不良研究所

What: A monthly lunch-time video-conference discussion group of child welfare- oriented academics, students, and researchers who convene monthly to discuss, appraise, and report on child welfare research studies published in scholarly journals.

Who: Members include faculty and graduate students at 不良研究所, the University of Toronto, and the University of Windsor. Meetings are co-chaired by Delphine Collin- Vezina, Nico Trocm茅 (不良研究所), Barbara Fallon (University of Toronto), and Kristen Lwin (University of Windsor) with administrative support from Practice and Research Together (PART).

Purpose: Our members increase their awareness of child welfare research trends and build analytical skills by critical analysis of substantive research. We scan the literature each month to pick up the latest research results and identify studies that stand out because of their methodological strengths and the practice or policy relevance of their findings. Selected studies are summarized and shared with the broader community of researchers and practitioners across Canada through the Canadian Child Welfare Research Portal

When and where does the group meet? Online via Zoom

All meetings are held on Mondays from 12:05pm to 1:30pm.

October 21, 2024

November 18, 2024

December 16, 2024

January 20, 2025

February 24, 2025

March 24, 2025

April 28, 2025

May 26, 2025

What is required of members? You are expected to attend all meetings, participate in discussions, present a ONE MINUTE review of one child welfare journal article per month and occasionally write a full review of an 鈥渆xceptional鈥� study.

• A list of new articles is sent to all participants each month. You can choose three or more articles to review, or alternatively, articles will be assigned to you.
• Each month, based on your preferences you will be assigned journal articles to review and asked to assess the quality and relevance of these articles. Based on your assessment, you will identify one (or none) study for discussion. Choose your article for discussion based on the relevance of the article to child welfare policy and practice and the methodological strengths of the research. Expect to spend 15 to 20 minutes reading each of your assigned articles, and an additional 15 minutes preparing your brief review.

• Verbal presentation of the article should be less than one minute long, followed by discussion with the larger group. You may be asked questions about your article (typically questions about the sample or the measures used) as well as occasional questions about the ones you did not select. If you have a second article that you鈥檇 like to discuss we can try to add it once the first round of reviews is completed. Note that the purpose of your brief review is not to compare and contrast the three articles, rather a discussion about an individual article. If you do not get the opportunity to discuss your article during a meeting or you miss a meeting, you can request that this article be carried over to the following month.

• If the group decides that the article you reviewed is exceptional, you will be asked to prepare a written review, if you are unable to complete a full review in the required time frame another student will be asked to complete the full review (see 鈥淔ull Review鈥� details below).

What if I review an 鈥渆xceptional study鈥�?

If you review an exceptional study you will be asked to write a short summary (鈥渇ull review鈥�) that should be submitted as a draft within 30 days of the meeting date. We understand that responsibilities and requirements vary, therefore, if you are unable to complete the full review within 30 days, please indicate this at the time the study is identified as a full review and another student will complete the summary. Exceptional articles typically have clear policy or practice implications and are based on sound evidence (e.g., the article鈥檚 methodology must be of sufficient quality to warrant the recommendation). To respect journal copyright, your review must be original; you cannot copy the published abstract.

Your summary will be reviewed by the JW team, and once accepted it will be published on the CWRP website and sent to the CWRP list serve.

Full reviews should be written in plain language and between 300 and 600 words. The first paragraph of the review should succinctly summarize the main 鈥渢ake away鈥� message arising from the article鈥檚 findings. The second paragraph should summarize the study methodology and findings. The final paragraph should comment on the strengths and limitations of the methodology. An APA formatted citation should be included as well.

Also include a short title highlighting the key 鈥渢ake-away鈥� message; this will be used as the subject header in the dissemination email. Please see Appendix A for an example of a full review.