Memorandum submitted by Janet Galley
SUMMARY OF
EVIDENCE
(a) Any consideration of the suitability of training
needs to start with the desired outcomes.(b) These must include
a change in the way national government and society as a whole
views social workers and their job, and not just a change in the
way the profession itself is developed. (c) Entry routes should
be flexible but admission criteria rigorous.
(d) The degree level of training is probably
about right.
(e) Support for newly qualified social workers
should follow the model for newly qualified teachers.
(f) The content of the generic degree course
is fundamentally flawed and does not equip children and families
social workers for the job they are required to do.
(g) Students should specialise after year one,
and follow a comprehensive training course covering the skills,
knowledge and experience needed to become a children and families
social worker.
(h) The GSCC could consider following the model
adopted by Ofsted for the regulation of teacher training courses
to regulate social work training courses.
(i) There are a number of ways in which the quality,
suitability and supply of practice placements could be improved.
(j) Continuing professional development is hampered
by a number of factors, both specific to the workplace, such as
high workloads, poor working conditions, pay, and more generally
to the way in which society as a whole views social workers and
their work, such as media vilification, poor recognition for what
they do.
(k) Good supervision and support is essential
and needs to be built in to any system of ongoing training and
development.
INTRODUCTION
1. Any consideration of the suitability
of training needs to start with the desired outcomes. Children
and families social work is a complex, intellectually challenging,
stressful, sometimes dangerous job requiring the highest level
of analytical and assessment skills. It requires individuals with
the intellectual ability, maturity, insight, common sense, confidence
and life experiences to assess and analyse complex family situations;
to evaluate risk; to present findings coherently and competently
to a range of other audiences, including courts, and to children
and families themselves. It requires the ability to be non-judgemental
and deal sympathetically and respectfully with damaged, needy
and often aggressive individuals whilst focusing relentlessly
on the core task—ensuring the safety and wellbeing of, and
improving the outcomes for the most vulnerable children in society.
2. In order to attract the highest calibre of
candidates to the profession there needs to be a fundamental shift
in the way national politicians and policy makers respond. This
should include investing the kind of resources and attention given
to the other professions of teaching, healthcare and police. Raising
standards in these professions without similar attention to social
work simply makes the job of the other professionals harder, and
fails to improve outcomes for the most vulnerable children, the
focus of many of the Government's policies.
3. In my opinion the training of children
and families social workers neither recruits candidates with the
necessary attributes, nor equips them to do the job they are required
to do.
ENTRY ROUTES
TO THE
PROFESSION
4. The profession needs to recruit individuals
from a wide range of backgrounds and cultures. Entry routes therefore
should be as flexible as possible but criteria for admission should
be rigorous, including basic numeracy and literacy skills, and
ability to demonstrate the personal qualities described above
at 1.
STRUCTURE OF
TRAINING
5. The format and level of training is probably
all right, but it is the content of the training which
needs to be revised.
6. Newly Qualified social workers should be given
the same support, guidance and protection as Newly Qualified teachers,
with a rigorous probationary period and clear expectations about
the support, guidance and supervision they should receive from
their employer. They should be required to successfully complete
a range of tasks during this period. These could include, with
appropriate support, guidance and shadowing, the following:
— Report to child protection conference;
— Working with a looked after child, and
— Placement decision making.
7. This is not meant to be an exhaustive
list, and some of the tasks would depend on the setting, but all
children and families social workers are likely at some point
to be asked to do some, if not all, of these tasks. For example,
a social worker in a Sure Start centre may be asked for a report
for a child protection conference, and a report for court.
CONTENT OF
INITIAL TRAINING
8. This is the core of my concern. I do
not believe the generic social work degree is fit for purpose,
nor does it equip social workers for the tasks they will be asked
to undertake when employed. Unlike Medicine, there is no system
for "training on the job" under the tutelage of a consultant.
Social workers are exposed to the full range of tasks from day
one. It may be possible to provide some protection in the first
year as described above, but they must possess the skills, knowledge
and confidence to make good assessments and act independently
from the start.
9. I understand that one of the main arguments
for the retention of the generic social work degree is that all
social workers must be grounded in generic social work values
and principles, and must be able to work across both adults and
children's services in order to understand how one impacts on
the other.
10. Whilst this is a necessary requirement,
I believe there is an imbalance between the time allocated to
these generic skills and the time devoted to specialist skills.
The bulk of the course should be devoted to specialist skills.
This does not mean that there will be no attention to overall
principles and values, but rather that they will be enshrined
in the teaching of specialist skills.
11. In addition, the reality is that the
current generic training does not lead to the desired outcomes
of greater understanding and awareness. Rather, it leads to the
worst of all worlds whereby social workers neither have the in
depth understanding of their area of work nor the ability to work
effectively across the interface.
12. Despite their generic training, adult
social workers often do not understand the impact of adult circumstances
on children (see the findings of numerous serious case reviews
which show that adult mental health, drug and alcohol misuse,
and domestic violence are critical risk factors in child protection,
and yet are rarely understood and assessed as such by the social
workers for the adults, and communication between adult and children
workers is often poor—("Learning Lessons, Taking Action"
Ofsted's evaluation of serious case reviews April 2007 to March
2008) and children and families social workers do not understand
the context within which their adult social work colleagues operate.
13. The reality is that there is now little
commonality, apart from the basic principles and values, in the
work of the adult social worker and the children and families
social worker. The legislative, policy, practice and organisational
frameworks are completely different, and the opportunities for
working in depth across the interface minimal. Other ways than
through the basic training course must be found to ensure good
communication across this interface.
14. In fact it could be argued that it is
equally important that children and families social workers understand
the role of teachers, named nurses and doctors, and police officers
working in child protection as it is to understand the role of
the social worker for adults.
15. It is my contention that the most important
task of the basic training course is to equip the workers with
the skills to do their job, and that in order to do this they
must specialise as soon as possible, I would say after the first
year.
16. The content of the training thereafter
should include (this is not meant to be a comprehensive or exhaustive
list, but to give a sense of what needs to be covered):
17. Historical perspective:
— How we have got to where we are in terms
of changing attitudes and expectations of children, including
the developing focus on the rights of the child; hearing the child;
and understanding their emotional and psychological needs.
18. Legislative Framework:
— The history of legislative developments
and why changes were made (previous enquiries; research findings,
etc).
— Current legislative framework and application
in practice.
19. Research and its impact on policy and
practice:
— Key findings and developments.
— Child development and impact of trauma
etc.
— Child abuse ("battered baby"
syndrome onwards).
— Importance of attachment and the way
in which it can be identified and assessed, and its critical importance
in assessing risk.
— Impact of separation and loss.
— Concept of "good enough" parenting.
— Issues of race, culture etc on child
rearing.
20. Development of policy and practice:
— Current overall framework—Every
Child Matters.
— "Planning for permanence".
— Early intervention and family support.
— Best interests of the child.
— Safeguarding and promoting the welfare
of the child.
— "Partnership with parents"
as a means to an end (better outcomes for the child) and not as
an end in itself.
— Child abuse and neglect and the concept
of "safeguarding".
— Outcome focused plans and working within
child's timescales.
— Key policy documents (eg. Working Together
to Safeguard Children' DCSF 2006).
21. Working in a multi-agency context:
— Attributes of good multi-agency working.
— Role and function of other colleagues.
— Confidence in own professional expertise.
— Role of local safeguarding children boards
and similar bodies, and findings from serious case reviews.
22. Communicating and listening to children:
— Relating to damaged, distressed, needy
children and giving them a voice.
23. Role of courts and youth justice system:
— "Balance of probabilities"
cf "Beyond reasonable doubt".
— Concept of "significant harm".
— "Best interests of the child".
— Welfare checklist and presumption of
"no order".
— Role of CAFCASS/Guardian ad Litem service.
24. All this needs to be taught in a coherent
and comprehensive way, with opportunities for reflection, debate
and challenge. There should be a range of practice placements,
with a requirement that all students have at least one placement
in a local authority children's social care fieldwork service.
Other placements could include:
— A family support service.
— A residential care placement.
— A family placement (fostering and adoption)
service.
— A GP practice/named nurse.
— Police child protection unit.
— Probation/youth justice.
— Adult mental health service.
— Drug and alcohol service.
QUALITY OF
TRAINING
25. I am not competent to judge whether
the GSCC effectively regulates the quality of training, but whatever
the regulatory framework the content has to be right first, and
then would it be possible to adopt the Ofsted model for regulating
teacher training?
26. The quality, suitability and supply of practice
placements could be improved by:
— Establishing performance targets for
employers to meet in relation to the number and quality of placements
on offer;
— Providing financial incentives to both
employer and practice supervisor;
— Providing good support from the relevant
academic institution to both the student and the practice supervisor;
— Access to specific training and development
opportunities for practice supervisors;
— Ring fencing the time available for the
practice supervisor, and
— Establishing external assessment processes,
either as part of the Ofsted inspection processes, or via the
GSCC, which impact on the overall judgement of the quality of
the service.
POST-QUALIFYING
TRAINING AND
CAREER PATHS
27. The factors which influence the continuing
development of children and families social workers are in my
experience (not in any order of priority):
— Poor working conditions—office
accommodation, IT systems, etc;
— Poor pay and other rewards;
— Little recognition and value for the
work they do;
— Being "damned if you do and damned
if you don't" by the media;
— Senior managers not understanding or
taking into consideration the work they do (many senior managers
do not have a social work background);
— Working in an organisational culture
which does not understand or support social work values;
— Over-bureaucratised and complex procedural
systems which detract from face to face work and the opportunity
to use skills and expertise, and
— Target driven culture which measures
timescales and outputs (necessary but not sufficient) but does
not measure the quality of the work social workers do.
28. Good supervision and support is essential
and often requires the same skills as good social work practice—a
time for reflection and discussion about challenges and difficulties,
whilst at the same time establishing clear frameworks and expectations
about the quality and delivery of work. There should be an expectation
about the quality and frequency of supervision for all social
workers and a requirement that any supervisor should complete
a supervision course and demonstrate their ability to be an effective
supervisor.
29. The social work model of supervision
is a good one and could be usefully adopted by other professions.
The absence of good and challenging supervision is often a factor
in the findings of serious case reviews.
CONCLUSIONS
30. Many of the basic standards and working
practices that were commonplace when I started work as a young
social worker 40 years ago have been lost. There needs to be clear
expectations and requirements for social workers to deliver these
basic standards, and they must be held to account when they do
not do so. At the same time they must be equipped with the appropriate
level and type of training, support and supervision to enable
them to do their job effectively and confidently.
May 2009
| 
