Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention Advance Access originally published online on February 1, 2007
Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention 2007 7(2):115-126; doi:10.1093/brief-treatment/mhm003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
School of Social Work Disaster Response Following the World Trade Center Disaster: MSW Student and Field Instructor Perspectives
From the Department of Psychiatry, Center for the Study and Prevention of Suicide, University of Rochester Medical Center (Matthieu), the Barry University School of Social Work (Lewis), and the Columbia University School of Social Work (Ivanoff, Conroy)
Contact author: Monica Matthieu, Senior Instructor and National Research Service Award (NRSA) Fellow, Department of Psychiatry, Center for the Study and Prevention of Suicide, University of Rochester Medical Center, 300 Crittenden Boulevard, Box PSYCH, Rochester, NY 14642. E-mail: monica_matthieu{at}urmc.rochester.edu.
As part of a larger needs assessment of social workers, this study focuses the September 11, 2001 (9/11), experiences of 286 first-year MSW students and 206 agency-based field instructors in New York City, in response to 9/11. Their perception of the school of social work's disaster response was collected at 1 month from narrative responses to questionnaire items. Results showed that students felt conflicted about the university's response; in class, group discussion was beneficial, others wanted normal school routines. Some field instructors surveyed felt supported by the academic institution, yet others felt underutilized. The school of social work, embedded within the larger community, acts as a central hub of information, training, and resources in times of a national catastrophe.
KEY WORDS: social workers, September 11th, mental health personnel, college, disaster
Disasters erode the social fabric in an affected community. The potentially traumatic effects of natural disasters, such as hurricanes and floods, or human-made disasters, such as war or terrorism, spread much further, impacting a region and ultimately our national consciousness. The terrorist attacks on America, hurricanes crossing Florida and other southern states, and the flooding of New Orleans, like so many other disasters, are local community disasters that affect many people beyond the impact zone.
The experience of local human service agencies or school systems can provide much needed insight on their institutional policies and programs that were mobilized to provide supportive services to clients, students, and others in their respective communities during times of traumatic events such as disasters or atrocities. As this brief report will demonstrate, there is an urgent need for the schools of social work within their local communities to focus on disaster planning and preparedness to guide the faculty, staff, and students within our schools as well as the mental health professionals serving as field instructors in local community-based agencies.
The aim of this study is to describe the psychological stress and coping experienced by both novice and experienced social workers who were in human service agencies across the New York City (NYC) metropolitan area when the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster occurred. This study is unique in that it provides a dual perspective: graduate social work students and their agency-based field instructors. In order to assess the disaster-related impact on this educational community, both groups were asked a month after September 11, 2001 (9/11), to reflect on how their own school responded in the immediate aftermath of a national disaster in their own locality. To our knowledge, this is the only study that has focused exclusively on the perceptions of the academic institution by social work graduate students and community-based human service providers who serve as field instructors for the school of social work.
 |
The Effects of Disaster on Students and the College Community |
|---|
 TOP The Effects of Disaster... The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
One community setting affected by disasters is that of the academic institution, where large populations of diverse individuals can be joined by communal tragedies or crisis events that occur on or near campus. Studies on college students in the aftermath of 9/11 have focused on students who were vicarious victims of the disaster with mental health impacts (Ai, Cascio, Santangelo, & Evans-Campbell, 2005; Blanchard et al., 2004; Blanchard, Rowell, Kuhn, Rogers, & Wittrock, 2005; Cardenas, Williams, Wilson, Fanouraki, & Singh, 2003; DeRoma et al., 2003; Liverant, Hofmann, & Litz, 2004; Murphy, Wismar, & Freeman, 2003; Wayment, 2004), as well as those sampled for studies on individual-level characteristics (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh, & Larkin, 2003; Lee & Park, 2004; Piiparinen & Smith, 2003; Schmidt, 2004; Walker & Chestnut, 2003; Woike & Matic, 2004) or social perceptions about the disaster that occurred on U.S. soil (Reser & Muncer, 2004; Strenge, 2003).
Although the majority of these 9/11 college studies focused on the student's disaster-related response, a few studies focused on community-level characteristics. Blanchard et al. (2004) investigated the relationship of geographic proximity and resulting clinical symptoms of acute stress and depressive disorders for students at three universities across the United States with varied students experiencing clinical symptoms persisting a year later (Blanchard et al., 2005). Given the number of studies that sampled students on college campuses, only one study investigated the postdisaster stress and coping responses across the entire academic community, to include the faculty, staff, and student population (Swenson & Henkel-Johnson, 2003). These groups, when combined, form the typical on-campus stakeholder groups, yet there are other university affiliates located off campus, out in the local community, that provide a much needed community-based perspective that is rarely considered in disaster research.
|
The Local Impact of a Disaster |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
As noted previously, the immediate impact of a community disaster is far reaching, affecting students, agency-based clinicians, and the academic institution. A number of studies were conducted specifically in NYC at universities where students locally experienced the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the WTC. One longitudinal study focused on the decrease in psychological stress symptoms over time for NYC college students (Callahan, Hilsenroth, Yonai, & Waehler, 2005), whereas another focused on the emotional and professional impact on medical school students who delivered aid to families and victims (Katz, Gluck, Maurizio, & DeLisi, 2002). A few studies focused specifically on NYC social work students. One discussed the immediate disaster perceptions of students in a group work class and their clinical experiences over the year following the disaster (Tosone et al., 2003). Another provided narratives on the students' experience as developing professionals in fieldwork, augmented by their personal reactions as students at 1 and 6 months after the disaster (Matthieu, Lewis, Conroy, Ivanoff, & Robertson Blackmore, 2005).
The disaster literature focusing specifically on community-based agencies and/or clinical providers after 9/11 is also limited. One study assessed NYC after-school workers who had limited direct exposure (Piotrkowski & Brannen, 2002), whereas other studies focused specifically on the mental health responders to the disaster. One study revealed that disaster mental health responder individual-level risk factors (i.e., intense trauma caseload, limited professional experience, younger age, and a history of treatment for traumatic experiences) were associated with secondary traumatic stress symptoms (Creamer & Liddle, 2005). Another study of social workers after 9/11 who provided disaster mental health services focused on the emotional exhaustion or "compassion fatigue" in work with disaster victims in NYC (Boscarino, Figley, & Adams, 2004). This study found that after controlling for a variety of personal and occupational factors, providing more disaster mental health services after the WTC disaster was related to the social workers' emotional exhaustion. In terms of the 9/11 literature specific to social work field instructors, only one study by Matthieu et al. (2005) provides insight on the impact of the WTC disaster on these community-based mental health providers who were balancing agency and clinical demands to care for clients, staff, and fieldwork student interns.
These studies mainly provide individual-level information on a growing body of research utilizing community samples that, for the most part, are indirectly affected by human or natural disasters. However, few studies focus on the community-level lessons learned after a disaster or incorporate a range of perspectives from stakeholder groups that are situated at different social strata within the disaster-affected community. This study seeks to offer the perspectives from two groups, MSW students and field instructors in agency practice regarding their school affiliate.
|
Methods |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
Study Design
The study focuses on the experiences of first-year MSW students at one graduate school of social work in NYC. In addition, current social work field supervisors from over 300 human service agencies in the greater New York area that served as field placements for the NYC school were also surveyed to assess the impact on these field instructors. The data presented in this paper are a subset of a larger study, focusing specifically on the post-9/11 narratives written by these field instructors and students. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe the student and field instructor perspectives regarding the academic institution's response to the WTC disaster immediately following the disaster.
Sampling
Approximately 1 month after 9/11, 321 students attending a foundation social work class in the school of social work's masters program were approached and invited to participate in the study. The survey was distributed only to students who were in class on that day. Also 1 month later, 568 agency-based social work professionals from over 300 human service agencies were invited to participate in the study based on the fieldwork department's roster of field agencies with social work students in the Fall 2001 semester. A similar survey to that administered to the students was distributed via standard first class mail addressed only to these field instructors. Each participant provided written informed consent, and ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board.
Measures
The survey contained a battery of self-administered standardized scales and a disaster response questionnaire. The disaster response questionnaire was developed by the four authors specifically to assess responses to the events of 9/11 in NYC. The authors were in the unique position of not only witnessing and living through the attacks on the WTC but also observing the effects on students and field supervisors from their positions within the school.
The disaster response questionnaire included two open-ended questions specifically focused on the school's disaster response. Students and field instructors were asked about the most and least helpful response to the WTC disaster by the school of social work. Responses to the open-ended questions formed the basis of the qualitative data.
Data Analysis
Direct quotes are presented to illustrate the qualitative interpretation of responses and themes that were generated from the participants' written responses. Three methods were used to analyze the data: (a) Q-sort, (b) triangulation with three of the authors (André Ivanoff, Kathryn Conroy, Sarah J. Lewis), and (c) inductive coding with consensus building (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000). Content analysis is inherently subjective; therefore, the results presented here will reflect not only the original data but also the frequency of responses as a means of showing reliability and validity.
Sample
Of the 321 social work graduate students recruited, 286 consented providing a response rate of 89%. There were missing data on some questionnaire items; therefore, the sample sizes may differ for some variables in each sample. The majority of the student sample were enrolled full time (86.7%, n = 248), were female (89.2%, n = 255), had a mean age of 26.94 years (SD = 7.07, range = 20–60 years), were single (74.1%, n = 212), and lived in Manhattan (62.2%, n = 178). Over half of the sample self-identified as Caucasian (66.8%, n = 191), whereas the remainder were Asian (8.7%, n = 25), African American (8.4%, n = 24), and Hispanic (7.7%, n = 22).
Of the 568 field instructors who were asked to participate in the study, 206 consented, providing a response rate of 32%. The majority of the field instructor sample was again female (78.2%, n = 161), with a mean age of 43.68 (SD = 11.66, range = 26–88 years), and married or living with a partner (61.7%, n = 127). In late fall of 2001, 65.3% (n = 134) of the instructors lived in one of the five boroughs of NYC. Most self-identified as Caucasian (78.2%, n = 161), whereas the remainder were Hispanic (7.8%, n = 16), African American (5.8%, n = 12), Asian/Pacific Islander (3.9%, n = 8), and others (3.9%, n = 8).
|
Results |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
Lessons Learned: The School's Most Helpful Response to Students in the Immediate Aftermath
In-Class Discussion.
In regards to student perspectives, the most helpful thing that the school did in response to 9/11 was relinquishing class time to instructor-led discussion. Almost half of the students (43.4%, n = 124) shared that the class time allowed for "processing sessions in class" and that it "allowed students to talk about it in classes [and] let students have time to get back to normal," and that this time provided "space for discussion at classes—maintaining dual focus of reflection plus impact on professional choice of social work."
Lighter Workload.
The impact on student learning and ability to attend to the demands of being in graduate school was an ongoing issue for some students. In terms of academics, 10.8% (n = 31) of students felt it was most helpful to have a lighter workload. One stated that the "professors have given leeway about missing class and handing in assignments late" and that the faculty are "understanding that our concentration level is low."
Support Groups.
Another effort that students appreciated was the extracurricular student groups, coordinated and led by clinically experienced faculty. These support groups, fashioned in the style of group crisis intervention and utilizing some elements of debriefing, were offered around campus at varying times. The intention of the groups was to make available additional support provided by the faculty and within the academic community to address stress and coping after 9/11. Almost 10% (9.8%, n = 28) of students noted that these group activities "presented a forum for students to discuss/process their feelings" and that it was helpful to "run groups for students. Just knowing they're available was a comfort." For students who participated, the social support from peers as well as the interaction with faculty members was seen as beneficial.
Communication.
Other students (7.7%, n = 22) shared that communication and contact from the school was very helpful to them following 9/11. Students stated that e-mail communication to all students was noteworthy: "Extended support via e-mail from Deans. It was nice to know they were there for us at such an awful, disrupting time." In addition to this e-mail contact, including up to date information and resources gathered and distributed by the school's fieldwork department was of paramount importance to the students and the agencies. Various forms of telecommunication such as e-mail and Web sites were used in the weeks following the disaster to remain connected; however, in the immediate aftermath, messages needed to be routed in a manner much less dependent on computer technology. This included detailed crisis information, such as "posting places for people to stay on Tuesday night," and messages about community involvement, "posting volunteer opportunities." For students, the use of posters displayed prominently in existing centralized locations within the school building was a main source of disaster-related information and community-based resources.
Lessons Learned: The School's Least Helpful Response to Students in the Immediate Aftermath
Holding Classes.
When asked about the least helpful ways the school first responded to the disaster, over a quarter (27.3%, n = 78) of the students stated that not canceling class was a regrettable decision on the part of their school. One student wrote, "classes on Wednesday ... was appalling," whereas another student remarked "class the day after—on September 12th—how were we supposed to get there?" The students also reported that they felt that the school's immediate response to hold classes was out of sync with what other academic departments and institutions in the city were doing "have classes during that week while other schools canceled classes—very insensitive." Other students shared the difficult position that this presented for them emotionally by "not being able to get there and knowing class was held was extra stress." For those who did make it to class, the lack of concern for students who made the effort to attend was clearly problematic: "one of my professors did not acknowledge what happened until the last 30 seconds of class. She began an intense lecture before all the students could even get to class because of the commute. She did not empathize whatsoever and began class right on time without a word about what we were all dealing with." In the immediacy of this particular catastrophe, acknowledging the distress felt by the entire disaster-affected community was preferred.
In-Class Discussion.
In contrast to the students who felt that the most helpful thing the school did was in-class discussion, other students (9.1%, n = 26) felt that it was "too much group processing" and that they "talked exhaustingly about it." For most of these first-year social work students, internships were scheduled 3 days per week, typically on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday. This meant that students might have attended up to four classes of about 2 hr each in 2 days with a variety of faculty members and peers that first week. One student remarked, "Every meeting or class had a debriefing session. It got to be too much—class should have continued" with another sharing the sentiment "Debriefing in class was overwhelming at times. Then I got annoyed. I didn't want to share anymore with classmates. I didn't want to hear anymore." The lack of coordination between in-class activities and among faculty may have resulted in "too much debriefing—rehashing and rehashing," and in the end some students felt it was "overprocessing!"
Lessened Academic Responsibilities.
Less than 10% (6.3%, n = 18) of respondents expressed that it was not helpful that there were no lowered expectations in school or fieldwork. One student remarked that it was difficult "to keep going at the same pace," whereas another stated, "our schedule of work has not changed." In addition to holding classes, some students struggled with the requests for additional meetings to "check in" the week after the disaster. Although some students appreciated the outward expressions of concern by the school and faculty, others reported that it felt like another meeting packed into an otherwise stressful time when the school "requested students come to field advising that week." Reflecting back, one student stated, "I think expectations for full functioning were very high just following the disaster," whereas others felt that the expectations only "added pressure and stress to an already awful situation."
Communication.
Another category of least helpful institutional responses included communication (6.3%, n = 18). Although service was impaired at times, some students did rely on the telephone to attain confirmation regarding school cancelations. One student reported that it was not a good idea to "send communication about school being open via e-mail because I do not check. I wish they had changed the voicemail message." Another student remarked that "there was not good communication on whether classes were canceled. For cases of disaster, a central phone number would be helpful" and that there was an obvious "need to coordinate outgoing school messages in the event of emergency." However, for some, it was frustrating. Fragmented communication hindered their participation as the school was "not being clear enough about when and where special meetings and trainings are."
Providing Ongoing Support: Perspectives from the Field on the School's Disaster Response
Most Helpful.
According to the agency-based field instructors, the most helpful thing that the school did in response to 9/11 was to offer ongoing support and flexibility (23.8%, n = 49). Many of the field instructors expressed gratitude to the school's leadership and fieldwork staff for their efforts to communicate with the agencies by noting that the director of the fieldwork department "was in close touch with us via e-mail immediately, offered support, and information (materials, Web sites) on how to volunteer and help re: mental health. This was most helpful" and that the school shared "what [the director of the fieldwork department] was doing and copying to us the memo [that was] sent to students with resource info." In addition, for a select few, at the time of the disaster, new field instructors were enrolled in the school of social work's fieldwork training seminar and stated that "attending SIFI has been very helpful especially the week following 9/11" which "provided a forum to discuss our experiences" and that the "SIFI Field teacher helped us talk about it and process our feelings." Another stated that the "SIFI session spent discussing the effects of the WTC on interns' placements, supervision, etc.—very helpful." These instructors seemed to appreciate having a regularly scheduled group and a place to discuss the impact of 9/11 on their agency, the students, and themselves. Yet, others not in the seminar who were, for the most part, experienced field instructors were unaware of what the school had done in response to 9/11 for students or for the field agencies (12.1%, n = 25) stating, "I don‘t feel much has been done" and "no involvement with [the school]." Although some instructors felt supported by the academic institution, others did not.
Consistency was also appreciated by field instructors (7.3%, n = 15), especially, in terms of the fieldwork program, schedule planning with students, and the school as a stable entity. One respondent said that the school has been "realistic regarding schedules and deadlines, which have been thrown off kilter by 9/11" and that it has been "very responsive to students in the aftermath of the crisis (and continuing crisis)."Another field instructor noted it was helpful for the school to, "just be there as a source of stability, knowledge dissemination & comfort."
For some field instructors (6.3%, n = 13), the extra efforts by the school to focus on the experiences of the field instructors and field agencies were noted as helpful. These efforts included the distribution of the survey to field instructors and inquiring about their own personal reaction to the WTC attacks: "this survey gives feelings of support."
Least Helpful.
In regards to least helpful things that the school did in response to the disaster, less than 20% of the field instructors responded. The majority (15%, n = 7.4) wrote general comments from their personal experiences, "how to keep my own anxiety from ‘infecting’ my children"; impressions from the agency, "... there is lots of anxiety among staff"; and general reactions, "many workplaces have been disorganized and dismissive about the effects of such trauma on employees."
The next largest percentage of field instructors who responded to this question felt they were not informed, assisted, or included in the school's disaster response plans (7.4%, n = 15). Given their level of expertise, some expressed that they were not utilized, helped, or contacted by the school: "Didn't use me as a volunteer when I wanted to. Didn't recruit me to debrief master's students." They also mentioned that there was no readiness planning for such a wide-scale community disaster and that future needs included "some kind of short symposium on disasters‘ effects on members of coping profession, etc." Another field instructor who commented on the school’s need for ongoing disaster preparedness remarked that the school should coordinate disaster planning with the field agencies in times of a communal tragedy.
For 3.9% (n = 8) of those field instructors who responded to this question, they reported that everything was fine. A few instructors (1.5%, n = 3) felt it was unreasonable to hold classes right away, "expecting students & staff to come to Manhattan for classes on 9/12/01 when the mayor asked all non essential personnel not to travel into the city." Yet, in contrast to the student response, two field instructors felt that the least helpful things that the school did in response to the disaster were that there was too much time spent discussing the disaster (0.5%, n = 1) and "debriefing" (0.5%, n = 1) and that "The student's teachers dedicated so much class time to ‘counseling’ the students that the students didn’t get a clear sense of their educational responsibilities. This only served to increase their anxiety." Overall, there were varied responses in how students and field instructors assessed the school's response to the disaster.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
In this study, we described the students' and field instructors' perspectives regarding the school's disaster response following the events of 9/11 with many opposing viewpoints expressed. Some students wanted more in-class discussions, others felt discussion was repetitive and overwhelming as they went from one class to another, all in a short period of time. Direct communication with the school's fieldwork department was beneficial for some field instructors who felt supported by the academic institution, but for some experienced field instructors, they felt underutilized by the school.
Although some universities and schools of social work in disaster-prone areas may be well prepared, others may not be. Regardless, this and other disaster studies underscore the need for additional attention to determine if the academic institution, from the individual schools to the university level, is prepared for a community disaster near campus or even a large-scale crisis on campus. A review of communication plans and interagency coordination pertaining to local disasters for both the school and the field agencies should be undertaken in light of this study.
Limitations
The results of this study are subject to limitations. The student sample was limited to those who were at school on the day the survey was distributed and to those instructors affiliated with the field education department that semester. However, it should be noted that a large sample size and moderate response rates were still attained in both samples. These results specifically pertain to students and agency-based field instructors who were in the NYC area during 9/11, but the similarity of findings with previous literature (Tosone et al., 2003) confirms the themes that arose in this study.
The School of Social Work: A Hub for Disaster-Related Information and Community Resources
Future Implications.
Many of the issues expressed in this study point to the need for (a) internal school coordination and (b) external communication with the local community, in particular with the field agencies, students, and other key stakeholder groups.
Coordination.
These students reported feeling overwhelming expectations to quickly get back to normal routines, with no lessened expectations in the classroom or in field. The field instructors were also very concerned with expectations, especially, in regards to the disasters' impact on themselves, the students, and the fieldwork experience. For many, personal time devoted specifically to processing their experiences was needed, which was evident in the desire for informal discussions. The school, in particular the clinical and teaching faculty, fieldwork department, and field instructors, was instrumental in providing academic and social support. Enhanced coordination among these groups could be accomplished by developing a core set of emergency and/or disaster-specific activities that can be integrated into the classroom, fieldwork, advising sessions, or the new field instructors' seminar immediately after a crisis event occurs or even as a disaster preparedness module during school or field orientation.
In order to implement a higher level of internal coordination, one must look to the school leadership. The findings revealed in this study provide evidence that the reaction of students and field instructors to a disaster in their own community and in America is varied and complex. Institutional disaster plans can be informed by these dual viewpoints by challenging leaders to very carefully design (and annually revise) the school-wide emergency response and/or disaster action plans based on the most current empirical evidence. Drawing from disaster and crisis approaches could provide university leaders with a much needed template (Luna, 2002). Knowing what is clinically effective, as well as individual and community risk and protective factors, before a disaster strikes provides an opportunity to design a comprehensive disaster plan for multiple systems. Incorporating the on- and off-campus stakeholder groups would allow for a more inclusive plan that may also assist in identifying a variety of education or advocacy needs that may emerge across campus or out in the local community in the aftermath of a disaster.
Communication.
A second theme that was discussed by both students and field instructors was the need to centralize disaster-related information and community resources. Some students astutely pointed out that critical information and up to date institutional messages are urgently needed in times of disaster. But where to physically locate this information (e.g., existing common areas particular to the school of social work, community and school bulletin boards, on- and off-campus meeting spaces such as coffee shops or cafes, Web sites, or with the media) needs to be based on a broad knowledge of the school's larger social network and its key stakeholder groups (e.g., current students and their parents, faculty and staff, field instructors and their respective agencies, and alumni). Utilizing a variety of locations and forms of communication to display time- and date-stamped messages will aid in initial dissemination of critical school- and disaster-related community information through out the affected community.
Over time and as services are restored, the use of telecommunications will be a necessary component in the school's disaster plan. One approach is to develop, prior to any event, a set of standard messages that can be tailored and distributed quickly via electronic or print media, to a redirected school homepage, to the media, or to other local communication outlets. These messages should be designed for vastly different emergency scenarios that could occur in a specific geographic location (e.g., school evacuation, on-campus crisis event, or a natural, technological, or human-caused disaster in the local community) with their corresponding evacuation, emergency response, or disaster action plan. A recent federal consensus report on standard messaging for a variety of natural disasters could serve as a key resource in this type of disaster preparedness and disaster response planning (National Disaster Education Coalition, 2004). Each disaster situation is unique and all contingencies cannot be anticipated; however, unintended injuries or losses as a result of a lack of planning are no longer acceptable excuses in the post-9/11 era.
Therefore, disaster preparedness should be addressed, both institutionally and in our curricula. A standardized message for emergency and disaster response plans developed by the school leadership could be included in existing school policies such as in the faculty and staff handbooks, field agency contracts, and all class syllabuses. The use of the syllabus provides a simple but underutilized venue for wide-scale dissemination of critical emergency and disaster-related information to faculty, academic deans, students, and even to field instructors. This message could reference the school's broader policies and minimally detail in a short paragraph the school's policy on class and field cancelations; a dedicated emergency telephone number; appropriate use of e-mail and phone contact to and from students and school officials; centralized locations for attaining school-related notices and ongoing communications; the chain of command for who and where ongoing messages regarding class, fieldwork, and university decisions will be distributed; as well as student responsibilities to their field agencies.
In addition, students and field instructors may want to review and discuss the agency and school disaster plans for any conflicting plans and include a short summary of the agreed upon disaster plan for the student in the initial field education report. Although linked to the school and the students, these field instructors still seemed to lack connectivity during the crisis as noted in their amazed responses that the field education department was "just there" steadfast in its support of the agency and the students. For that reason, timely and caring messages from the school leadership are also critical outreach components to field agencies after a catastrophe.
|
Conclusions |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
The school of social work, embedded within the larger community, acts as a central hub of information, training, and resources in times of a national catastrophe. Field instructors as well as students look to the academic institution to provide empirically supported information and community-based resources to aid the individual and community readjustment after a tragedy. Coordination and communication, along with dedicated leadership, are the key elements to the development and maintenance of a school-based and community-wide disaster plan. Utilizing lessons learned from off-campus stakeholders and including the field agencies is vital. Every academic institution has a responsibility to be prepared; how well integrated the plan is with the local community is still the question.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Conflict of Interest: None declared.
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPThe Effects of Disaster...The Local Impact of...MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsReferences |
|---|
-
Ai AL, Cascio T, Santangelo LK, Evans-Campbell T. Hope, meaning, and growth following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Journal of Interpersonal Violence (2005) 20:523–548.
Blanchard EB, Kuhn E, Rowell DL, Hickling EJ, Wittrock D, Rogers RL, et al. Studies of the vicarious traumatization of college students by the September 11th attacks: Effects of proximity, exposure and connectedness. Behaviour Research and Therapy (2004) 42:191–205.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Blanchard EB, Rowell DL, Kuhn E, Rogers RL, Wittrock DA. Posttraumatic stress and depressive symptoms in a college population one year after the September 11 attacks: The effect of proximity. Behaviour Research and Therapy (2005) 43:143–150.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Boscarino JA, Figley CR, Adams RE. Compassion fatigue following the September 11 terrorist attacks: A study of secondary trauma among New York City social workers. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health (2004) 6:57–66.[Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Callahan KL, Hilsenroth MJ, Yonai T, Waehler CA. Longitudinal stress responses to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in a New York metropolitan college sample. Stress, Trauma, and Crisis (2005) 8:45–60.[CrossRef][find it @ Stanford]
Cardenas J, Williams K, Wilson JP, Fanouraki G, Singh A. PTSD, major depressive symptoms, and substance abuse following September 11, 2001, in a midwestern university population. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health (2003) 5:15–28.[Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Creamer TL, Liddle BJ. Secondary traumatic stress among disaster mental health workers responding to the September 11 attacks. Journal of Traumatic Stress (2005) 18:89–96.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (2000) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
DeRoma VM, Saylor CF, Swickert R, Sinisi C, Marable TB, Vickery P. College students' PTSD symptoms, coping, and perceived benefits following media exposure to 9/11. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy (2003) 18:49–64.[CrossRef][find it @ Stanford]
Fredrickson BL, Tugade MM, Waugh CE, Larkin GR. What good are positive emotions in crises? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2003) 84:365–376.[ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Katz CL, Gluck N, Maurizio A, DeLisi LE. The medical student experience with disasters and disaster response. CNS Spectrum (2002) 7:604–610.[find it @ Stanford]
Lee CH, Park J. Differences in styles of writing about a tragic public event over time. Psychological Report (2004) 94(Pt. 1):1058–1060.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Liverant GI, Hofmann SG, Litz BT. Coping and anxiety in college students after the September 11th terrorist attacks. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping (2004) 17:127–139.[CrossRef][ISI][find it @ Stanford]
Luna JT. Collaborative assessment and healing in schools after large-scale terrorist attacks. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health (2002) 4:201–208.[Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Matthieu M, Conroy K, Lewis SJ, Ivanoff A, Robertson-Blackmore E. Student perspectives on the impact of the World Trade Center disaster: A longitudinal qualitative study. Social Work Research. (in press).
Matthieu M, Ivanoff A, Lewis SJ, Conroy K. Social work field instructors in New York City after 9/11: Impact and needs resulting from the World Trade Center disaster. The Clinical Supervisor. (in press).
Matthieu M, Lewis S, Conroy K, Ivanoff A, Robertson Blackmore E. Student perspectives on the impact of the World Trade Center disaster: A longitudinal qualitative study. Unpublished manuscript. (2006).
Murphy RT, Wismar K, Freeman K. Stress symptoms among African-American college students after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (2003) 191:108–114.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
National Disaster Education Coalition. Talking about disaster: Guide for standard messages (2004) Washington, DC.
Piiparinen RA, Smith JC. Stress symptoms of two groups before and after the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. Perception and Motor Skills (2003) 97:360–364.[CrossRef][find it @ Stanford]
Piotrkowski CS, Brannen SJ. Exposure, threat appraisal, and lost confidence as predictors of PTSD symptoms following September 11, 2001. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (2002) 72:476–485.[CrossRef][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Reser JP, Muncer S. Sense-making in the wake of September 11th: A network analysis of lay understandings. British Journal of Psychology (2004) 95(Pt. 3):283–296.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Schmidt SR. Autobiographical memories for the September 11th attacks: Reconstructive errors and emotional impairment of memory. Memory and Cognition (2004) 32:443–454.[ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Strenge H. Self-assessment of post-traumatic stress reactions in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City. A survey among medical students. Nervenarzt (2003) 74:269–273.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
Swenson DX, Henkel-Johnson G. A college community's vicarious stress reaction to September 11th terrorism. Traumatology (2003) 9:93–105.
Tosone C, Bialkin L, Campbell M, Charters M, Gieri K, Gross S, et al. Shared trauma: Group reflections on the September 11th disaster. Psychoanalytic Social Work (2003) 10:57–77.[CrossRef][find it @ Stanford]
Walker KL, Chestnut D. The role of ethnocultural variables in response to terrorism. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology (2003) 9:251–262.[CrossRef][find it @ Stanford]
Wayment HA. It could have been me: Vicarious victims and disaster-focused distress. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (2004) 30:515–528.
Woike B, Matic D. Cognitive complexity in response to traumatic experiences. Journal of Personality (2004) 72:633–657.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline][find it @ Stanford]
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||