'

The Classroom Teacher

and the Role of Authority
Roselle Kurland

SUMMARY. This paper examines the ways in which teachers can

use their authority to maximize their teaching effectiveness as well
as to set a positive example for student social workers. Three areas
in which teachers use their authority are discussed: setting the struc-
ture of the class, covering course content, and relating to students.
Practices that contribute to both good teaching and impactful role
modeling of authority are identified.

Teachers are authorities. In the courses they teach, they deter-

mine curriculum content, give grades to students, and decide how
class sessions will be conducted. Effective teachers are Those who
are comfortable with their role of authority and who carry it well. In
social work education, the teacher's role of authority is especially
crucial. Not only does it contribute to success in teaching, but it
serves for students as an example of how to be in a role of authority,
Just as teachers are in positions of authority in relation to their stu-
dents, so too are social workers in positions of authority with their
clients. And social work students, during their professional educa-
tion, struggle to learn how to carry successfully a role of authority.
Observation of their own teachers is central to their learning in this
area.
This paper will discuss the ways in which teachers can use their
authority to maximize their teaching effectiveness as well as to set a
positive example for student social workers. Specifically, three ar-
eas in which teachers use their authority will be examined: setting

Roselle Kurland, PhD, is Associate Professor, Hunter College School of So-

cial Work, New York, NY.
© 1991 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 81
 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
the structure of the class, covering course content, and relating to
students. Practices that contribute to both good teaching and im-
pactful role modeling of authority will be identified in each of these
areas.
It is important to distinguish here between being an authority and
being authoritarian. The authoritarian person is overbearing and
dogmatic and believes in unquestioning obedience to authority
rather than in individual freedom of judgment and action (Adorno et
al., 1950). Teachers of social work are not authoritarian. But they
have power and influence as a result of their role, position, knowl-
edge, and prestige. Teachers of social work are authorities. They
have the legitimacy of authority identified by Weber (1947).
Compton and Galaway (1984) define authority as "a power dele-
gated to the practitioner by client and agency in which the practi-
tioner is seen as having the power to influence or persuade resulting
from possession of certain knowledge and experience and from oc-
cupying a certain position." They go on to explain that there are
two aspects of authority.
The first might be called the institutional aspect in that it
comes from the social worker's position and function within
the agency's purpose and program. The second aspect is psy-
chological in that clients give workers the power to influence
or persuade because they accept them as sources of informa-
tion and advice —as experts in their field, (p. 204)
Such a definition of authority certainly applies to teachers of so-
cial work as well. They are in positions of power because of their
ability to reward and punish, because of the positions they occupy
within the university structure and because students identify with
them as persons of prestige and see them as experts. Thus, they
hold the five kinds of power —reward, coercive, legitimate, refer-
ent, and expert-identified by French and Raven (1968) as the ba-
ses of social influence.
But practitioners and teachers of social work often seem loathe to
exercise power and authority in their work with clients and stu-
dents. Their use of authority, it would seem, clashes with core so-
cial work beliefs in democracy, in equality, and perhaps, above all,
Roselle Kurland 83
in self-determination, a predominant precept of the profession that
occupies a central place in NASW's Code of Ethics (1980)
(Kurland and Salmon, 1990).
Goldstein (1973) underscores social work's discomfort with au-
thority:
. . . it has been the tendency of social workers to disclaim the
role of authority and the idea that any degree of power was
used in practice . . . Equality, cooperation, and the recognition
of others' rights were valued precepts; any manifestation of
power and control would therefore be seen as the anti-thesis of
these principles and as an abuse or manipulation of others*
rights, (p. 83)
In a similar view, Levinson and Klerman (1972) explain that au-
thority and power may be equated with authoritarianism and viewed
with distaste and denial. "The predominant view of power," they
say, "is much like the Victorian view of sex. It is seen as vulgar, as
a sign of character defect, as something an upstanding professional
would not be interested in or stoop to engage in."
Even though many social workers may want to shy away from
the exertion of their authority, they cannot overlook the fact that all
helping relationships essentially involve influence and authority
(Siporin, 1975). Compton and Galaway (1984) emphasize the need
for social workers to accept their authority:
A person in need of help seeks someone who has the authority
of knowledge and skill to be of help . . . The attempt of social
workers to abdicate their role and pretend that they carry no
authority only leaves clients troubled by suspicions and doubts
about why workers are unwilling to admit what they, the cli-
ents, are so aware of. (p. 240)
Similarly, Northen (1988) states that clients want and expect social
workers to accept the responsibilities of their role of authority by
giving professional opinions and taking appropriate action.
A recent survey of 25 students, conducted at the end of their first
year of graduate study in social work, indicates that struggle with
their role as an authority was, indeed, characteristic of their first-
 84 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
year experience. That study indicated that four interwoven concerns
contributed to their struggle: (1) a desire to be liked and accepted by
the clients with whom they worked; (2) lack of clarity about the
social work role and about what it means to be in a role of authority;
(3) fear that they did not possess the knowledge and skills necessary
to assume the role of social worker; and (4) fear that clients would
react negatively to their assumption of a role of authority.
Crucial to helping students feel more comfortable assuming a
role of authority with clients are the increased practice skill that
comes with experience and the enhanced knowledge and under-
standing that they gain in class. Said one student surveyed at the
end of her first year of graduate school, "I feel more confident
about the way I'm handling myself now. I have more skill and I feel
more effective than I did at the beginning of the year, which helps
me to be more comfortable in assuming authority." Said another,
"Learning that I do have some knowledge and skill and also that I
don't have to be perfect and have all the right answers, that I can
admit when I make a mistake —these things have led me to be more
comfortable in a position of authority" (Kurland and Salmon, in
press).
Crucial, too, in students' learning to assume a role of authority
are the examples set by their teachers. How teachers carry out their
own authority—what they actually do —may make an even more
important impact upon students than what they teach about author-
ity.
McKeachie (1986) identifies six roles of teachers that seem cen-
tral to their successful assumption of authority. First, he says,
"Instead of "providing the structure that the class needs irTthe begin-
teachers are experts, transmitting information, concepts, and ideas.
Second, they are formal authorities, representing the school, setting
goals, and establishing procedures (e.g., structure, assignments,
standards of evaluation) for reaching those goals. Third, they are
socializing agents, representing the profession and, through their
own behavior, clarifying expectations and acceptable behavior.
Fourth, teachers are facilitators, helping students define their own
goals and encouraging student creativity and independence. Fifth,
teachers are ego ideals, conveying enthusiasm, excitement, and en-
joyment of their subject and of teaching and communicating that
their subject is valuable and deeply important. Finally, teachers are
Roselle Kurland 85
persons, wanting to be validated by their students and, in turn,
wanting their students to feel they can be open with them (pp. 53-
66).
In all these roles, teachers model for students the ways in which
they, as social workers, can take on effectively a role of authority
with their clients. Students surveyed indicated that they especially
valued teachers who possessed knowledge, expertise, and enthusi-
asm for their work, conveyed respect for others, and encouraged
quality work and active participation. Citing a former teacher as a
positive role model, one student said, "She had very clear expecta-
tions and was even a little demanding. She enjoyed working with
students and was excited about her work. She had a lot of confi-
dence about her own work and worked very hard. She was generous
about sharing her thoughts and was accepting of different points of
view." Another student described a teacher she admired and
wanted to be like: "She made me think and figure things out for
myself. She had a nice balance. She was easygoing, flexible, rea-
sonable, yet she demanded satisfactory work. She welcomed input
from others, yet was secure and confident about what she knew"
(Kurland and Salmon, in press).
Three areas in which teachers use their authority are particularly
central to both effective teaching and beneficial role modeling. In
setting the structure of the class, in covering course content, and in
relating to students, teachers use the authority of their knowledge,
experience, position, and person.
In setting the structure of the class, a common mistake_pf teach-
er sirioTxertlooTlttle authority, especially in the class~r5egmnjngs.
ning, they give the class too many choices or choices that are more
appropriately made by the teacher than by the class members.
Professor H. was a new teacher of research. From what other
faculty told her, she knew that research was unlikely to be very
popular with the students. She believed that if she gave stu-
dents choices and employed democratic procedures, class
members would like her because she was not dictatorial and
also would feel greater ownership of the class and participate
in it more actively. At the first meeting of the class, she asked
 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
students to make two decisions: (1) Would they prefer to have
a ten-minute break after the first hour of the class or meet
without a break and end ten minutes early? (2) Would they
prefer to work on research projects that asked class members
to apply the concepts covered in class individually or in small
groups of four or five class members?
When Professor H. posed the first question, the class was
sharply divided. Many class members wanted a break mid-
way through the two hours. One student said she was sure she
was going to have difficulty absorbing content on research and
that meeting for two hours without a break would be intolera-
ble.
Another student said he needed a cigarette break. Still an-
other said he came to class straight from his agency without
time for lunch and needed ten minutes to get something to eat.
Many in the class favored having no break and ending ten
minutes early. One student said she had two young children at
home and ending earlier would enable her to relieve her baby-
sitter after a long day. Another student said ending earlier
would help her avoid some of the rush hour traffic. Another
said he had another class after this one and needed a break
before that class started. The debate went on and on, with
strong opinions expressed for .and against a mid-class break.
Finally, Professor H. asked the class to vote. Those in favor of
ending the class early without a break held sway by a margin
of 12 to 10. Those who had favored a mid-class break were
annoyed at and unhappy with the outcome.
Next, Professor H. posed the question about working on
projects individually or in small groups. The class debate on
this question was even more heated than the first. Again, opin-
ion was divided. Some in the class said that small groups were
used in other classes and they were sick and tired of them, that
typically one or two people in the group did all the work and
the others got a "free ride." Others said the logistics of find-
ing a time for the small groups to meet were too difficult.
Others in the class said they liked working in a group, that it
made the work more fun, that they learned more, and that it
also gave them a chance to get to know their classmates.
Rosette Kurland 87
Debate on this issue became chaotic with class members
interrupting one another, putting down and making fun of
opinions with which they disagreed, and having side conversa-
tions with their neighbors. Professor H. struggled to maintain
order. Finally, she asked for a vote. By a margin of 13 to 9,
the class voted to work on projects individually rather than in
small groups.
Debate on the two issues took up the entire first class ses-
sion. Many students left class disgruntled and unhappy, with
hard feelings about the discussion and the decisions that had
been made. Professor H. left with the feeling that somehow
things had gotten out of control. She was dissatisfied with how
the class had gone and sensed that many of the students were
angry. In addition, she was disappointed with the vote to work
on projects individually. Her belief was that students gained
greater understanding of research concepts through working
on projects in small groups.
Looking back at how the course had gone at the end of the
semester, Professor H. reported that the class never seemed to
come together, that an angry undertone persisted throughout.
All during the course, she said, she felt that students showed a
lack of respect for each other and for her. Class discussion was
frequently chaotic. Class members did not seem to listen to
each other. Some in the class, especially those students who
had wanted a mid-class break, often came late to class. Profes-
sor H. felt that the class never recovered from the difficult start
of the first class session.
In this example, Professor H. abdicated her authority. At a time
when the class needed her leadership and direction, in its very first
session, she asked the class to make two choices. One of those
choices, whether to take a mid-class break or end early, was likely
to be divisive in nature with strong sentiments on the part of stu-
dents favoring each option. The second choice, whether students
should work on projects individually or in small groups, was also
likely to be highly divisive. Perhaps even more important, it in-
volved educational considerations and judgments that Professor H.
rather than the class needed to make.
 88
Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
Though a class is different from a small group in many ways, it
also has many similarities to a group. Thus, basic principles of so-
cial group work practice can inform teaching practice. Material on
the stages of group development (Garland, Jones, and Kolodny,
1965; Northen, 1988; Shulman, 1984) emphasizes thmjjMt^begi fi-
ning stage a group jiegdsjjie_ariivp. leadership of its worker, who
must provide direction, structure, and guidance for the group and its
members at a time when the group is new and the members are not
yet willing or able to assume leadership. Such material also accents
the importance of bringing to the fore in a group's beginning stage
the commonalities that the group members share. Such commonali-
ties are the foundation for support among the group members
(Northen, 1988).
In this example, Professor H. did neither. She raised questions
that were inappropriate for a first class session, likely to bring out
and accentuate the differences among the students rather than their
commonalities. Once she had raised such questions, however, Pro-
fessor H. needed to use her authority by taking an active role with
the class. She might have provided the guidance and direction that
the class needed by expressing her own points of view and sharing
the reasons for her opinions. She needed to limit the disrespectful
behavior of some class members. Instead, Professor H. was pas-
sive. She allowed the class session to get out of control and to
become chaotic, resulting in class members feeling the lack of lead-
ership and a lack of confidence in her.
A number of teaching principles can be drawn here. Teachers
need to use the authority of their position and expertise to provide
structure, limits, guidance, and direction for the class, especially in .
its beginning stage. Teachers should not, at this stage, be fearful of
exerting authority or of imposing their ideas and viewpoints onto
the students. Quite the contrary, class members gain a sense of
security from teachers who are clear in providing structure and di-
rection, who in effect say to the class, "Here's how we'll do things
and here's my thinking_behind dojn^JhejTUharwgy.'' For teachers
to provide such structure and direction is a needed and very appro-
priate use of their authority.
As the class goes along, however, as class members become
more familiar with the purposes and content of the course, with the
Hostile Kurland 89
teacher, with their classmates, and with themselves in this course,
then the teacher can step back a bit and students can begin to have
increasing input into decisions and choices about the structure and
content of the class. Whether to work in small groups, whether to
hear student reports on certain topics, whether they would rather
spend limited class time on X subject or Y subject, are decisions
that the teacher might ask the class to make at a later stage in the
class' development, decisions that it would be inappropriate to ask
the class to make in its beginning stage.
The teacher's use of authority in determining class structure is
very akin to that of the social work practitioner. What teachers
model here for students, in addition to a willingness to use their
authority, is the need for social workers to use authority differen-
tially according to the needs of the clients with whom they are
working,
In covering course content, teachers also use and model their role
of authority. Crucial here is the teachers' comfort with the authority
of their knowledge of the subject. Teachers who are comfortable
with their authority are able to express a point of view. At the same
time, they are open to new input and to different ways of looking at
things. In fact, they encourage students to express their view; they
are able to accept challenges and disagreements from students and
do not find them threatening or inadmissible.
But such teachers also feel free to question and challenge student
opinions. They use student challenges of their statements, as well as
their challenges of student statements, to stimulate class discussion
and the thinking and learning that such discussion inspires. With
such teachers, students come to know that their views, if different
from those expressed by the teacher, will not be rejected automati-
cally as invalid. They also come to know that the teacher may dis-
agree with, challenge, or ask them to expand their statements and
that they need to be prepared to do so.
Teachers who are comfortable with the authority of their knowl-
edge model for students important qualities of social work practi-
tioners (Solomon, 1976): security with their own expertise along
with openness to new ideas and different viewpoints and ways of
looking at situations.
90 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
Professor R. taught a first-year group work practice class. The
class was looking at group roles, focusing on the role of scape-
goat. In her presentation about this role, Professor R. made a
strong statement that the scapegoat in a group is never merely
the innocent victim of the other members' hurtfulness, that the
scapegoat is always doing something to elicit the behavior of
the other group members toward him/her.
Ken, a student in the class, raised his hand. "Is that always
true?" he asked. "Yes, I think it is," Professor R. responded.
Ken looked puzzled. "I get the sense that you have something
in mind," Professor R. said. "Well, I'm thinking of the Jews
in the Holocaust," Ken said. "Weren't they innocent vic-
tims?" Ken's reference surprised Professor R. "I hadn't
thought of that," she said. "It does seem to contradict what
I've been saying. I'm not sure." Students in the class seemed
stymied as well by Ken's idea. "Why don't we all think about
this and come back to it next week," Professor R. said.
At the start of the next class session, Mary, another student,
asked to be recognized. "A lot of us have been talking about
the scapegoat question all week," she said, "and we think
there are important differences between scapegoating in a
small group and scapegoating when it's a group like an entire
people." A lively class discussion ensued about the differ-
ences between the small groups typical in social work practice
and large groups or aggregates of people.
Dr. L., a social worker, was leading a seminar on work with
groups for staff working with youth at a community-based so-
cial work agency. Staff in the teen program were about to
initiate a new group program addressing issues of tccn sexual-
ity. Howard, the worker who was to coordinate the new pro-
gram, was describing the need for the program. "In this
neighborhood, sex is the only thing a lot of teens think about.
We're aiming to help them see that that's not all there is in
life. We also want them to realize that if they get pregnant
now, they'll never get anywhere."
Rosette Kwland 91
Jorge, a youth worker in a different agency program,
seemed in disagreement with what Howard was saying. "I get
the sense that you disagree," Dr. L. said to Jorge. "Yes, I
do," he responded. "How would you describe the need for
the program," she asked. "I don't think there is a need for this
program," Jorge said. "I think the program is racist and a
form of genocide." Jorge's comments were unexpected and
came as a surprise to Dr. L. Jorge went on to question whether
it was true that sex is all that teens think about. "They think
about a lot of things," he said. "And the problem is not that
kids get pregnant. It's the lack of jobs, health care, and other
resources. If those were available, these teens would do fine.
How come pregnancy prevention programs are always di-
rected at teens in poor neighborhoods, not in white middle
class neighborhoods?" he asked.
Some in the seminar agreed with Jorge's viewpoint. Others
spoke of the need for such a program and of the need to pre-
vent teen pregnancy. "There may be a need for more jobs and
resources," Sue, another staff member, said, "but neverthe-
less the lives of many kids who become parents before they're
really ready to are ruined. We've seen it over and over again."
Lively discussion of these issues continued for two seminar
sessions. Jorge's comments sensitized the participants to a dif-
ferent point of view and helped them better define the needs
that the new program would aim to address, the program's
purposes, and how staff would present the idea of the new
program to parents and teens at an open house that was sched-
uled to launch the program.
Both these examples illustrate the teacher's openness to ideas that
are different and/or unexpected. Neither Professor R. nor Dr. L.
was threatened when the session she was leading took an unantici-
pated turn. In fact, each encouraged and learned from the expres-
sion of views that were new to her or different from her own. Pro-
fessor R. modelled authority especially well when she openly
admitted that she had not thought about scapegoating in relation to
the Holocaust and was not sure how it fit with the point of view she
•92 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education
had just expressed. Teachers who are secure with their authority do
not have to pretend to know it all.
The third area where teachers use and model their authority is in
relating to students. Extremes are not uncommon here. On the one
hand are teachers who use their authority as a barrier in their rela-
tionships with students. Such teachers tend to be overly formal and
aloof and come across to students as uncaring and unapproachable.
They maintain distance and share little of themselves, be it person-
ally or professionally. They seem to hold themselves above stu-
dents. Beneath a facade of superiority, such teachers are often fear-
ful of students.
On the other extreme are teachers who downplay their role of
authority. Such teachers seem overly concerned with being liked by
their students. Often, they relate to students as friends and seem to
"bribe" students to like them by sharing of themselves personally
in an effort to win students over by gaining their sympathy. Such
teachers are often unsure of themselves. They need and seek valida-
tion from students.
A third category of teachers who use authority inappropriately
are those who create student dependence upon them by exhibiting
their knowledge as if it were a prized possession that only a few
people arc fortunate enough to get. Like a guru or Pied Piper, such
teachers often create a loyal following. They enjoy the adulation of
students and invite it by discouraging independent student thinking
and rewarding student thinking that parrots their own. Such teach-
ers are usually quite self-involved and have little genuine interest in
their students.
Central to teachers' effective use of authority in relationships
with students is mutual respect. Teachers who respect themselves
are those who use authority well and are respected by students.
Such teachers, in turn, communicate respect for their students by
encouraging them to express their ideas, by taking their ideas seri-
ously, and by taking time to appreciate where their students are
coming from and what has contributed to their thinking.
As long as such respect exists and is communicated to students,
as long as they have genuine interest in their students, then different
teachers can have widely different styles of relating to students, all
of which can be highly acceptable. Some teachers will share a great
Rosette Kurland 93
deal of themselves, others very little. Some will come across as
warm, others more distant. Some will relate more formally, others
in a more casual manner. There are no absolute right or wrong ways
of relating to students.
Again, in the ways in which they relate to students, teachers
model for students ways in which they can use their authority as
they relate to clients. With clients, as well, there are no absolute
right or wrong ways of relating and students can learn that from the
variety of teachers they observe. What is central to the worker's
role, like the teacher's, is the genuine respect and interest that
workers communicate to their clients.
Becoming comfortable with the authority of the teacher's role is
not easy. It is a process that takes time. The new teacher struggles
with many questions: how much and when to take control in the
classroom, how to best get across course content, how close to get
to students, how much of oneself to share. The conclusions that
each teacher reaches in regard to these questions may differ. But
what seems crucial to all good teaching is the teachers' confidence
in and comfort with themselves. Such confidence and comfort are
central to the teachers' ability to effectively assume the position of
authority that they must own.
REFERENCES
Adorno, T.W., Else Frenkel-Brunswick, DJ. Levinson, and R.N. Sanford. The
Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1950.
Complon, Beulah Roberts and BurtGalaway, eds. Social Work Processes. 3rded.
Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press, 1984.
French, John R.P. and Bertram Raven. "The Bases of Social Power," In Dorwin
Cartwright and Alvin Zander, eds. Group Dynamics: Research and Theory,
3rd ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. pp. 259-269.
Garland, James A., Hubert E. Jones, and Ralph L. Kolodny. "A Model for
Stages of Development in Social Work Groups." In Saul Bernstein, ed., Ex-
plorations in Group Work, pp. 17-71. Boston: Boston University School of
Social Work, 1965, Milford House, 1973.
Goldstein, Howard. Social Work Practice: A Unitary Approach. Columbia, S.C.:
University of South Carolina Press, 1973.
Kurland, Roselle and Robert Salmon. "Not Just One of the Gang: Group Workers
and Their Role as an Authority." in Paul Ephros and Thomas Vassil, eds.
94 Teaching Secrets: The Technology in Social Work Education

Social Work With Groups: Expanding Horizons. New York: The Haworth
Press, Inc., in press.
Kurland, Roselle and Robert Salmon. "Self-Determination: Its Use and Misuse in Standing for Values and Ethical Action:
Group Work Practice and Graduate Education." Paper presented at the
Twelfth Annual Symposium, Association for the Advancement of Social Work Teaching Social Work Ethics
With Groups, Miami, Florida, 1990.
Levinson, Daniel and Gerald KJerman. "The Clinician-Executive Revisited." M. Vincentia Joseph
Administration in Mental Health, 1972, #6, pp.53-67.
McKeachie, Wilberl J. Teaching Tips: A Guidebook for the Beginning College
Teacher, 8th ed. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath & Company, 1986.
National Association of Social Workers. Code of Ethics. 1980.
Northen, Helen. Social Work With Groups. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia Univer-
sity Press, 1988. SUMMARY. This article is focused on the role of ethics in the
Shulman, Lawrence. The Skills of Helping Individuals and Groups. 2nd ed., professional socialization of the student and the place of ethics in the
Itasca, III.: Peacock, 1984. social work curriculum. The content and structure of the ethics com-
Siporin, Max. Introduction to Social Work Practice. New York: MacMillan Pub- ponent and related issues are considered and an educational model, a
lishing Company, 1975. teaching-learning approach, with its underlying learning theory and
Solomon, Barbara Bryant. Black Empowerment: Social Work In Oppressed Com- philosophical orientation is presented and instructional technology
munities. New York: Columbia University Press, 1976. discussed.
Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1947, pp. 324-329.
With the widening parameters of ethical issues in social work and
their increasing complexity, the profession is faced with the task,
similar to that of other professions, of adequately preparing students
to deal with value and ethical dilemmas in practice situations. These
dilemmas require cross disciplinary knowledge and skills to provide
the competencies needed for thoughtful and informed ethical
choices. Within the past two decades, a substantive literature has
developed in social work ethics but the profession is only beginning
to seriously examine the educational aspect— the development of
core curriculum content and the structure of this content in the edu-
cational program (Black, Hartley, Kirk-Sharp, & Whelley 1989;
Hockenstad, 1987; Joseph, 1989).
The broad purpose of this article is to consider the role of ethics
in the professional socialization of students and the place of ethics
content in social work curricula, particularly at the master's level.
More specifically, an educational model, a learning-teaching ap-
proach with its underlying learning theory and philosophical orien-

M. Vincentia Joseph, DSW, is Professor and Chair, DSW Program at The

National Catholic School of Social Service, The Catholic University of America,
Washington, DC 20064.
© 1991 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 95