Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment
Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment
18 Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57
© 2018 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.
Counselor Preparation
Received 08/17/16 Revised 03/14/17
Accepted 05/08/17 DOI: 10.1002/ceas.12091
How Exemplar Counselor Advocates Develop Social Justice Interest: A Qualitative Investigation
Melissa Robinson Swartz, Dodie Limberg, and Joshua Gold
The authors examined the experiences of 10 peer-nominated exemplar counselor advocates using grounded theory methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Analysis by the authors yielded a model of how exemplar counselor advocates develop a social justice interest and provided key insights on how counselor educators can enhance social justice interest in their students. Implications for supervisors and scholars are presented.
Keywords: counselor advocate development, grounded theory, multicultural com- petence, social justice advocacy, social justice interest and commitment
Social injustice exacerbates mental health symptoms (Chakraborty & Mc- Kenzie, 2002; Krieger, 2000; Ratts & Hutchins, 2009). Researchers have demonstrated that when counselors assist clients in alleviating oppressive forces, mental health symptoms improve (i.e., Deegan, 1997; Harding, Brooks, Ashikaga, Strauss, & Breier, 1987). Vera and Speight (2003) wove together 2 decades worth of scholarship to build a strong argument that counselors have the unique ability to foster social change by expanding their profes- sional activities role to include social justice efforts. The culmination of this research resulted in the ACA (American Counseling Association) Advocacy Competencies (Lewis, Arnold, House, & Toporek, 2002), which were endorsed by the ACA in 2003. Several scholars combined available research findings with their own experiences as social justice advocates to offer an operation- alization plan for the Advocacy Competencies (Lee & Rodgers, 2009; Lopez- Baez & Paylo, 2009; Ratts & Hutchins, 2009). They used case study examples to demonstrate that professional and school counselors advocate on three levels: client/student (e.g., training a client in self-advocacy), school/com- munity (e.g., developing alliances with school officials to reduce bullying), and in the public arena (e.g., moving the ACA conference from Tennessee because of oppressive laws passed against counselors and LGBTQI persons [Tenn. SB 1556/HB 1840, 2016]). Following ACA support of the importance of the counselor as advocate, the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) also made its standard on
Melissa Robinson Swartz, Firm Foundations Counseling and Wellness, Lugoff, South Carolina; Dodie Limberg and Joshua Gold, Department of Educational Studies, University of South Carolina. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Melissa Robinson Swartz, Firm Foundations Counseling and Wellness, 1443 Highway 1 South, Lugoff, SC 29878 (e-mail: mswartz@firmfoundationscounseling.com).
Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57 19
counselor advocacy clear by mandating that counselor education programs infuse advocacy training into multiple common core curriculum experiences (CACREP, 2009, 2016). Thus, leaders in the counseling field clearly define advocacy as a major role of professional and school counselors.
The Advocacy Competencies operationalize, on a day-to-day basis, excellence in counselor advocacy. Developmental models of counselor skill and theoretical mastery (e.g., Lifelong Developmental Model; Rønnestad & Skovholt, 2003) have proven critical to counselor educators, supervisors, and scholars as they develop curriculum and standards for master’s degree and doctoral programs. Likewise, with such a model for counselor advocate development, counselor educators and supervisors will be able to assess, evaluate, and plan curriculum that helps further develop competent counselor advocates. However, a model of how counselors (or other helping professionals) develop as advocates does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a model of counselor advocate development utilizing grounded theory. For this study, the term coun- selor advocate is operationally defined as a counselor who demonstrates advocacy behavior as described in the Advocacy Competencies (Lewis, et al., 2002).
Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment
Scholarship suggests social justice interest and commitment are significant predictors of advocacy behavior. Miller and colleagues’ Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment (Miller et al., 2009; see Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011, for visual model) was adapted from Lent, Brown, and Hackett’s (1994) social cognitive career theory. Miller et al. (2009) developed the following components as a framework for social justice commitment and interest: (a) social justice self-efficacy beliefs, (b) social justice outcome expectations, (c) social justice interest, (d) social justice commitment, and (e) social justice support and barriers.
Social justice self-efficacy beliefs, based on Bandura’s (1986) social-cognitive theory, is defined as a dynamic and domain set of beliefs regarding an indi- vidual’s perceived ability to perform particular social justice tasks. Social justice outcome expectations refer to the “perceived positive outcomes associated with social justice engagement” (Miller et al., 2009, p. 497). Social justice interest refers to compilation of likes, dislikes, and indifferences concerning social justice activities. Social justice commitment “refers to the choice-content goals or the domain-specific activities related to social justice advocacy one plans on pursuing” (p. 497). Scholars have theorized social justice interest and commitment are generated by a person’s personal moral imperative (Prillelten- sky, 1997; Vera & Speight, 2003). “Personal moral imperative refers to the process by which individuals discover for themselves certain aspects of social injustice that compel them to action” (Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011, p. 160). Finally, social justice social supports and barriers refer to the amount of support versus hindrance one has in the pursuit of social justice engagement.
Using the five components of the model, Miller and Sendrowitz (2011) found that social justice interest has a direct effect on social justice commitment,
20 Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57
indicating that high levels of social justice interest will likely lead to more social justice advocacy. The findings of Miller and Sendrowitz (2011) echo previous studies (Caldwell & Vera, 2010; Field & Baker, 2004; Singh, Urbano, Haston, & McMahon, 2010) that suggest advocacy development may begin early in life (e.g., developing personal moral imperative via parents’ modeling advocacy or faith/religious beliefs). In addition, these findings are in line with an earlier quantitative study by Nilsson and Schmidt (2005), who found “the desire to engage in social justice work” (p. 273), along with political interest, to be sole predictive factors of actual social justice advocacy. Miller and Sendrowitz’s (2011) findings are helpful because they offer the most comprehensive framework to date of social justice interest and commitment. However, this study’s sample was primarily White female counseling psychol- ogy doctoral trainees; thus, results may not be generalizable to professional counselor advocates. In addition, although the researchers substantiated the direct effect social justice interest has on social justice commitment, they did not expose how one develops a social justice interest.
The Development of Social Justice Interest
To our knowledge, to date the counseling literature provides no empirical evidence on how counselors develop a social justice interest. However, quali- tative inquiries into a related construct, social justice orientation, provide evidence of the early stages of counselor advocate development. Vera and Speight (2003) suggested that social justice orientation is a precursor to social justice advocacy. Caldwell and Vera (2010) defined social justice orientation as “the disposition of individuals who endorse social justice beliefs and are engaged in social justice advocacy” (p. 164). In their study they applied criti- cal incident technique (Caldwell & Vera, 2010) using in-depth interviews with 36 counseling psychologists. They found five major themes in which incidents are critical in contributing to the development of a social justice orientation: (a) influence of significant persons, (b) exposure to injustice (both personal experiences with injustice, and witnessing/observing injustice), (c) education and learning, (d) work experiences including clinical and community work with oppressed groups and research work with oppressed groups, and (e) religion/spirituality. Participants ranked each of the five themes in order of most influential: exposure to injustice (1); influence of significant persons and religion/spirituality, both (2); education/learning (3); and work experiences (4), suggesting that early life experiences and relationships are critical in advocate development.
Sumner’s (2013) dissertation study applied consensual qualitative research (CQR) to data collected via in-depth interviews with 18 peer-nominated social justice advocate exemplars. The findings echoed those of Caldwell and Vera (2010), which emphasized that advocate development begins with early life experiences and adds the themes of social movements (e.g., civil rights, women’s rights movements) and personal/professional integration in personal narrative (e.g., the ability to integrate personal social justice values into one’s professional work) as critical in the development of a social
Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57 21
justice orientation. Finally, Singh et al. (2010) conducted a qualitative study to explore the aspects of self that school counselors (N = 16) identified as central to their advocate development. Their results were consistent with themes in the aforementioned studies. They also added the themes of certain personality characteristics (i.e., proactivity, directness, patience, flexibility, resourcefulness, courage, and willingness to take risks) and emotions (i.e., passion, enthusiasm) as influential to the development of a social justice orientation.
The scholarship produced over the last decade provides a beginning point to the empirical inquiry of counselor advocate development. Many unanswered questions remain as to how counselors develop the type of competency outlined in the Advocacy Competencies (Lewis et al., 2002). First, to our knowledge no study to date has used a sample exclusively of professional counselors. Second, many of the studies of how mental health professionals develop into advocates examined samples including students or self-identified advocates. These samples left no way to validate that developmental descriptions were coming from persons who had achieved advocacy competency as outlined by Lewis and colleagues (2002). Of the studies that did include a way to validate participant advocacy work (Caldwell & Vera, 2010; Sumner, 2013), none included a sample of professional counselors. The only study (Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011) where researchers offer a comprehensive model of advocate development found social justice interest to have a direct impact on social justice commitment, suggesting social justice interest leads to more social justice advocacy. Therefore, to deepen the knowledge on how social justice interest begins from individuals who have achieved advocacy competency (i.e., exemplar advocates), the purpose of this study was to explore how exemplar counselor advocates developed a social justice interest.
Method
Qualitative inquiry, particularly grounded theory methodology (GTM; Strauss & Corbin, 1998), allows researchers to build theory directly from data col- lected in the field. GTM characteristics include the grounding of theory in data, memo writing, constant comparative method, and theoretical sampling. In addition, GTM provides researchers a framework from which to generate a theory from the context of experiences (Creswell, 2007); therefore, we found this approach appropriate to address the research question. In the current study, we used GTM (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) to derive a theory that emerged from in-depth interviews with 10 peer-nominated exemplar counselor advocates.
Role of the Researcher and Research Team
The research team consisted of two counselor education doctoral students and one counselor education faculty member. The principal investigator identifies as a Caucasian, heterosexual female; the two additional investiga- tors identify as Caucasian, heterosexual males. Furthermore, all members of the research team identify themselves as professional counselors interested
22 Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57
in counselor advocate development. To promote transparency of potential researcher bias, prior to data collection and analysis, the principal investigator wrote a reflection answering each of the interview questions. The principal investigator acknowledged and later bracketed a bias that her own social justice interest grew from close connections to oppressed groups.
Trustworthiness
We aimed to promote trustworthiness through a variety of measures, includ- ing (a) prolonging exposure with participants and the research topic itself; (b) practicing reflexivity to identify potential bias; (c) providing sufficient detail in regard to the setting (i.e., the field of professional counseling in the United States) to participants, nominators, and nominees; (d) member checking; (e) utilizing transparency as a key feature throughout the study and in the presentation of the study’s results; (f) memoing to document node and code list evolution, emerging theoretical reflections, and links to the existing literature, as well as other key decision points; (g) triangulation of investigators (i.e., multiple investigators conducted coding procedures to confirm categories were similar among investigators); and (h) utilizing an external auditor.
Sampling Procedure
Exemplar methodology “is a sample selection technique that involves the intentional selection of individuals, groups, or entities that exemplify the construct of interest in a particularly intense or highly developed manner” (Bronk, King, & Matsuba, 2013, p. 2). Scholars across various disciplines (Colby & Damon, 1993; Lurie, Nofziger, Meldrum, Mooney, & Epstein, 2006) used exemplar methodology as a preferred sample selection method to study developmental processes. Therefore, we used exemplar sampling to identify 10 peer-nominated exemplar counselor advocates.
We constructed a nomination process to identify exemplar counselor advocates. This process began with clear and concrete nomination criteria for what constitutes an exemplar counselor advocate: (a) current or retired professional counselor; and (b) someone who exemplifies the description of professional counselor advocacy as found in the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014, Section A.7.a). Advocacy. In addition to these criteria, we also provided potential nominators a link to the ACA Advocacy Competencies. Nominators were typically experts in the field or peers of potential nominees (Bronk, et al., 2013). For the purposes of this study, we used two electronic mailing lists dedicated to the counseling profession to request nominations: Counselor Education and Supervision Network LISTSERV and an electronic mailing list for mental health professionals in South Carolina. Initially, 44 nominators submitted nominations. All nominators were counselor educators or mem- bers of the professional counseling community (i.e., licensed professional counselors [LPCs], licensed marriage and family therapists [LMFTs], licensed independent social workers). Because of the limited sample pool generated, we next employed a more purposeful, or snowball (Charmaz, 2014), sampling.
Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57 23
During the second round of nomination requests, we contacted each nomi- nee via e-mail and asked them for the names of three colleagues who met the nomination criteria. After two rounds, the 44 nominators produced 93 nominations; of these, 20 people were peer-nominated two or more times as exemplar counselor advocates. After reviewing the nominations, we set an additional criterion for study inclusion: Participants must receive a minimum of two peer nominations and one self-nomination to be included in the study.
Participants
Twenty eligible nominees were nominated more than two times and thus were invited to participate. In total, 10 of the 20 exemplars were interviewed because of data saturation (e.g., no new data emerged, categories were well developed, relationships among categories were established and validated; see Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p. 212) being met between Interviews 8 and 9. Seven participants identified as female and three as male. Seven participants identified as White/Caucasian, two as Hispanic, and one as South Asian. One participant identified as gay. Years of professional experience ranged from 8 to 47 years, with a mean of 24.8 years; four participants worked primarily in private practice, two in community agencies, two in a school setting/ community agency, and two in academia. Four of the interviewed exemplars held a doctorate in counselor education or a related field; one of the inter- viewees held a doctorate in divinity; five of the interviewed exemplars held a master’s or education specialist degree. All participants were a licensed (LPC, counselor supervisor [LPC/S]; 70%); dual-licensed as an LPC/S and as a LMFT and supervisor (LMFT/S; 10%), a LMFT/intern (10%); or held the National Certified Counselor credential (10%).
Data Collection
In-depth interviews are a standard part of exemplar methodology (Bronk, 2012), as well as GTM (Charmaz, 2014). Question type, order, and the way the researcher asks questions will inherently influence the study’s outcome (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Therefore, we designed the interview guide based on review of the existing literature and pilot interviews. Interview topics began with the participant’s definition of advocacy and his or her current advocacy work, how he or she learned to be an advocate, and how he or she became aware of social justice issues, personal–professional integration, and the relation- ship between social justice awareness and advocacy behavior. Semistructured interviews with the 10 peer-nominated exemplar counselor advocates yielded approximately 8 hours and 5 minutes of audio interview data.
Data Analysis
After we conducted interviews, each was transcribed verbatim. We used line- by-line analysis (i.e., open coding) to ground categories in the data from which they emerged (Charmaz, 2014). We applied this process of open cod- ing to all 10 interviews to identify emergent concepts and categories, many of which we captured in vivo. Initially we coded each interview separately,
24 Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57
then we had joint open-coding sessions to compare one another’s analyses. At the completion of the open-coding process, there were 276 concepts. Each of the initial 276 concepts were recorded via analysis memos.
The next level of analysis involved axial coding, that is, relating the open code categories to their subcategories. Adhering to Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) Paradigm Model, we asked the following questions of the data: who, why, when, where, how, for what cause, and with what consequences. This analysis model, meant to help analysts relate structure and process, helped us to develop conditions for each category and any salient context in which they were situated, the action/interaction pertaining to those categories as they evolve over time, and any consequences that resulted. Finally, we applied the constant comparison method to each category, context, action/ interaction, or consequence that emerged. The purpose of this was to discover how many participants shared those themes as well as to detect any nonconfirming or discrepant cases. After completing the axial coding process for each research question, we began selective coding, focusing on the theoretical connections among core categories in each research question. When a potential relationship was identified, we conducted additional constant comparison processes to determine how many cases contained the hypothesized relationship. We used this process of constant comparison in tandem (Charmaz, 2014) with theoretical sampling. Theoretical sampling led us to add additional probes to the interview guide after Interviews 1 and 4. Saturation was achieved for all categories with one gender variation revealed (i.e., only male participants acknowledged the subcategory of acknowledging privilege).
Findings
Analysis of the data resulted in four core categories and 17 subcategories, which we organized using Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) Dimensional Analysis Model. We provided pseudonyms to protect the identity of participants. From the results emerged a GTM of how exemplar counselor advocates develop social justice interest.
Development of a Social Justice Interest
As previously stated, social justice interest is made up of an individual’s likes, dislikes, and indifferences concerning social justice activities and personal moral imperative, which refers to the process by which individuals discover certain aspects of social injustice that compel them to action (Miller & Send- rowitz, 2011). Analyses revealed four categories related to how participants developed a social justice interest: (a) time context, (b) conditions for social justice interest, (c) influencers, and (d) consequences.
Time context. This category refers to the time during which participants developed a social justice interest. Some participants stated, “I was born this way,” indicating they believed they were predisposed toward social justice. When asked when she was first aware of social justice issues, Sara said, “I think that for me, it started at a really young age. It was just something that
Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57 25
was kind of innately in me.” Almost all other participants acknowledged that their social interest either began or was continually developed in childhood. Teresa said, “I realized that we needed advocacy in the world from my fa- ther’s stories from World War II. He was at like Auschwitz. I knew a long time back when I was a kid about injustices.” Furthermore, participants acknowledged their social justice interest and personal moral imperative continued to evolve during their undergraduate/graduate school years as well as during their professional training. Throughout these various time contexts, findings suggest multiple conditions influenced the develop- ment of participants’ social justice interest.
Conditions. This category denotes conditions to which participants attrib- uted their development of a social justice interest. First, analysis revealed that participants’ social justice interest grew from awareness of their own unmet needs. Henry described how he knew what “income disparity” was long before it was a hot topic. He said, “As a kid . . . what I noticed was that the people who had to work harder to get things tended to come from a lower socioeconomic status.” When asked about experiences that led to her awareness of social justice issues, Margarite said, “[My] mom was a single mom, so . . . I need[ed] someone, and nobody came.” As an advocate, she explained, “I was trying to do for others what I could not do for me.”
Participants also highlighted specific personality characteristics (i.e., sensi- tivity, intuition) that led them to a social justice interest. When asked when she was first aware of social justice issues, Maragarite said, “I think I’m very sensitive. So I used to sit and see people and feeling that they have some needs . . . as I told you I’m really sensitive about people.” Although she did not have the language for the term social justice back then, Sara explained her awareness of social injustice began through a sensitive nature as well.
In addition to certain personality characteristics, participants discussed experi- ence of helplessness as an event that led to their social justice interest. Teresa described the condition as “Personal factors, I think, probably go back to the things I talked about already. That was the feeling of helplessness at not being able to get answers.” This was something that sparked an interest in social justice and advocacy. Sam also discussed his awareness of social justice issues begin- ning through early family experiences that resulted in feelings of helplessness.
Although helplessness was a condition for only some participants, all par- ticipants stressed how exposure to injustice, oppression, or racism ignited their social justice interest. This condition includes both personal exposure (injustice/oppression/racism happened to them) and vicarious exposure (injustice/oppression/racism happened to a person or group they were connected to). Teresa said she “really came more into realizing those things [social justice issues] . . . while working with oppressed populations at a homeless shelter.” Kara, describing her development of a social justice inter- est, gave another example of vicarious exposure to oppression and injustice:
My father was an immigrant from Germany and there were issues in his childhood that he would talk about where there was prejudice against him. He came as a child. So I was aware of prejudice at an early age.
26 Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57
Other participants, like Jyoti, described very personal exposure to op- pression: “Well, the whole thing was for me, living in South Asia, was the women’s rights and the issue of how the women were so oppressed and so pushed down and controlled, and like in my culture.”
Conditions of faith or spirituality as well as social movements also emerged as reasons for developing a social justice interest. Kara stated that her “Faith focuses on that [referring to social justice] my denomination does a tremen- dous amount of work in that area. I’m an Episcopalian. They are very active in social justice, and continue to be.” Participants discussed the civil rights movement and the Peace Corp initiative by President John F. Kennedy as social movements that impacted their social justice interest.
Participants also reported experiential learning (e.g., working with persons who are homeless or children placed in group homes) as critical experiences that triggered a social justice interest. However, participants seemed to believe that the closer the experience “hit home” or affected them personally, the more likely they were to act out on the interest. Finally, both male partici- pants reported that recognizing their own privilege was a condition present in the development of their social justice interest. Henry remembered the first time he realized his privilege:
I was aware as a White guy going to [name of school] I was given privileges that other people didn’t get. I got part-time jobs because I was a student at [name of school] and I had friends who had applied to the same kind of jobs that I was applying for and they did get it at [name of school] and they didn’t get the jobs. And some of them were probably more qualified than I.
Simiarly, Marco stated “I realized that because I was privileged . . . I could speak up and I could become an advocate.”
Influencers. This category reflects persons who influenced participants toward a social justice interest. These aforementioned conditions that resulted in the development of participants’ social justice interest were often influenced by family models, mentors, and other professionals. Family models tended to be immedi- ate relatives such as parents, grandparents, or siblings. Teresa spoke of her fam- ily’s influence: “[M]y sister was a Vietnam War protestor and my cousin went to Canada to avoid going to war. So it actually comes from my raising.” Participants also described mentors and other professionals who raised their awareness of social justice issues. Veronica discussed her many mentors and their influence:
[Naming mentors]. Those were the people we trained with and I think that those were really important people in my life. [Mentor name] is extremely socially conscious. He is very involved in social justice issues so I think he shaped us a lot in terms of families and social justice. I was primed for that, anyway.
Consequences. After constantly comparing participant accounts of how and when they developed a social justice interest, it was evident that these events over time resulted in two common outcomes for the participants: paradigm shifts and thus a more focused personal moral imperative. This category represents the consequences of the aforementioned conditions
Counselor Education & Supervision • March 2018 • Volume 57 27
and influencers present in the participants’ lives. Paradigm shifts were often described as beginning awareness in childhood or earlier life, then some experience shifted and oftentimes expanded their understanding of social justice issues. Veronica illuminated this process when she shared about a paradigm shift she had in regards to racism:
So I moved to New Hampshire. . . . In my entire growing up life, being from South Carolina, I never saw racism like I saw in New Hampshire. They were racist about Black people . . . about French people.
A more focused personal moral imperative represented how participants would further narrow the areas of social justice they were interested in and thus perform advocacy behaviors. Henry acknowledged understanding socioeconomic privilege early in life:
[I was aware] [t]hat some, some people received things without having to work and it just kinda came their way. And what I noticed was that the people who had to work harder to get things tended to come from lower socioeconomic status.
Then, when in college, he said he experienced this firsthand: “When I was in college . . . [I was] embarrassed that my family were not in the same socioeconomic class that my college friends were.” He then described how this experience resulted in a paradigm shift for him, a more focused moral imperative, and subsequent advocacy behaviors:
[I was] discuss[ing] with one of my mentors about this dissonance that I was experiencing and he acknowledged that social class difference was there and it was there strongly at [school name] . . . he was happy that I was experiencing this dissonance so then he said to me, “How do you reconcile this and how do you give back?” He was the person that convinced me to go into the lay volunteer corps. It was that recognition even in elementary school and more pronounced in high school and college that if you didn’t come from wealth you had to work harder.
GTM of Counselor Social Justice Interest
Our data analysis yielded a GTM (see Figure 1) of how exemplar counselor advocates developed a social justice interest. Our analysis revealed that par- ticipants’ social justice interests grew from an awareness of their own unmet needs; specific personality characteristics; experience of helplessness; exposure to injustice, oppression, or racism; because of their faith or spiritual beliefs; social movements they experiened in their youth; and through experiential knowledge and recognizing their own privilege. These experiences were often influenced by family models, mentors, and other professionals. A few participants believed they were born with a predisposition for social justice interests and many participants acknowledged that their social justice interest either began or was continually developed in childhood. Undergraduate/graduate school and professional training were other reoccuring themes in regards to the time context in which participants developed social justice interest. Consequences of the actions/interactions of these conditions resulted in paradigm shifts, as well as more focused personal moral imperative and social justice commitment.
28
F IG
U R
E 1
R ev
is ed
C o
n ce
p tu
al M
o d
el o
f S
o ci
al J
u st
ic e
In te
re st
D ev
el o
p m
en t
S oc
ia l J
us tic
e C
om m
itt m
en t
A dv
oc ac
y B
eh av
io rs
S oc
ia l J
us tic
e In
te re
st
Fa m
ily M
od el
s
U nm
et N
ee ds
P er
so na
lit y
C ha
ra ct
er is
tic s
E xp
os ur
e to
In ju
st ic
e/
O pp
re ss
io n/
R ac
is m
Fa ith
/S pi
rit ua
l B el
ie fs
E xp
er ie
nc e
H el
pl es
sn es
s
S oc
ia l M
ov em
en ts
E xp
er ie
nt ia
l K no
w le
dg e
R ec
og ni
ze P
riv ile
ge
Personal Moral Imperative
V ar
io us
S et
tin gs
S er
vi ce
L ea
rn in
g
Ty pe
o f P
ra ct
ic um
S ite
s
V ic
ar io
us a
nd P
er so
na l
M en
to r
M od
el o
f S
oc ia
l J us
tic e/
A dv
The post Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment appeared first on Lion Essays.
“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”
Social-Cognitive Model of Social Justice Interest and Commitment was first posted on May 7, 2019 at 7:06 pm.
©2019 "Lion Essays". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at support@Lion Essays.com