Sample Of My Schoolwork Writing: "Assessment and Analysis of a Scholarly Article" (Originally For SOWK 240)

In full disclosure, I will say that doing this assignment scared the crap out of me. I just hope that I did well on the assignment—i.e., I hope that I covered all of my bases and cited everything correctly. By the way, I—unless I am unaware of some law which states that I can't share my own writing on my own own blog—have the right to share my own writing. Also, for you to cite me if you use this blog entry would be nice; but I would be a hypocrite if I required that you cite that, since I believe in the Bible as opposed to the concept of "intellectual property".

Assessment and Analysis of a Scholarly Article:

Student Critique of “Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) Students’ Prior

Sexual Abuse Victimization”

Nicole V. Czarnecki

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Abstract

            This article attempts to summarize, assess, and analyze Michelle T. Gore’s and Pamela J. Black’s study which is titled “Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) Students’ Prior Sexual Abuse Victimization”. Published by Gore and Black (both of whom are affiliated with Eastern Kentucky University in Richmond, Kentucky) in Journal of Teaching In Social Work, the study stands for scrutiny insofar as it employed its chosen type of research and methodology, and insofar as it came to the conclusions to which it came. The scrutiny is the work of Nicole V. Czarnecki, who was then a student in the SOWK 240 (Information Technology in Social Work) class of Dr. Jessica Guzman-Rea at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). Czarnecki was a Political Science (as opposed to a Social Work) major and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science in December of 2013 (The time of Czarnecki’s critique of Gore’s and Black’s study was October 19, 2013, when Czarnecki was a to-be-graduating senior and Political Science major at UMBC.). Therefore, Czarnecki could not comprehensively assess and analyze the study of Gore and Black, both of whom are in the Social Work field (whereas Czarnecki is in the Political Science field).

            Keywords: analysis, assessment, Black, critique, Czarnecki, Eastern Kentucky University, Gore, social work, scholarly article, study, summary; University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Introduction

            Michelle T. Gore and Pamela J. Black of Eastern Kentucky University conducted and published a study which they titled ““Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) Students’ Prior Sexual Abuse Victimization”. Gore and Black published their study in Journal of Teaching In Social Work in 2009, and they described their 2009 publication as a study which “reports findings of an exploratory study surveying 61 students about their prior child sexual abuse victimization.” (Abstract From the Authors) They utilized quantitative work to attempt to answer the query of “What percentage of [Bachelor of Social Work] students [“at a south central U.S. regional university”] has been sexually abused (as defined by [the 2001 Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children] statute) during childhood?” (“RESEARCH QUESTION” &“METHODOLOGY”)

            Gore and Black extensively laid out their 2009 study’s methodology. In sum, the methodology “consisted of 61 BSW students [who were] attending the university during the academic years of 2001 and 2002” and “taking a required course on child abuse”. The students each received “[a] confidential five-itemed questionnaire” (“SAMPLE” & “METHODOLOGY”). The questionnaires effected the researchers to find “that taking a child abuse course may increase BSW students’ self-awareness regarding prior victimization” and “social work students [indeed] report a higher occurrence of prior childhood abuse than the general population” (Abstract From the Authors & “DISCUSSION”).

Assessment and Analysis

            As Gore and Black concede in their study’s “LIMITATIONS OF STUDY” section, “There were several limitations to this study.” One significant limitation is that Gore and Black used a highly-flawed methodology in that they defined “sexual abuse” in the terms of “[t]he state’s current definition of child sexual abuse” (“METHODOLOGY”), which in of itself is highly flawed. The definition, according to Gore and Black, is as follows (ibid.):

“‘‘Abused or neglected child’’ means a child whose health or welfare is harmed or threatened with harm when his parent, guardian, or other person exercising custodial control or supervision of the child:

(e) Commits or allows to be committed an act of sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or prostitution will be committed upon a child;

(f) Creates or allows to be created a risk that an act of sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or prostitution will be committed upon a child.

(Cabinet for Families and Children, 2001, p. 4)”

            The flaw in the definition is that it “addresses abuse by a parent, guardian, or

others [who was or who were] acting in a caretaking capacity. It does not pertain to sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers. For example, incidents of sibling sexual abuse would not be included unless the perpetrator was acting in a caretaking role with the alleged victim.” The flaw specifically is that the definition does not cover “sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers” or “sibling sexual abuse” as “sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or prostitution” which a “parent, guardian, or other person exercising custodial control or supervision of the child… allows to be committed…[and/or] [c]reates or allows to be created.”

            Given that the definition is as highly flawed as it is, therefore, it alone nullifies and voids the study. After all, a “parent, guardian, or other person exercising custodial control or supervision of the child… allows to be committed…[and/or] [c]reates or allows to be created…sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers” or “sibling sexual abuse”. Whether the custodian mandates, encourages, enables, or fails to act to stop and/or punish any “sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers” or “sibling sexual abuse”, the custodian allows to be committed…[and/or] [c]reates or allows to be created…sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers” or “sibling sexual abuse”. Therefore, Gore and Black must redo their study and base it on a definition that covers any and all custodian-mandated, -encouraged, -enabled, and –commended or –condoned sexual abuse.

            As far as the study’s other limitations, Gore and Black adequately speak to those limitations. Therefore, this critique needs to not comment on those limitations. As this critique aforestated, the study must go through a reworking process and base itself on a definition of any and all sexual abuse that anyone commits against a child.

            In conclusion, this critique assessed and analyzed Michelle T. Gore’s and Patricia J. Black’s 2009 annullable, voidable, and reworkable study which was published in Journal of Teaching In Social Work. This critique explicitly stated that Gore and Black must rework their study because of how they measured their concept of sexual abuse by the standards of the 2001 Kentucky Cabinet for Families and Children law, which  inadequately and illogically does not count “sexual abuse from non-custodians, peers, or abuse from strangers” or “sibling sexual abuse” as “sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or prostitution” which a “parent, guardian, or other person exercising custodial control or supervision of the child… allows to be committed…[and/or] [c]reates or allows to be created.”

References

Gore, M.T., & Black, P.J. (2009). Bachelor of social work (bsw) students’ prior sexual abuse victimization. Journal of Teaching In Social Work, 29, 449–460. doi:10.1080/08841230903249786

Paiz, J.M., Angeli, E., Wagner, J., Lawrick, E., Moore, K., Anderson, M., Soderlund, L., Brizee, A., and Keck, R. (2013, March 1). General format. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

“. (2013, September 28). Reference list: electronic sources (web publications). Retrieved from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/10/