Memorandum submitted by John Barraclough,
Senior Lecturer in Social Work
1. INTRODUCTION
This submission will comment upon:
— Social work training.— Recruitment
of students for training.
— Practice placements.
— Post-qualifying training in practice
teaching and assessment.
2. BRIEF BIOGRAPHY
OF THE
WRITER
I was involved in the implementation of the
practice learning requirements for the Diploma in Social Work
at Middlesex University between 1989 and 1992. I was responsible
for the post-qualifying Practice Teaching Award Programme for
London Metropolitan University from 1994 to 2002, and have been
a Senior Lecturer in Social Work at London Metropolitan University
since 2002. I was responsible for devising and implementing the
practice learning requirements for the BSc and MSc in social work
programmes in 2002. I am responsible for practice learning on
the social work degree programmes. A major part of this responsibility
is the preparation of students for their periods of assessed practice
(placements), and I teach Child Development and Theoretical Perspectives
in Social Work. I have published articles in The Journal of
Practice Teaching and in Community Care magazine, and
have undertaken research into the assessment of practice learning.
I have been a qualified social worker for 28 years. I spent 10
years in generic fieldwork practice since qualifying.
3. EVALUATION
OF QUALIFYING
PROGRAMMES
The General Social Care Council has taken a
"hands-off" approach to the monitoring and evaluation
of social work degree programmes. The quality assurance process
for programmes consists of a paper exercise every five years.
This is in contrast to the process under the previous qualifications,
which involved regular inspections of the programmes. These inspections
involved visits to universities. Discussions were held with teaching
staff, partner agencies and students. It was a more rigorous process;
it enabled problems to be identified and forced universities to
address problem areas.
Organisation and Delivery of Training Programmes
3.1 It is widely accepted within the social work
profession that generic training is essential if social workers
are to have a sufficiently broad and balanced view of the range
of problems faced by vulnerable people, of the range of professional
responsibilities across all specialist services, and of available
resources to various client groups. It is also essential for social
workers to have a balanced view of society in order to make appropriately
informed decisions, particularly in relation to the assessment
and management of personal risk. Generic programmes enable students
to study academic modules which relate to all client groups, and
to experience assessed practice with adults and with children
and families. (See Barraclough, J. Community Care, May, 2000)
3.2 This compliments the specialist nature of
social work, as students who have studied a generic programme
are more able informed choices as to the area of specialism they
wish to pursue once qualified. Specialist programmes would involve
students making uninformed choices about the area of practice
they wish to pursue. This would be likely to lead to a larger
numbers of social work students dropping out of education, as
they will not have had the opportunity to properly think through
their choice of specialism, and many, therefore, would inevitably
make what they perceive to be the wrong choice. Also, forcing
students to make a premature choice of such significance would
not be conducive to fostering a sense of commitment to the service
chosen.
Preparation for Practice Learning
3.3 The structure of the current three-year
undergraduate degree requires programmes to deem students "safe
for practice" before they start their first placement. We
achieve this by having students in college for one academic year
before they go out to placement, and by requiring students to
pass a module designed specifically to test their readiness and
safety for practice. Within the module students are introduced
to professional practice in a variety of ways. Students work with
practitioners and service users in college, and visit a social
work agency to shadow a qualified social worker. The teaching
is experimental, which enables students to understand their strengths
and weaknesses, and to work through their fears and anxieties
about practice. The teaching is designed to test students' communication
skills, their ability to deal with conflict, to reflect on their
actions and on how to make the best use of supervision. The other
element to this module is that it allows teachers to assess students'
behaviour and attitudes. These are aspects of professional practice
that are not easily assessed through the competency model of assessment
currently applied to practice learning. We can address issues
of student behaviour which may have a negative impact on their
practice. This includes issues of timekeeping, the ability to
cooperate and work with others, attitudes to service users etc.
This can be described as "soft" evidence, rather than
the "hard" evidence of being able to meet competencies,
in other words it is not only about what they do, but about how
they do it.
3.4 Graduates are only admitted on to the two-year
MSc programme if they have previous social care or social work
experience. These students are deemed safe for practice by virtue
of their applications, and through the provision of references.
This process is less thorough than the process for undergraduates
as described above, and the nature of a two-year programme means
that students undertake their first placements after just 12 weeks
in college. This means that we take risks with MSc students when
they go into their assessed placements, and I suggest that all
students, regardless of status, be required to properly prepare
for placement in college before commencing placement. This may
involve an extension to the two-year graduate programme.
Location of Social Work Education and Training
3.5 Universities operate on a business model
and there is a constant tension between financial considerations
and considerations about the quality of recruitment processes,
teaching and assessment. It may be beneficial to consider if social
work education should be provided outside of the university sector.
3.6 London Metropolitan University is currently
seeking to make 25% of staff redundant in an attempt to reduce
running costs. Although the social work programme has been assured
that it will not suffer from direct cuts in staffing, we face,
along with all other University departments, an increase in staff
student ratios from 1 to 22, to 1 to 28. Such an increase would
have extremely negative affects on the quality of the teaching
provided at London Metropolitan. I and colleagues believe that
existing staff/student ratios are already too high to ensure quality,
and we therefore believe that an increase in the ratio would lead
to inadequate admissions processes, to ineffective teaching and
to unreliable student assessments. In addition, we face indirect
threats to the quality of the social work programmes through the
cutting back on media and IT services, and from the loss of library
facilities.
3.7 It would appear therefore that an examination
of how universities deliver social work education is necessary
in order to ensure that universities are delivering education
that is of a high standard, and fit for purpose. I would suggest
that the current way universities are funded jeopardises the quality
of professional training, and consideration should be given to
providing protection for professional courses from the vacillations
of the economic realities in higher education.
3.8 There is a related issue regarding regulations
within universities that provide students with protection against
unfair assessment. Such regulations are complex, and students
have a high level of protection against decisions that negatively
affect them. This often seems inappropriate for social work students,
and because of the requirement on the University to provide proof
of inappropriate student behaviour, we are frequently unable to
appropriately address issues of student behaviour when it raises
questions about the student's suitability for social work because
of the level of proof required. This results in students being
given the benefit of the doubt, which may be appropriate in non-professional
degrees, but in social work appears inappropriate because of the
nature of professional qualifications.
4. SELECTION
OF STUDENTS
FOR TRAINING
The selection of students for social work training
is also compromised by the resource issues referred to above.
Social work degree courses are massively over-subscribed. On the
face of it this appears to be a positive thing, but it also means
that university admissions processes are overwhelmed by the task
of selection. This means that students are admitted who, in retrospect,
are considered to be unsuitable. When the unsuitability is on
academic grounds it is relatively straightforward to terminate
their studies. As described above, it is far more complex to do
this in relation to student behaviour, or in relation to the quality
of their practice in placement. (See Barraclough, J & Schumann,
C "Research into the Role of the Practice Assessor"
The Journal of Practice Teaching, Vol 3, Number Two, 2000)
4.1 It is therefore very difficult to terminate
the studies of students where there are concerns about their suitability.
The module I refer to in section 3.3 above provides a thorough
assessment of the suitability of each student undertaking the
module. If this module was part of an extended admissions process,
or a pre-course requirement, universities would be more certain
that the student is appropriate for, and capable of completing
the course, and of being an asset to the profession.
4.2 It would be beneficial if universities
had more rigorous and extended admissions processes, which may
involve students in passing an extended piece of assessment.
5. PRACTICE PLACEMENTS
The practical aspect of social work training
has always been in an anomalous situation with regard to other
professions. Statutory social work agencies are not required to,
and therefore do not have a culture of providing training to students
on qualifying courses. This is in stark contrast to the teaching
and nursing professions, where student teachers and nurses are
integrated into the regular activity of teachers and nurses. As
long as there is no compulsion on statutory social work agencies
to provide practice placements, universities will be in the invidious
position of continually having to persuade, cajole and occasionally
beg agencies to provide student placements. This means that universities
cannot effectively plan practice learning, as students often do
not know where they will be placed up until the point of obtaining
a placement. This is extremely unprofessional and detracts from
the quality of the experience for students. Each year a proportion
of students cannot be placed at the right time, and their studies
are then delayed. The increased emphasis on practice learning
in the new degree programmes was welcomed, but without the commitment
or ability of statutory agencies to provide placements, the new
requirements have not been as effective as they should have been.
5.1 At London Metropolitan we insist that all
students must have one adults and one children & families
placement. We are committed to this as we feel that it increases
the quality of the training considerably. By implementing this
structure we make things increasingly difficult for ourselves,
and we come under constant pressure from students who are not
placed on time to compromise our requirements and place students
in less than ideal settings.
5.2 I note with some concern therefore Ed
Balls' statement on 7 May regarding to allocation of 200 more
university places for social work students. In itself this can
only be applauded, but given the already acute shortage of placements
in London local authorities, it means that London authorities,
which are suffering some of the highest vacancies rates in the
UK, will not be able to properly take advantage of this scheme,
and, if the additional student places on courses involve London
universities, the scheme could aggravate an already serious problem.
5.3 For the last three years I have written
to all 32 London authorities asking about placement opportunities
in general, and, in particular, trying to get them interested
offering placements to our final year students, who often go on
to work for the agency in which they do their final placement.
Such a scheme would help universities meet their placement requirements,
and help local authorities to fill vacant posts with newly qualified
workers who would have had an extended learning and assessment
experience in that agency, and, who could therefore take up a
position having been assessed in the work they will go on to do
in the position of qualified worker. Despite the obvious benefits
of such a scheme, in three years I have received positive replies
from only two London authorities.
5.4 We will not be able to increase the
supply of high quality qualified social workers unless there are
requirements on all local authorities to commit themselves to
professional training through the provision of practice placements
as a regular aspect of their activities.
6. POST-QUALIFYING
TRAINING IN
PRACTICE TEACHING
Along with the introduction of the Diploma in
Social Work in 1992 came the Practice Teaching Award. It was envisaged
that this award would lead to all qualified social workers having
a post-qualifying award in practice teaching. It was hoped that
this would then lead to the embedding of practice learning within
social work agencies. Unfortunately this has not happened for
reasons that are too complex to be examined here. The introduction
of the PQ framework for social work superseded the Practice Teaching
Award, and, in eyes of many, this constituted a downgrading of
practice teaching.
6.1 The philosophy of every qualified social
worker having a qualification, and an active role in the practice
teaching of students has been abandoned. Under the new PQ framework
qualified workers have to choose between several post-qualifying
qualifying options, practice teaching being one of them. This
will result in only a small section of the workforce being qualified
and actively involved in the teaching and assessing of student
practice. This seriously undermines the government's intentions
under the social work degree of placing a higher emphasis on practice
learning.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
— Require the GSCC to inspect qualifying
programmes at more frequent intervals, to visit programmes and
canvas opinion from a range of interested groups.— Maintain
generic social work degree programmes.
— Require all students, regardless of status,
to undertake college teaching and assessment that tests their
readiness for practice before commencing the first placement.
— Consider if universities are the best
place for the provision of social work education, or introducing
protective measures that would enable university social work programmes
to provide a stable high quality social work education.
— Consideration be given to enabling universities
to have more rigorous and extended admissions processes.
May 2009
| 
