the same macro social work instructor and with the same content. Methods IRB Approval This study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval to be conducted confidentially. Students were informed that participation was voluntary, that they could withdraw at any time, that there was no compensation, and that there was little risk. Study Design This was a one-group, pretest-posttest design. While trainings were facilitated with six different groups of BSW students, between August and October 2020, analyses were done with an aggregate of all participants’ data so this is not being considered a multi-group design. Pre-tests assessed students’ levels of attitudes and behaviors using Qualtrics software. Post-tests were given immediately after trainings, then assessed for potential changes. Post-tests also were facilitated with the Qualtrics software. Recruitment and Sampling Social work department faculty were contacted to determine interest in having a training facilitation done during one of their classes. This process yielded six groups of students to participate in trainings virtually (classes were being conducted online at this time, as this was in fall of 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic). The sample was comprised of 66 BSW students at a public regional university in the southern United States. One student (1.5%) identified as nonbinary, four students (6.1%) identified as men, and the remaining 61 (92.4%) identified as women. Regarding race, one student (1.5%) identified as Asian, 13 students (19.7%) identified as Black or African American, and the remaining 52 students (78.8%) identified as White or Caucasian. One student (1.5%) was older than 45 years old, seven students (10.6%) were in the 25-34 age range, and the remaining 58 (87.9%) were in the 18-24 age range. Measures The pre-test survey first solicited demographic information. Likert scales then measured students’ political and policy activity level. The post-test used the same format but omitted demographics and added one optional, open-ended question asking if there was anything participants would like to share about the training or related topics. The main instrument adapted for the pre- and post-test was the Individual Orientation Toward Engagement in Social Action Scale (IOTESA). The IOTESA, which leans more towards measuring political practice than policy practice, and exhibits strong reliability and ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 130 validity. Cronbach’s alpha (α) for the scale was .96 and the coefficient of determination (R-squared) was .364 (Corning & Myers, 2002). While the scale has 35 questions, only 10 were used in the survey (possible implications on validity are discussed in the “Limitations” section). The 10 questions asked how likely participants were to engage in activities like campaigning for a candidate, voting, and emailing a public official. These questions were posed with options: “extremely unlikely,” “unlikely,” “likely,” and “extremely likely.” For analysis, these were recoded from 0 (extremely unlikely) to 3 (extremely likely). In light of the pre-test and post-test being taken so closely together, measures were taken to help strengthen the validity of the study and its questionnaire. Those measures included basing the survey on an established instrument (Corning & Myers, 2002), pilot testing the survey prior to giving it to students, and using a standard measurement procedure with each of the six cohorts. Analysis Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27. A total of 90 pretests and 75 posttests were recorded. Pre-test and post-test data were paired, and unpaired test data were discarded. In total, 66 complete sets of data were viable. Analyses were conducted to determine the difference in participants’ likelihood to engage in activities between before and after they received the training. Because the data are ordinal (questions had options such as likely and unlikely), a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted instead of a paired samples t-test. The level of significance was set at p < .05. Effect sizes for each item were calculated as r = Z / N½, with Z being the Wilcoxon signed-rank statistic and N being the number of paired samples (Rosenthal, 1994). The values 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 were considered the cut-off for small, medium, and large effects. Results For nine of the ten questions, participants were more likely to engage in political and policy activity after receiving the intervention. Question 6 (“How likely are you to send a letter or e-mail expressing a political opinion to the editor of a periodical or television show?”) had the most significant effect size (r = .75, p < .001). Questions 2 (“How likely are you to organize a political event [e.g., talk, support group, march]?”), 4 (“How likely are you to campaign door-to-door for a political candidate?”), and 8 (“How likely are you to send a letter or e-mail about a political issue to a public official?”) also had large effect sizes (rs > .50, ps < .001). Questions 1, 3, 7, 9, and 10 had moderate effect sizes (rs > .30, ps < .01). Question 5 (“How likely are you to vote in a non-presidential federal, state, or local election?”) did not have a statistically significant effect size (r = .17, p < .165); however, participants reported a high likelihood for this question on the pretest, indicating a potential ceiling effect and leaving little opportunity for growth as a result of the training. See Table 1 below for full results. One optional, open-ended question was asked at the end of the participant post-test inviting students to share any thoughts they had on the training or related topics. Nine of Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 131 the 66 participants answered this question substantively (five additional answers were recorded saying some version of “N/A”). Seven of the nine responses were positive and were either directly about the training (e.g., “This was a great overview training of basic knowledge social workers should be aware of and more proactive things we can do to get involved”) or shared something the student learned in the training (e.g., “I did not know that it was so easy to advocate on behalf of a law by simply calling or emailing an official.”) Two responses were neutral and about students’ thoughts more broadly (e.g., “I think politics are most of the time a game of who is popular but legislation is very important. The general public just needs more education.”) Table 1. Change in Likelihood to Engage in Political and Policy Practices Question MB MA W r p Q1: How likely are you to purchase a poster, t- shirt, etc. that endorses a political point of view? 1.11 1.38 241.5 .44 <.001 Q2: How likely are you to organize a political event (e.g., talk, support group, march)? 0.92 1.31 313 .57 <.001 Q3: How likely are you to go out of your way to collect information on a social or political issue? 1.68 1.94 322 .37 .002 Q4: How likely are you to campaign door-to- door for a political candidate? 0.70 1.08 253 .58 <.001 Q5: How likely are you to vote in a non- presidential federal, state, or local election? 2.11 2.20 114 .17 .165 Q6: How likely are you to send a letter or e-mail expressing a political opinion to the editor of a periodical or television show? 0.89 1.65 741 .75 <.001 Q7: How likely are you to distribute information representing a particular social or political group’s cause? 1.52 1.77 230 .39 .002 Q8: How likely are you to send a letter or e-mail about a political issue to a public official? 1.27 1.71 520 .51 <.001 Q9: How likely are you to attend a talk on a particular group’s social or political concerns? 1.65 1.91 315 .33 .005 Q10: How likely are you to keep track of the views of members of Congress regarding an issue important to you? 1.71 2.05 334 .44 .002 Note. Total participants (n) was 66. MB represents the mean before and MA represents the mean after. W stands for the Wilcoxon signed-rank statistic and r denotes the correlation coefficient. The probability value is represented by p. Questions were posed with answer options: extremely unlikely, unlikely, likely, and extremely likely. For analysis, these responses were recoded from 0 (extremely unlikely) to 3 (extremely likely). Effect sizes for each item were calculated as r = Z / N½, with Z being the Wilcoxon signed-rank statistic and n being the number of paired samples (Rosenthal, 1994). Cut-off values of 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 were used for interpreting small, medium, and large effects. The significance level was set at p < .05. ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 132 Discussion Students participated in a brief, experiential training to increase their likelihood of engaging in political practice and policy practice in the future. Before and after the training, students completed questionnaires about levels of related activity engagement. Students expressed a greater likelihood of engaging in political practice and policy practice after the training than before for nine of the ten items, indicating that this training effectively increased students’ desire and intent to engage in political practice and policy practice. The findings are consistent with previous research showing that experiential learning is very effective. Notably, the one question that showed no significant improvement following the training (i.e., likelihood to vote in a non-presidential election) is the question that appeared to be near the ceiling on the pretest. This finding is consistent with previous research indicating that most social workers (Ostrander et al., 2021) and students (Bernklau Halvor, 2012) already vote in high numbers. Student Insights One optional, open-ended question was asked at the end of the participant post-test inviting students to share any thoughts they had on the training or related topics. Nine of the 66 participants answered this question and three key themes emerged. First: students found that having complex systems explained simply, and being given concrete advice on meaningful engagement, was extremely helpful (e.g., “I am interested in taking more action in politics because I was given practical ways that I can help make change.”) Second, students expressed surprise and/or relief having seen legislative advocacy skills modeled (e.g., “I did not know that it was so easy to advocate on behalf of a law by simply calling or e-mailing an official.”) Third was feelings of confidence and/or empowerment (e.g., “I now have a new outlook on what I can do to help better the community we live in.”) Recommendations Social workers and social work students increasingly perceive politics and policy as something disconnected from or not applicable to them (Amerman Goerdt et al., 2019; Meehan, 2021). We must find ways to break through and help them make these crucial connections. Based on the literature presented here, and supported by the findings from the present study, social work programs are encouraged to evaluate their political practice and policy practice curriculum and teaching methods, and ensure that they are utilizing experiential components. Doing this can help reframe political practice and policy practice much more actively and strategically than classes taught without experiential learning (Schwartz-Tayri et al., 2020). Utilizing experiential activities can also promote future political practice and policy practice engagement (Nowakowski-Sims & Kumar, 2020; Street et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2020). Experiential learning activities for political practice and policy practice need not be grand. Simple tasks can be beneficial such as signing up to receive action alerts (Tower & Hartness, 2010). A variety of writing activities can be effective too, such as policy briefs (Sundet & Kelly, 2002), social media posts (DeRigne et al., 2014; Rocha, 2000), blogs (DeRigne et al., 2014), and authoring letters to the editor or to legislators (DeRigne et al., 2014; Rocha, 2000). This is particularly true as related to areas of students’ interests Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 133 (Henman, 2012). These activities can be easily interspersed throughout the curriculum and spread over a semester as appropriate (Zubrzycki & McArthur, 2004). Experiential activities can also be more expansive and involved, like conducting student debates (Keller et al., 2001); visiting a legislative office (Manalo, 2008); spending a whole day learning and advocating in a state capitol (Beimers, 2016; Nowakowski-Sims & Kumar, 2020); or spending additional time explicitly preparing for these events at the capitol (Kilbane et al., 2013). These activities can be particularly engaging when using cases in students’ own communities and states (Wolfer & Gray, 2007). To end this section, some additional recommendations are being shared from the academic literature regarding helping to promote macro work in social work educational programs. Reisch (2016) noted that much of this work can be done outside of BSW and MSW curricula. Partnerships outside of academia can reinforce this change in culture by working with various stakeholders in the community (Weiss-Gal, 2017). Reisch (2016) suggested building an appreciation of macro social work, particularly the profession’s role in policy change, into the culture of programs through informal activities like orientations and lunchtime talks. We can also make sure to bring political practice and policy practice up when discussing topics related to human rights (McBeath, 2016). One last valuable resource is educators themselves. Instructors’ excitement and enthusiasm can be a helpful tool for engaging students’ interests in policy practice and political social work (Pritzker & Lane, 2014). Study Limitations This study was done virtually with undergraduate students in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, which understandably was found to increase stress among this population (Wilson et al., 2021). This heightened stress may have impacted students’ answers on pre- and post-tests. It is also possible that social desirability impacted how students answered questions, biasing students’ responses towards those that appear more socially acceptable. Another limitation is that the study used convenience sampling, which yielded a relatively homogenous group (most students identified as white women in the 18-24 age range). Future studies should endeavor to do random sampling where possible and for greater generalizability. The pre-test and post-test relevant to this article was adapted from the Individual Orientation toward Engagement in Social Action Scale. While this scale has substantial levels of reliability and validity, the pre- and post-tests only used 10 of the scale’s 35 items; the reliability and validity of partial use of this scale have not been researched. Additionally, given that the pre- and post-tests were given in such close proximity, the validity of the measure of changes in students may be limited. Lastly, while the results of the present study alluded to a strong potential for behavior change, one study showed that similar interventions may not have a long-lasting impact (Segal-Engelchin et al., 2017). In addition to getting students more engaged, how to keep them engaged over time needs further study. ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 134 Further Research The training described in this article was designed to have social work students meaningfully and personally engage in political and policy skill-building and to increase their interest in these activities. It may be worth doing additional research on this training to see if the results are replicable and to determine why some elements showed more change from pre- to post-test than others. Future qualitative research could also be useful to better understand fears or misconceptions which may contribute to the lack of full engagement in political practice and policy practice of social workers and social work students. Understanding these attitudes and experiences in greater depth may help researchers determine best practices to move social work students from anxieties and misunderstandings, closer to confident action. Conclusion The intervention described in this paper increased students’ intent to engage in political practice and policy practice. The research adds to a growing body of scientific literature, reinforcing that experiential learning is helpful for training social work students on the topics of political practice and policy practice. This research is timely, given that the social work landscape is experiencing a weakening focus on social action and an increased focus on clinical professionalization (Ostrander et al., 2017). As a profession set apart by our commitment to the vulnerable and oppressed, I argue that we must relentlessly pursue new and novel ways to get through to, educate, and empower our students to do this vital work. Students demonstrate tremendous passion every day for the populations and issues they care about most. We need to help students translate that passion into meaningful political and policy action by continually finding the best ways to give them the knowledge and confidence to do so. References Abramovitz, M. (2020). The U.S. safety net is degrading by design. The Nation. Abramovitz, M., Sherraden, M., Hill, K., Rhodes Smith, T., Lewis, B., & Mizrahi, T. (2019). Voting is social work: Voices from the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4), 626-644. Amerman Goerdt, L., Blaalid, B., Elswick, S. E., Johnson, D. H., Delavega, E., Kindle, P. A., & Granruth, L. B. (2019). Teaching characteristics and student satisfaction: Impact on social work students’ interest in policy. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4), 767-776. Anderson, D. K., & Harris, B. M. (2005). Teaching social welfare policy: A comparison of two pedagogical approaches. Journal of Social Work Education, 41(3), 511-526. Apgar, D., & Nienow, M. (2023). Becoming woke by the ASWB pass rates: A closer look at racial inequities in social work. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 21, 1-15. https://www.thenation.com/article/economy/coronavirus-social-services/ https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656690 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656690 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1611512 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1611512 https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2005.200303120 https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2005.200303120 https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2265911 https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2265911 Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 135 Apgar, D., & Parada, M. (2018). Strengthening competency in policy practice: An Experiential model for student learning. Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work, 23, 145-158. Bailey, D., Mizrahi, T., & Smith, J. (2022). The Special Commission to Advance Macro Practice. In Encyclopedia of social work (pp. 1-20). National Association of Social Work [NASW]. Beaumont, E. (2011). Promoting political agency, addressing political inequality: A multilevel model of internal political efficacy. The Journal of Politics, 73, 216-231. Beimers, D. (2016). Legislative advocacy days: Building political self-efficacy in social work students. Journal of Policy Practice, 15, 269-288. Berk, R. A. (2002). Humor as an instructional defibrillator: Evidence-based techniques in teaching and assessment. Stylus. Bernklau Halvor, C. D. (2012). Increasing social work students’ political interest and efficacy: The experience and impact of a social welfare policy course from the students’ perspective [Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University]. PDX Scholar. Bernklau Halvor, C. D. (2016). Increasing social work students’ political interest and efficacy. Journal of Policy Practice, 15(4), 289-313. Brenan, M. (2023, January 17). Record high in U.S. put off medical care due to cost in 2022. Gallup. Cai, T., Lei, J., & Chen, Y. (2022). Depoliticised or repoliticised policy practice?: The role of non-governmental social work organisations in policy-making in China. The British Journal of Social Work, 52(4), 2024-2042. Corning, A. F., & Myers, D. J. (2002). Individual orientation toward engagement in social action. International Society of Political Psychology, 23(4), 703-729. Committee to Elect Ayanna Pressley. (n.d.). Meet Ayanna. Author. Council on Social Work Education [CSWE]. (2022). Educational policy and accreditation standards. Author. Cummins, L. K., Byers, K. V., & Pedrick, L. (2023). Policy practice for social workers (2nd ed., p. 5). Taylor & Francis. DeRigne, L., Rosenwald, M., & Naranjo, F. A. (2014). Legislative advocacy and social work education: Models and new strategies. Journal of Policy Practice, 13, 316-327. Diebold, J., Kim, W., & Elze, D. (2018). Perceptions of self-care among MSW students: Implications for social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 54(4), 657-667. Felderhoff, B. J., Hoefer, R., & Watson, L. D. (2015). Living up to the Code’s exhortations? Social workers’ political knowledge sources, expectations, and behaviors. Social Work, 61(1), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.18084/1084-7219.23.1.145 https://doi.org/10.18084/1084-7219.23.1.145 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.1456 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.1456 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381610000976 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381610000976 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2015.1081577 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2015.1081577 https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.565 https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.565 https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.565 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2015.1081578 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2015.1081578 https://news.gallup.com/poll/468053/record-high-put-off-medical-care-due-cost-2022.aspx/ https://news.gallup.com/poll/468053/record-high-put-off-medical-care-due-cost-2022.aspx/ https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab172 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab172 https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00304 https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00304 https://ayannapressley.com/about/ https://www.cswe.org/getmedia/bb5d8afe-7680-42dc-a332-a6e6103f4998/2022-EPAS.pdf https://www.cswe.org/getmedia/bb5d8afe-7680-42dc-a332-a6e6103f4998/2022-EPAS.pdf https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315157559 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2014.929071 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2014.929071 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2018.1486255 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2018.1486255 https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swv053 https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swv053 https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swv053 ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 136 Gal, J., & Weiss-Gal, I. (Eds.). (2017). Where academia and policy meet: A cross-national perspective on the involvement of social work academics in social policy. The Policy Press. Gal, J., & Weiss‐Gal, I. (2023). The policy engagement of social workers: A research overview. European Social Work Research, 1(1), 47-64. Gottwald, M., & Sowa, F. (2019). ‘A little more humanity’: Placement officers in Germany between social work and social policy. In U. Klammer, S. Leiber, & S. Leitner (Eds.), Social work and the making of social policy (pp. 201-216). Policy Press. Hamilton, D., & Fauri, D. (2001). Social workers` political participation: Strengthening the political confidence of social work students. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(2), 321-332. Heidemann, G., Fertig, R. D., Jansson, B., & Kim, H. (2011). Practicing policy, pursuing change, and promoting social justice: A policy instructional approach. Journal of Social Work Education, 47, 37-52. Henman, P. (2012). Making social policy “sexy”: Evaluating a teaching innovation. Australian Social Work, 65, 341-354. Hill, K. M., Erickson, C. L., Plitt Donaldson, L., Fogel, S. J., & Ferguson, S. M. (2017). Perceptions of macro social work education: An exploratory study of educators and practitioners. Advances in Social Work, 18, 522-542. Hill, K. M., Ferguson, S. M., & Erickson, C. (2010). Sustaining and strengthening a macro identity: The association of macro practice social work. Journal of Community Practice, 18(4), 513-527. Hylton, M. E., Rhodes Smith, T., Powers, J., Ostrander, J., & Lane, S. R. (2018). The power of three: Infusing voter engagement in lower level BSW courses. Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work, 23(1), 213-229. Hylton, M., Lane, S. R., Rhodes Smith, T., Ostrander, J., & Powers, J. (2022). The Voter Engagement Model: Preparing the next generation of social workers for political practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 59(2), 423-437. Igielnik, R. (2022, February 23). Many working parents with young children say finding backup care would be very difficult. Pew Research Center. Keller, T. E., Whittaker, J. K., & Burke, T. K. (2001). Student debates in policy courses: Promoting policy practice skills and knowledge through active learning. Journal of Social Work Education, 37, 343-355. Keshner, A. (2019, February 24). America's 1% hasn't had this much wealth since just before the Great Depression. MarketWatch. Kilbane, T., Pryce, J., & Hong, P. Y. (2013). Advocacy week: A model to prepare clinical social workers for lobby day. Journal of Social Work Education, 49, 173-179. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447320197.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447320197.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1332/SGNP8071 https://doi.org/10.1332/SGNP8071 https://doi.org/10.56687/9781447349174-016 https://doi.org/10.56687/9781447349174-016 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2001.10779057 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2001.10779057 https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2010.2010.200800118 https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2010.2010.200800118 https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2011.652139 https://doi.org/10.18060/21455 https://doi.org/10.18060/21455 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2010.519684 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2010.519684 https://doi.org/10.18084/1084-7219.23.1.213 https://doi.org/10.18084/1084-7219.23.1.213 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2021.2009945 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2021.2009945 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2021.2009945 https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/23/many-working-parents-with-young-children-say-finding-backup-care-would-be-very-difficult/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/23/many-working-parents-with-young-children-say-finding-backup-care-would-be-very-difficult/ https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2001.10779059 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2001.10779059 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-been-almost-a-100-years-since-the-americas-1-had-so-much-wealth-2019-02-11 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-been-almost-a-100-years-since-the-americas-1-had-so-much-wealth-2019-02-11 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2013.755420 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2013.755420 Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 137 Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall. Lane, S., Ostrander, J., & Smith, T. (2018). Politics is social work with power: Training social workers for elected office. Social Work Education, 37(1), 1-16. Lane, S. R., & Pritzker, S. (2018). Political social work: Using power to create social change. Springer. Lieberman, M. (2022, July 12). How school staffing shortages are hurting students. Education Week. Lim, Y., Yang, M. Y., Maccio, E. M., & Bickham, T. (2018). Engaging MSW students in policy practice: Evaluation of civic and course-learning outcomes. Advances in Social Work, 18(4), 1187-1205. Lujan, H. L., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2016). Humor promotes learning! Advances in Physiology Education, 40(4), 433-434. Manalo, V. (2008). Teaching policy advocacy through state legislative and local ballot- based advocacy assignments. Social Policy Journal, 3(4), 53-67. McBeath, B. (2016). Re-envisioning macro social work practice. Families in Society, 97(1), 5-14. McClendon, J., Lane, S. R., Ostrander, J., & Rhodes Smith, T. (2020). Training social workers for political engagement: Exploring regional differences in the United States. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 40(2), 147-168. Meehan, P. (2021). Water into wine: Using social policy courses to make MSW students interested in politics. Journal of Social Work Education, 57(2), 357-371. Mendes, P., McCurdy, S., Allen-Kelly, K., Charikar, K., & Incerti, K. (2015). Integrating professional social work identity and social justice advocacy: An analysis of the Australian campaign to restore Medicare rebates for accredited mental health social workers. Journal of Social Work, 15(5), 516-536. Mink, T., & Twill, S. (2012). Using service-learning to teach a social work policy course. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 5(1), 5-13. NASW. (2021). Read the Code of Ethics. Author. Nowakowski-Sims, E., & Kumar, J. (2020). Increasing self-efficacy with legislative advocacy among social work students. Journal of Social Work Education, 57(3), 1-10. Ostrander, J., Bryan, J., Sandler, A., Nieman, P., Clark, M., Loveland, E., & Rhodes Smith, T. (2018). The political participation of first year social work students: Does practice specialization matter? Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 45(3), 39-49. Ostrander, J., Kindler, T., & Bryan, J. (2021). Using the civic voluntarism model to compare the political participation of US and Swiss social workers. Journal of Policy Practice and Research, 2, 4-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2017.1366975 https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2017.1366975 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68588-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68588-5 https://www.edweek.org/leadership/whos-at-risk-when-schools-staffing-shortages-persist/2022/06 https://doi.org/10.18060/22414 https://doi.org/10.18060/22414 https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00123.2016 https://doi.org/10.1300/J185V03N04_05 https://doi.org/10.1300/J185V03N04_05 https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.2016.97.9 https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2020.1724240 https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2020.1724240 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1671256 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1671256 https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017314552050 https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017314552050 https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017314552050 https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017314552050 https://doi.org/10.54656/EKYS2591 https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1713942 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1713942 https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.4215 https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.4215 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-020-00020-z https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-020-00020-z ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 138 Ostrander, J., Lane, S., McClendon, J., Hayes, C., & Smith, T. (2017). Collective power to create political change: Increasing the political efficacy and engagement of social workers. Journal of Policy Practice, 16(3), 261-275. Parker, M., & Sherraden, M. (1992). Electoral participation of social workers. New England Journal of Human Services, 11(3), 23-28. Pawar, M. (2019). Social work and social policy practice: Imperatives for political engagement. The International Journal of Community and Social Development, 1(1), 15-27. Pawar, M., & Nixon, M. (2020). Social policy practice preferences by social work students: Implications for macro practice education. The British Journal of Social Work, 50(8), 2279-2297. Pritzker, S., & Lane, S. R. (2014). Field note—Integrating policy and political content in BSW and MSW field placements. Journal of Social Work Education, 50(4), 730-739. Reeser, L. C., & Epstein, I. (1987). Social workers' attitudes toward poverty and social action: 1968-1984. Social Service Review, 61(4), 610-622. Reisch, M. (2016). Why macro practice matters. Journal of Social Work Education, 52, 258-268. Reisch, M., & Andrews, J. (2002). The road not taken: A radical history of social work. Routledge. Ritter, J. A. (2007). Evaluating the political participation of licensed social workers in the new millennium. Journal of Policy Practice, 6(4), 61-78. Ritter, J. A. (2013). Reconceptualizing policy class as a practice class. Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work, 18, 1-16. Rocha, C. J. (2000). Evaluating experiential teaching methods in a policy practice course: Increasing the political efficacy of millennial students. Journal of Social Work Education, 36, 53-66. Rome, S. H., Hoechstetter, S., & Wolf-Branigin, M. (2010). Pushing the envelope: Empowering clients for political action. Journal of Policy Practice, 9(3-4), 201-219. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation. Rothman, J., & Mizrahi, T. (2014). Balancing micro and macro practice: A challenge for social work. Social Work, 59(1), 91-93. Schwartz-Tayri, T. M. (2021). The willingness of social work students to engage in policy practice: The role of personality traits and political participation predictors. The British Journal of Social Work, 51(7), 2381-2398. Schwartz-Tayri, T., Malka, M., Moshe-Grodofsky, M., & Gilbert, N. (2020). Integrating micro and macro practice: An evaluation of the policy advocacy course. Journal of Social Work Education, 57(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2016.1266296 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2016.1266296 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2016.1266296 https://doi.org/10.1177/2516602619833219 https://doi.org/10.1177/2516602619833219 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa179 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa179 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2014.947905 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2014.947905 https://doi.org/10.1086/644481 https://doi.org/10.1086/644481 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1174652 https://doi.org/10.1300/J508v06n04_05 https://doi.org/10.1300/J508v06n04_05 https://doi.org/10.18084/basw.18.suppl-1.0u3v0v7211373h56 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2000.10778989 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2000.10778989 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2010.487236 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2010.487236 https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swt067 https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swt067 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa065 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa065 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1713271 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1713271 Berkowitz/POLITICAL & POLICY PRACTICES IN SWK STUDENTS 139 Segal-Engelchin, D., & Kaufman, R. (2008). Micro-or macro-orientation? Israeli students' career interests in an antisocial era. Journal of Social Work Education, 44(3), 139-157. Segal-Engelchin, D., Kaufman, R., Huss, E., & Amos, O. (2017). Impacts of an intensive macro-oriented social work programme on first-year students’ values, practice preferences and sense of practice competence’. British Journal of Social Work, 47(8), 2346-2363. Sherraden, M., Guo, B., & Umbertino, C. (2015). Solving current social challenges: Engaging undergraduates in policy practice. Journal of Policy Practice, 14(3-4), 308- 332. Shewell, H., Schwartz, K., & Ongaro, K. (2021). Social work faculty engagement in social policy practice: A quantitative study of the Canadian experience. The British Journal of Social Work, 51(4), 1277-1295. Siripurapu, A. (2022, April 21). The U.S. inequality debate. Council on Foreign Relations. Specht, H., & Courtney, M. E. (1995). Unfaithful angels: How social work has abandoned its mission. Simon and Schuster. Street, L. A., Martin, P. H., White, A. R., & Stevens, A. E. (2022). Problem-based learning in social policy class: A semester-long project within organizational policy practice. Journal of Policy Practice and Research, 3, 118-131. Sundet, P. A., & Kelly, M. J. (2002). Legislative policy briefs: Practical methodology in teaching policy practice. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 22(1-2), 49-60. Tham, P., & Thorén, K. (2020). Under the delusive wings of the welfare state: Engagement in the policy process among social work faculty members in Sweden. European Journal of Social Work, 23(6), 1081-1091. Tower, L. E., & Hartnett, H. P. (2010). An internet-based assignment to teach students to engage in policy practice: A three-cohort study. Journal of Policy Practice, 10, 65-77. U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2023, July 19). Food Security and Nutrition Assistance. Economic Research Service. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press. Wang, J. S., Chui, C. H., Jordan, L. P., & Chan, K. S. (2020). An experiential learning- based integrated policy advocacy education model in Hong Kong: What works in a non-western and partial democratic context? Journal of Social Work Education, 58(2), 346-364. Wanzer, M. B., & Frymier, A. B. (1999). The relationship between student perceptions of instructor humor and students' reports of learning. Journal of Communication Education, 48, 48-62. https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2008.200600147 https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2008.200600147 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw127 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw127 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw127 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2014.956972 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2014.956972 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab037 https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab037 https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-inequality-debate https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-022-00047-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-022-00047-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-022-00047-4 https://doi.org/10.1300/J067v22n01_05 https://doi.org/10.1300/J067v22n01_05 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2020.1783211 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2020.1783211 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2011.522961 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2011.522961 https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-security-and-nutrition-assistance/ https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1pnc1k7 https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1pnc1k7 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1817818 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1817818 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1817818 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529909379152 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529909379152 ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WORK, Spring 2024, 24(1) 140 Weaver, R., & Nackerud, L. (2005). Evaluating the effects of an applied learning exercise on students' interest in social policy. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 25, 105-120. Weiss-Gal, I. (2016). Social workers’ policy engagement: A review of the literature. International Journal of Social Welfare, 26, 285-298. Weiss-Gal, I. (2017). Social workers’ policy engagement: A review of the literature. International Journal of Social Welfare, 26, 285-298. Weiss-Gal, I., Gal, J., Schwartz-Tayri, T., Gewirtz-Meydan, A., & Sommerfeld, D. (2020). Social workers’ policy practice in Israel: Internal, indirect, informal and role contingent. The European Journal of Social Work, 23, 203–214. Weiss-Gal, I., & Savaya, R. (2012). Teaching policy practice: A hands-on seminar for social workers in Israel. Journal of Policy Practice, 11(3), 139-157. Wilson, O. W. A., Holland, K. E., Elliott, L. D., Duffey, M., & Bopp, M. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on US college students’ physical activity and mental health. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 17, 272-278. Wolfer, T., & Gray, K. A. (2007). Using the decision case method to teach legislative policy advocacy. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 27, 37-59. Wolk, J. L. (1981). Are social workers politically active? Social Work, 26, 283-288. Witt, H., Witt, R., & Brisby, K. (2020). Does policy practice class increase social work students’ planned political engagement? Journal of Policy Practice and Research. 1(3), 77-95. Wright, S. (2019). Policy practice of Master of Social Work students: An analysis of a policy practice intervention (815) [Master’s Thesis, California State University, San Bernadino]. ScholarWorks. Ziv, A. (1988). Teaching and learning with humor: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57, 4-15. Zubrzycki, J., & McArthur, M. (2004). Preparing social work students for policy practice: An Australian example. Journal of Social Work Education, 23, 451-464. Author note: Address correspondence to Allison Berkowitz, Department of Social Work, University of North Alabama, UNA Box 5029, Florence, AL, 35632. Email: aberkowitz@una.edu https://doi.org/10.1300/J067v25n03_07 https://doi.org/10.1300/J067v25n03_07 https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12239 https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12239 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1499614 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1499614 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2012.655550 https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2012.655550 https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2020-0325 https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2020-0325 https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2020-0325 https://doi.org/10.1300/J067V27N01_03 https://doi.org/10.1300/J067V27N01_03 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-020-00009-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42972-020-00009-8 https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/815 https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/815 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1988.10806492 https://doi.org/10.1080/0261547042000245044 https://doi.org/10.1080/0261547042000245044 mailto:aberkowitz@una.edu