BSW On/Off-the-Ground Cohort Model

Description

BSW On/Off-the-Ground Cohort Model

Complete Implementation Framework for Flexible, Community-Centered Social Work Education

What This Resource Contains

This comprehensive implementation guide provides everything needed to establish or transform a Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) program using an innovative on/off-the-ground cohort delivery model. The framework addresses the complete educational infrastructure—from curriculum design through budget planning—for institutions seeking to expand access while maintaining accreditation standards.

Core Content Included

Complete BSW Program Architecture:

• 13 fully-developed core courses (36 credit hours)
• 2 field practicum courses (15 credit hours / 700+ hours)
• 3 elective slots (9 credit hours)
• 7-semester sequenced delivery model
• 156 weekly module topics with Social GRACES integration
• Complete alignment with CASWE-ACFTS 2021 EPAS standards

Five Integrated Learning Streams:

1. Identity, Power, and Ethical Social Work Practice (4 courses)
   • EPAS 7: Disrupting Power and Privilege
   • EPAS 1: Dreaming Identity (Professional Identity Development)
   • EPAS 2: Deconstructing Privileged Assumptions (Multilevel Practice)
   • EPAS 10: Delivering Ethical Practice
2. Theory, Policy, and Systemic Change (4 courses)
   • EPAS 9: Developing Ecological Justice
   • EPAS 3: Designing Theory (Theoretical Foundations)
   • EPAS 12: Delivering Change (Canadian Social Policy)
   • EPAS 11: Discovering Inquiry (Research Methods)
3. Decolonization, Anti-Racism, and Culturally Humble Social Work (4 courses)
   • EPAS 4: Decolonizing Practice (Challenging Colonial Constructions)
   • EPAS 5: Decolonizing Care (Indigenous Communities)
   • EPAS 6: Diverse Voices (Francophone and Language Communities)
   • EPAS 8: Dismantling Racism
4. Practicum and Applied Learning (2 courses)
   • EPAS 13: Field 1 Practicum (6 credit hours)
   • EPAS 13: Field 2 Practicum (9 credit hours)
5. Electives and Independent Study (3 courses)
   • Customizable based on student interest and institutional capacity

Implementation Infrastructure Provided

Pedagogical Framework:

• Dr. Kondrashov’s “Glider” Effectiveness Model
• Universal Design Framework for Higher Education
• Social GRACES Framework integration across all courses
• A+ Service Delivery Model (11 quality dimensions)
• Community Advisory Board (CAB) structures for each course

Delivery Flexibility:

• On-the-ground (100% in-person) specifications
• Blended (percentage continuum) specifications
• High-tech cohort (in-person with remote access) specifications
• 100% online specifications
• Hybrid-flexible (HyFlex) specifications
• Comparison tables with resource requirements for each model

Financial Planning:

• Zero-sum budget model ($305,550 balanced budget for 20 students)
• Revenue projections (tuition, program fees, practicum fees)
• Expense breakdowns (faculty costs, support staff, infrastructure)
• Per-student cost analysis ($15,255 total program cost)
• Instructor compensation guidelines ($6,000-7,000 per course)
• Suggested tuition structures

Institutional Support Requirements:

• Technology infrastructure needs
• Classroom space requirements
• Library and accessibility services integration
• Student support services (Aboriginal student centre, academic counseling, mental health services)
• Faculty support needs (instructional design, course editing, video/audio production)

Why This Model Transforms BSW Education

The Access Barrier This Model Addresses

Traditional BSW programs create systemic barriers:

• Geographic barriers: Students in rural, remote, or underserved communities cannot relocate
• Financial barriers: Costs of relocation, housing, and full-time study exclude working adults
• Cultural barriers: Indigenous students, newcomers, and racialized students face institutional environments disconnected from their communities
• Family barriers: Parents, caregivers, and those with community responsibilities cannot attend full-time residential programs
• Employment barriers: Students working to support themselves or families cannot attend daytime classes

These barriers don’t just limit access—they fundamentally shape who becomes a social worker, perpetuating homogeneity in a profession meant to serve diverse communities.

How the On/Off-the-Ground Model Removes Barriers

Geographic Flexibility:

• Students remain in their home communities
• Field placements occur locally, building community capacity
• Synchronous online options connect rural and urban students
• No relocation costs or displacement from support networks

Financial Accessibility:

• Students continue employment while studying
• No housing or relocation expenses
• Reduced transportation costs (environmental benefit)
• Local field placements enable income continuation

Cultural Responsiveness:

• Indigenous students remain connected to land, language, community
• Newcomer students maintain settlement support networks
• Racialized students avoid cultural isolation of predominantly white institutions
• Learning occurs within students’ cultural contexts

Family and Community Integration:

• Parents and caregivers balance education with responsibilities
• Students contribute to community while learning
• Intergenerational learning enriched through local engagement
• Field placements strengthen community-university partnerships

Employment Compatibility:

• Evening/weekend synchronous sessions accommodate work schedules
• Asynchronous components enable flexible learning
• Skills immediately applicable to current employment
• Career advancement without employment interruption

The Cohort Advantage

Unlike isolated online learning, this model centers cohort community:

Peer Learning Community:

• Students progress through program together
• Shared challenges and mutual support
• Diverse geographic perspectives enrich learning
• Lasting professional networks across regions

Faculty-Student Relationships:

• Consistent instructor engagement across delivery modes
• Mentorship relationships develop over time
• Faculty learn from students’ diverse community contexts
• Reciprocal knowledge exchange

Community-Grounded Learning:

• Community Advisory Boards ensure practice relevance
• Local practitioners and Elders shape curriculum
• Field placements integrate learning with community development
• Students become conduits between university and community knowledge

Cross-Institutional Applicability

This framework serves diverse institutional contexts:

Universities Seeking to Establish New BSW Programs

What You Receive:

• Complete curriculum architecture meeting CASWE-ACFTS standards
• All 13 EPAS learning objectives addressed across course sequence
• Field education structure with 700+ hour practicum requirements
• Accreditation-ready course descriptions and learning outcomes
• Community engagement infrastructure through CAB model

Implementation Advantages:

• Proven curriculum sequence refined over 20 years
• Pre-designed courses reduce startup time from 3-5 years to 12-18 months
• Financial sustainability model demonstrates fiscal viability
• Flexibility to adapt to institutional culture and regional context

Existing BSW Programs Seeking Expansion

What You Receive:

• Alternative delivery models to reach new student populations
• Infrastructure for off-campus cohorts (e.g., First Nations communities)
• Blended/online course designs maintaining community connection
• Models for integrating synchronous and asynchronous learning

Transformation Opportunities:

• Expand access without compromising educational quality
• Serve rural, remote, and underserved communities
• Pilot innovative delivery before full program conversion
• Diversify student body through reduced geographic barriers

Indigenous-Focused or Community-Based Programs

What You Receive:

• Decolonization explicitly centered across all courses
• Indigenous knowledge systems integrated throughout curriculum
• Community Advisory Board structures honoring local governance
• Flexibility for Elders, Knowledge Keepers, community members as instructors

Cultural Alignment:

• Social GRACES framework acknowledges colonialism’s ongoing impacts
• Land-based learning compatible with delivery model
• Students remain in community while pursuing education
• Program serves community capacity-building goals

International Adaptation

What You Receive:

• Framework adaptable to diverse national contexts
• Flexible accreditation alignment (not Canada-specific beyond EPAS references)
• Models for integrating local social work knowledge systems
• Community-university partnership structures transcending geography

Global Applicability:

• On/off-the-ground delivery enables international cohorts
• Social GRACES framework applies across cultural contexts
• Anti-oppressive approach translates internationally
• Community Advisory Boards honor local knowledge systems

What is NOT Included

This resource provides structural frameworks and course architectures. It does NOT include:

Discipline-Specific Course Materials:

• Detailed reading lists or textbook selections
• Pre-written lecture content or PowerPoint presentations
• Assignment templates or grading rubrics
• Assessment instruments or evaluation tools
• Student handouts or learning activities

Institutional Policies:

• Admission requirements or selection criteria
• Transfer credit policies
• Academic integrity procedures
• Grade appeal processes
• Field placement liability agreements

Accreditation Documentation:

• Self-study reports
• Outcome assessment data
• Program evaluation instruments
• Stakeholder consultation records
• Continuous quality improvement plans

Technology Platforms:

• Learning management system (LMS) configuration
• Video conferencing licenses
• Student information system integration
• Library database subscriptions
• Assistive technology software

Why This Approach?

Each institution requires:

• Different pedagogical cultures: Lecture-based vs. seminar-based vs. experiential
• Unique community contexts: Urban vs. rural, settler-colonial vs. Indigenous-governed
• Varied student populations: Traditional-age vs. mature students, domestic vs. international
• Distinct accreditation requirements: National vs. provincial, generic vs. specialized
• Specific institutional resources: Library collections, technology infrastructure, support services

Content must be contextualized to your specific institutional reality to maximize relevance and effectiveness.

Additional Services Available from Dr. Kondrashov

Custom Course Development for Your Institution

Comprehensive Adaptation Services Include:

Institution-Specific Course Guides:

• Reading lists from your library collections and preferred texts
• Case studies reflecting your regional practice context
• Assessment tools aligned to your program learning outcomes
• Practice activities suited to your student demographic
• LMS integration (Moodle, Canvas, Brightspace, etc.)
• Alignment with your institutional policies and procedures

Community Partnership Development:

• Community Advisory Board recruitment and training
• Field placement partnership agreements
• Indigenous community consultation protocols
• Practicum supervisor training materials
• Student-community reciprocity frameworks

Faculty Development Support:

• Instructor training in on/off-the-ground delivery
• Universal Design for Learning implementation
• Trauma-informed pedagogy workshops
• Anti-oppressive facilitation skills
• Technology integration coaching

Dr. Kondrashov’s BSW Program Development Experience:

Over 20 years of BSW curriculum development across:

• Thompson Rivers University (75 credit hours, 25 courses, 463 students)
• Dalhousie University (102 credit hours, 34 courses, 1,355 students)
• University of Manitoba (423 credit hours, 141 courses, 3,732 students)
• Wilfrid Laurier University (18 credit hours, 6 courses, 129 students)
• University of Northern British Columbia (3 credit hours, 1 course, 13 students)

This breadth enables realistic adaptation to diverse institutional contexts, regional variations, and student populations.

The Customization Process

1. Institutional Assessment (2-4 weeks)
   • Understanding your mission, values, and strategic priorities
   • Analyzing your student demographics and community context
   • Reviewing your existing resources and infrastructure
   • Identifying accreditation requirements and timelines
2. Curriculum Contextualization (8-12 weeks)
   • Adapting course descriptions to your institutional language
   • Selecting readings from your library and preferred publishers
   • Developing assessments aligned to your program outcomes
   • Creating learning activities suited to your delivery mode
3. Community Engagement Design (4-8 weeks)
   • Identifying potential Community Advisory Board members
   • Developing CAB Terms of Reference and honoraria structures
   • Creating field placement partnership frameworks
   • Designing student-community reciprocity protocols
4. Faculty Preparation (Ongoing)
   • Training instructors in delivery model and pedagogy
   • Developing course-specific instructor guides
   • Creating teaching resources and facilitation tools
   • Providing consultation during initial course delivery
5. Implementation Support (First cohort)
   • Troubleshooting delivery challenges
   • Student feedback integration
   • Continuous quality improvement
   • Program evaluation framework development

Investment for Custom Development:

Customization is quoted separately based on institutional scope and timelines. Contact Dr. Kondrashov for consultation and proposal development.

Price Justification: $19,999 CAD

Understanding the Investment

What $19,999 Provides:

Complete BSW Program Infrastructure:

• 13 core courses (36 credit hours)
• 2 practicum courses (15 credit hours)
• 3 elective frameworks
• = 18 complete course architectures
• $1,111 per course framework ($19,999 ÷ 18)

Supporting Implementation Resources:

• 156 weekly module outlines with Social GRACES integration
• 5 coherent learning stream progressions
• Complete CASWE-ACFTS EPAS alignment
• 5 delivery model specifications (in-person, blended, high-tech, online, HyFlex)
• Financial sustainability model with zero-sum budget
• Pedagogical frameworks and quality assurance models
• Community Advisory Board structures
• Universal Design for Learning integration

The Development Investment Behind This Framework

20 Years of Curriculum Refinement:

• 624 credit hours taught across 71 unique courses
• 5,717 students from diverse backgrounds and contexts
• 6 universities (5 Canadian, 1 Ukrainian)
• Inner City Social Work Program experience (University of Manitoba)
• Aboriginal Social Work Program leadership
• Online MSW program delivery (Dalhousie, Wilfrid Laurier)

Evidence-Informed Continuous Improvement:

• Student feedback integration over two decades
• Indigenous and racialized student consultation
• Community Advisory Board pilot testing
• Field instructor collaboration
• Accreditation review refinement

Time-to-Market Value:

• Typical BSW curriculum development: 200-300 hours per course
• 18 courses × 250 hours = 4,500 development hours saved
• Traditional program development timeline: 3-5 years
• Implementation with this framework: 12-18 months

Comparative Investment Analysis

Alternative Program Development Costs:

Hiring Curriculum Consultants:

• External consultant rates: $10,000-25,000 per course
• 18 courses = $180,000-450,000
• Timeline: 2-3 years
• Your investment: 4-11% of consultant costs

Internal Faculty Development:

• Course development stipends: $5,000-10,000 per course
• 18 courses = $90,000-180,000
• Faculty time: 250 hours per course × 18 = 4,500 hours
• At $75/hour = $337,500 additional investment
• Total: $427,500-517,500
• Your investment: 4-5% of internal development costs

Purchasing Commercial Curriculum:

• Packaged curriculum licensing: $8,000-15,000 per course
• 18 courses = $144,000-270,000
• Often lacks flexibility for institutional adaptation
• May not meet Canadian accreditation standards
• Your investment: 7-14% of commercial curriculum costs

Return on Investment for Institutions

Scenario: University Establishing New BSW Program

Investment:

• Purchase framework: $19,999
• Customize 18 courses for institutional context: $30,000
• Faculty training and implementation support: $15,000
• Total: $64,999

Institutional Return (Annual, 20-student cohort):

Revenue Generation:

• Tuition revenue (20 students × $12,155): $243,100
• Program fees (20 students × $2,100): $42,000
• Practicum fees (20 students × $1,000): $20,000
• Total annual revenue: $305,100

Program Expenses:

• Faculty costs: $153,000
• Support staff: $137,000
• Infrastructure: $15,550
• Total annual expenses: $305,550

Break-even analysis: Framework investment recovered in 3-4 months of first cohort enrollment

5-year projection:

• Framework serves 5+ cohorts = 100+ graduates
• Per-graduate framework cost: $200
• Community impact: Trained social workers serving local communities previously lacking access

Scenario: Existing Program Expanding to Underserved Region

Investment:

• Purchase framework: $19,999
• Adapt 12 courses for off-campus cohort: $20,000
• Community partnership development: $10,000
• Total: $49,999

Institutional Return:

Strategic Value:

• Increased enrollment capacity without campus expansion
• Diversified student demographics
• Strengthened regional community partnerships
• Enhanced institutional reputation for access and equity

Financial Value:

• Additional cohort tuition: $305,100 annually
• Provincial funding for increased enrollment (varies by province)
• Reduced capital costs vs. building expansion
• Potential for multiple regional cohorts using same framework

Community Value:

• Social workers trained to serve local community
• Reduced brain drain from rural/remote regions
• Field placements build community capacity
• University-community knowledge exchange

Scenario: Indigenous Institution Developing BSW Program

Investment:

• Purchase framework: $19,999
• Extensive cultural adaptation with Elders and community: $40,000
• Community Advisory Board development: $15,000
• Total: $74,999

Institutional Return:

Cultural Value:

• BSW program grounded in Indigenous knowledge systems
• Students remain connected to land, language, community
• Decolonized social work education model
• Community governance through CAB structures

Community Value:

• Indigenous social workers serving Indigenous communities
• Reduced child welfare apprehensions (culturally grounded practitioners)
• Community healing and capacity building
• Intergenerational knowledge transmission

Financial Value:

• Federal/provincial Indigenous education funding
• Tuition revenue supporting community development
• Reduced dependency on external social service providers
• Estimated community value: $500,000-1,000,000 annually through improved outcomes, reduced child welfare costs, community capacity

The Social GRACES Framework: Foundation for Equitable Education

The Social GRACES framework provides the theoretical foundation making this curriculum universally applicable and inherently anti-oppressive:

G – Gender, Gender Identity, Gender Expression, Geography
R – Race, Religion, Residence, Receipt of Public Assistance
A – Age, Ability, Appearance, Ancestry, Affiliation, Aliment, Addiction
C – Class, Culture, Citizenship, Community, Creed, Caregiving, Criminalization
E – Ethnic Origin, Economy, Extended Family, Education, Employment, English
S – Strengths, Status, Sex, Siblings, Social Capital, Sexual Orientation, Social Media, Spirituality

Why This Framework Matters for BSW Education

Every Course Integrates Social GRACES:

• Week-by-week module topics explicitly reference GRACES dimensions
• Students continuously analyze how intersecting identities shape experience
• Power, privilege, and oppression examined through structural lens
• Personal reflection integrated with systemic analysis

Example: EPAS 7 (Equity and Social Justice) – Week 4

• Topic: G’s of Social Welfare – Gender, Gender Identity, Gender Expression, Geography, Geographic Location
• Learning: Students examine how social welfare policies differently impact people based on gender identities and geographic contexts
• GRACES Application: Analyzing intersections of gender + geography reveals how transgender individuals in rural communities face compounded barriers to accessing services

Example: EPAS 13 (Field Practicum) – Week 10

• Topic: Critical Incidents – Mezzo Challenges and Resolutions
• GRACES: Citizenship, Siblings, Refugee/Displacement
• Learning: Students reflect on practice challenges involving clients with precarious immigration status, examining how citizenship shapes access to services and relationship dynamics

Framework Applicability Across Contexts

Whether students are:

• In urban or rural communities – GRACES analyzes geographic equity
• Working with Indigenous peoples – GRACES centers colonialism and residential school impacts
• Serving newcomer populations – GRACES examines citizenship, language, displacement
• Addressing mental health – GRACES integrates disability, criminalization, stigma
• Engaging in policy practice – GRACES reveals structural sources of inequity

The framework ensures every student, regardless of social location, develops capacity to:

• Recognize how systems create differential access and outcomes
• Challenge their own assumptions and privileges
• Practice cultural humility rather than claiming competence
• Advocate for systemic change grounded in intersectional analysis

Who Should Purchase This Framework

Institutions That Should Invest

Universities/Colleges Planning BSW Program Development:

• Institutions seeking CASWE-ACFTS accreditation
• Schools expanding into new geographic regions
• Universities prioritizing access for underserved populations
• Institutions committed to decolonizing social work education

Existing BSW Programs Seeking Transformation:

• Programs wanting to expand delivery modes
• Schools serving rural, remote, or Indigenous communities
• Institutions addressing enrollment equity gaps
• Programs updating curriculum for contemporary practice contexts

Indigenous Institutions and Communities:

• First Nations universities developing social work education
• Tribal colleges seeking culturally grounded BSW programs
• Indigenous communities wanting local social work training
• Organizations building community social service capacity

International Institutions:

• Universities in countries developing social work education infrastructure
• Schools seeking evidence-informed curriculum frameworks
• Institutions prioritizing community-based education models
• Programs committed to anti-oppressive social work education

Institutional Characteristics for Successful Implementation

Commitment to Educational Equity:

• Mission alignment with access, inclusion, social justice
• Willingness to challenge traditional delivery models
• Support for diverse student populations
• Investment in anti-oppressive pedagogy

Community-Engaged Values:

• Respect for community knowledge and expertise
• Commitment to reciprocal university-community partnerships
• Openness to Community Advisory Board governance
• Willingness to decenter institutional authority

Flexible Infrastructure:

• Technology capacity for blended/online delivery
• Student support services adaptable to diverse learners
• Faculty willing to learn new pedagogical approaches
• Administrative systems accommodating non-traditional students

Financial Sustainability:

• Realistic enrollment projections (minimum 15-20 students per cohort)
• Commitment to instructor compensation equity
• Investment in essential support staff (Field Coordinator, Student Advisor)
• Multi-year planning for program sustainability

Implementation Timeline

Year 1: Foundation Building (Months 1-12)

Months 1-3: Framework Acquisition and Institutional Assessment

• Purchase framework
• Assemble curriculum development team
• Conduct institutional readiness assessment
• Identify customization needs
• Engage Dr. Kondrashov for consultation (if desired)

Months 4-6: Curriculum Contextualization

• Adapt course descriptions to institutional language
• Develop reading lists from library resources
• Create assessment frameworks aligned to institutional outcomes
• Design learning activities for chosen delivery mode
• Begin Community Advisory Board recruitment

Months 7-9: Infrastructure Development

• Finalize delivery mode selection (in-person, blended, HyFlex, online)
• Configure technology platforms
• Develop field placement partnerships
• Create instructor guides and teaching resources
• Establish student support structures

Months 10-12: Pre-Launch Preparation

• Faculty training in delivery model and pedagogy
• Community Advisory Board orientation
• Pilot test course materials with current students/community
• Finalize accreditation documentation
• Student recruitment for inaugural cohort

Year 2: Implementation and Refinement (Months 13-24)

Months 13-18: First Cohort Launch (Semesters 1-2)

• Deliver Summer (EPAS 7, EPAS 9) and Fall (EPAS 1, EPAS 3, EPAS 4) courses
• Gather continuous feedback from students, instructors, CABs
• Troubleshoot delivery challenges with Dr. Kondrashov support (if engaged)
• Refine materials based on initial implementation experience

Months 19-24: Ongoing Delivery (Semesters 3-4)

• Deliver Winter (EPAS 2, EPAS 5, EPAS 12) and Summer (Electives) courses
• Continue quality improvement processes
• Document outcomes for accreditation
• Prepare for second cohort recruitment

Years 3-5: Maturation and Expansion

• Complete first cohort through graduation
• Expand to multiple cohorts if demand warrants
• Develop specialized elective streams
• Strengthen community partnerships
• Consider expanding to additional geographic regions

Final Value Proposition

$19,999 CAD provides:

✅ 18 Complete Course Frameworks meeting CASWE-ACFTS accreditation standards
✅ 5 Delivery Model Specifications from fully in-person to fully online
✅ Financial Sustainability Model demonstrating program viability
✅ Community Engagement Infrastructure through CAB frameworks
✅ 20 Years of Curriculum Refinement across diverse contexts
✅ Social GRACES Integration ensuring anti-oppressive pedagogy
✅ Universal Design Framework supporting diverse learners
✅ 3-5 Year Development Time Savings versus building from scratch
✅ Foundation for Institutional Customization adaptable to your specific context

This Investment Enables:

Educational Access:

• Students previously excluded by geographic, financial, cultural barriers
• Diverse cohorts enriching learning through varied lived experiences
• Community-based education strengthening local social service capacity

Institutional Impact:

• New BSW program launch or existing program expansion
• Enhanced reputation for innovation and equity
• Strengthened community partnerships and regional presence

Community Transformation:

• Social workers trained to serve their own communities
• Reduced brain drain from rural/remote/underserved regions
• Culturally grounded practice addressing community-identified needs

Professional Workforce Development:

• More diverse social work profession reflecting communities served
• Practitioners with deep community connections and cultural knowledge
• Social workers equipped for anti-oppressive, decolonized practice

Investment Comparison Summary

Alternative Approach	Cost	Timeline	Your Investment
External Curriculum Consultants	$180,000-450,000	2-3 years	$19,999 (4-11%)
Internal Faculty Development	$427,500-517,500	3-5 years	$19,999 (4-5%)
Commercial Curriculum Licensing	$144,000-270,000	1-2 years	$19,999 (7-14%)

Plus: Ongoing community relevance through CAB structures, proven pedagogy refined over 20 years, and alignment with contemporary social work values.

Contact for Framework Purchase and Customization

Dr. Oleksandr (Sasha) Kondrashov
Social Work Educator and Curriculum Designer

📧 krasun@gmail.com
🌐 www.krasun.ca

For Inquiries About:

• Framework purchase and licensing
• Institutional customization services
• Implementation consultation and support
• Faculty training and development
• Community partnership development
• Accreditation documentation support

Dr. Kondrashov’s Commitment:

Proceeds from this framework support scholarships for students facing barriers to social work education, including the TRU Foundation Stand with Ukraine  and Love Care Share Scholarship Fund. Your investment in this framework advances educational equity for future social workers while supporting current students overcoming access barriers.

This framework represents 20 years of dedication to social work education equity, informed by 5,717 students across diverse contexts, refined through continuous collaboration with Indigenous communities and racialized students, and grounded in the belief that social work education must be as accessible, equitable, and community-centered as the practice it prepares students to undertake.