Memorandum submitted by Professor June
Thoburn CBE, LittD, RSW Emeritus Professor of Social Work, University
of East Anglia
The observations in this memorandum are drawn
from: seven years as Vice Chair of GSCC and membership of its
Education and Training Committee [but the views expressed are
my own and not necessarily those of GSCC], as well as nearly 30
years as a University teacher of social workers at qualifying
(Masters and undergraduate), post-qualifying and doctoral (PhD
and DSW) levels; and 15 years as a front-line child and family
social worker and team leader.
SUMMARY STATEMENT
In essence, a newly qualified social worker
should not be expected to be fully accountable for complex cases
involving the possibility of significant harm or impairment to
children or adults until around five or six years after they embarked
on their training. This is not to say that they should not undertake
aspects of this type of work (which is fundamental to social work
practice) from the second year of their qualifying training onwards,
but such work should be undertaken as part of a team and supervised
by experienced social workers maintaining the main accountability
for the service provided and decisions made.
Are entry routes to social work sufficiently flexible
to encourage mature entrants, re-entrants and people considering
a career change?
1. My answer to this question is yes. In fact, more
than any other of the "people professions", the social
work profession has encouraged mature entrants in these categories,
and this applies more in the UK than in most other countries.
It could be argued that as a result of this policy, some of the
"brightest and the best" potential entrants have been
lost to the profession as recruitment at 18-19 was for many years
positively discouraged. The move around 2000 to the honours degree
in social work as the minimum qualification for entry to the profession
was accompanied by a shift in policy to encourage able school
leavers with good A levels to start on their training as social
workers. This was accompanied, in some local authorities, by creative
policies to allow these young people to gain some experience to
ensure that they had some awareness of the realities of the profession
before starting their degree.
2. Another route into the profession that could be
further developed, for school leavers as well as mature entrants,
is a foundation degree in working with children and families which,
with practice placements could lead into year 2 of the degree
for those who demonstrate ability to succeed at honours degree
level and have demonstrated the qualities needed of a professional
social worker.
3. Having said which, it is essential that the
profession welcomes change of career graduates and non-graduates
with the ability to achieve at honours degree level. The MA route
for graduates should continue. When the BA in social work was
being developed, evidence was provided that this route had proved
successful over many years, and that having an MA entry route
alongside a BA Hons entry route should be continued. The fact
that, in their basic training, they can study at M level has proved
an incentive for high quality graduates to enter the profession.
Although some argue that it is confusing to have qualification
at M and B level, I profoundly disagree.
4. There is evidence that HEIs have for many
years successfully trained graduates in a slightly shorter period
to the required standard of competence, with academic achievement
assessed at M level. In effect, because the amount of vacation
time is considerable shortened, the actual period of study is
only slightly less than for BA Hons students.
5. However, I do not believe that it is possible
to compress the knowledge component of the qualifying social work
curriculum any more than at present, even for those with "relevant"
degrees. (Past experience when there were 12 month qualifying
programmes for "relevant degree" graduates taught us
that there was too much room for interpretation about what was
"relevant". Degrees in sociology, psychology, social
policy and law, and professional qualifications in nursing or
teaching, for example, all left students with much ground still
to cover, and the need for time to re-appraise earlier learning
in the light of the realities of social work practice.) There
may be some scope for the practice placement element to be slightly
reduced (for mature entrants with prior relevant experience to
the degree and for post-graduates), but anything shorter than
the equivalent of 18 months full time study, interwoven with assessed
practice, even for those who enter with considerable practice
experience and with a "relevant" degree, would, in my
opinion, compromise standards at the point of qualification.
6. The Committee may be interested to have information
on a UEA/East Anglian employers scheme which has been successful
in attracting graduates with very good degrees but little experience.
Candidates from any HEI and with a wide range of degrees are jointly
interviewed by UEA and employers. The successful applicants are
offered employment as social care workers for 12 months and a
place on the MA in social work for the following year, subject
to satisfactory references from the employer. In most cases the
employer offers a small "retainer" to the student whilst
they complete the two years of the MA, and most return to the
same employer after qualifying. This is a more cost effective
approach than fully seconding those (usually more mature people)
already in post, and has the advantage of attracting into the
profession and the region good graduates who might not otherwise
think of coming to East Anglia. From the point of the University,
it ensures that the student already has a good practice basis
from which to absorb and make sense of the knowledge and practice
curriculum.
STRUCTURE OF
QUALIFYING AND
POST-QUALIFYING
TRAINING
7. The generic qualifying training at BA Hons
and MA levels plus a coherent system of (compulsory) assessed
post-qualifying education and continuing professional development
should be given more time to "bed in". Any fundamental
organisational or structural changes at this time risks further
damage to recruitment and retention and to the delivery of an
at least "good enough" service to vulnerable people.
See above comments on the place of the MA in social work initial
training.
8. All qualifying social workers should have the
status of "newly qualified social worker" (NQSW) in
their first year in practice. This should concentrate on consolidating
learning and acquiring new skills under the supervision of an
experienced social work practitioner—continuing a process
started under the supervision of social work practice educators
during the degree. The NQSW should have a limited caseload, taking
on some more complex cases but not having full case accountability—which
will be shared with the supervisor. The end of degree transcript
should be used to devise a first year programme for each student.
It is not necessary to have much of a taught component during
this year, other than necessary induction to the agency. It is
an opportunity to consolidate learning acquired during qualification
studies EXCEPT that newly qualified workers whose transcripts
indicate that they have not had placements or followed courses
in this area of practice may need to have a "catch up"
basic learning programme devised for them. The worker during this
period should be a Registered Social Worker but the employment
contract should have a "probationary clause" with the
contract being reviewed at the end of the NQSW year.
CONTENT OF
INITIAL TRAINING
9. Qualifying education should continue to be
"generic" but, as now, allowing for specialisation as
students proceed through the programme. Some (probably the majority,
and likely to include those with pre-qualifying relevant experience)
will wish to be moving towards a client group specialism in their
third year but others (especially younger entrants with limited
prior experience) will opt to remain generalists and start on
specialist training when they take up their first post.
10. The "knowledge curriculum" and "practice
curriculum", designed around agreed operational standards,
are broadly "fit for purpose", although some revisions
may be needed in light of changes since the standards were devised.
Given the breadth of knowledge required, it is inevitable (and
to an extent desirable) that there will be differences between
schools of social work in the emphasis given to different aspects
of the curriculum, but GSCC inspectors and external examiners
have key roles in ensuring these variations are within acceptable
limits.
11. The knowledge curriculum is already "compressed".
I would argue (though not all my colleagues would agree) that
there is room to consider whether the time spent on practice placements
(approximately half of the time of the degree) may allow too little
time for the acquiring and critically appraising of the wide range
of knowledge needed, right from the start of a social work career.
There is certainly no scope to cut down the time spent in the
HEI on the knowledge curriculum eg by "fast tracking"
proposals for graduates. There may be some scope for reducing
the length of placement time for those with pre-course relevant
experience—but there should still be a minimum of nine months
full time spent in assessed practice in an agency where social
work is a major element of the service provided. This experience
is necessary for skills development, but also brings relevance
and a better understanding to the knowledge and values learning
that takes place within the HEIs. That is—the practice and
knowledge learning should not be viewed as separate components
of the training but should be seen as mutually dependent and "inter-woven"
if each is to be effective.
POST-QUALIFYING
TRAINING AND
CAREER PATHS
12. The majority of NQSWs should be able to
complete within the first 18 months post-qualifying, the "consolidation
module" allowing entry to a GSCC accredited post-qualifying
specialist award. By the end of their third year after qualifying
(four years for those working part time), all new entrants should
have completed a GSCC accredited PQ Specialist award. Only then
should social workers be considered fully accountable for having
the lead professional/key worker role in the most complex cases
involving safeguarding children or adults from serious maltreatment
or other forms of avoidable significant harm or impairment. They
will have gradually incorporated such work into their practice,
by co-working or under the supervision of an experienced social
worker.
13. Staff working at senior practitioner level should
all have completed or be working towards a Higher Specialist award.
A modular approach to assessed study combining the enhancing of
practice knowledge and skills with study at graduate diploma or
masters level provides the flexibility necessary for both social
workers and employers. This formal assessed study has to be complemented
by shorter "in-service" courses, often directed at a
particular area of practice or a particular skill or method relevant
to the worker's practice. After the first five years or so post
qualifying the balance shifts from mainly assessed learning to
mainly short courses to top up knowledge or acquire new skills.
Some "ring fencing" of resources (for agency-based mentors
and HEI fees) is likely to be needed to achieve this. Universities
UK and CWDC should consider how to ensure that sufficiently well
qualified educators are available to staff these programmes.
14. For this to be successful, employers must
ensure and reward a career path of senior practitioner/practice
educator. To be effective first line managers/team leaders experienced
social workers most continue to expand their child and family
social work knowledge base alongside acquiring management knowledge
and skills.
QUALITY
15. None of the above is to say that identified
problems should not be urgently attended to by joint action by
government departments, employers, HEI schools of social work
and their external examiners and regulatory bodies. This applies
to the knowledge as well as the practice component of qualifying
and post-qualifying education and training.
16. There is urgent need for the placement experience
of each student to be more tightly monitored by a system devised
by the HEIs and GSCC. GSCC already collects student level data
but the data collection instrument needs refining as some of the
data entry protocols and definitions are unclear (eg the terms
"statutory" and "setting" are inadequately
defined and can be loosely interpreted). Specifically, no student
should qualify who has not, for the majority of their time on
placement (and specifically for their final placement), been taught
as well as assessed by a qualified and experienced social worker
who has undertaken training as a practice educator, and all students
should have a second or third year placement in a local authority,
health or criminal justice setting in which compulsory powers
may be used by social workers. This is essential if the newly
qualified social worker is to be confident in their social work
role, and to develop experience in how to make best use of (and
insist on having) competent social work supervision once entering
practice.
17. GSCC education advisers have a vitally important
role to play in quality assuring the qualifying and post-qualifying
education provided by HEIs. In particular they should have stronger
powers to ensure that funding provided by HEFCE or employers for
social work students is actually spent on the education of social
work students. The rules requiring sufficient and sufficiently
qualified teachers of practice and academic components of the
curriculum may need to be tightened or clarified, so that the
quality of the HEI programmes can be more adequately monitored.
SUPPLY OF
INITIAL TRAINING
18. If there is a tension between quantity and
quality (as I believe there currently is in the UK) quality issues
must prevail. A crucial factor for the Committee to consider is
that the shortage of high quality social workers is mirrored by
difficulty in recruiting high quality social work academics (at
all levels from professor to junior lecturer). The Committee should
consider (and perhaps seek evidence from Universities UK and ESRC)
what steps can be taken to assist those social work practitioners
who wish to have a career as social work lecturers and researchers
as well as those who wish to become advanced practitioners or
managers. There has been insufficient consideration by DCSF, DH,
GSCC, CWDC or employers' organisations on how best to "grow"
the next generation of social work educators. Training opportunities
can not be increased unless there are sufficient numbers of appropriately
qualified social work lecturers (including, for the bulk of the
curriculum, those with social work practice experience as well
as the relevant teaching and research qualifications). I am not
sure that the evidence is available on the academic and practice
qualifications of those currently teaching qualifying and post-qualifying
social workers in HEIs, but if it isn't this knowledge gap should
be urgently attended to before any decision is made about expanding
numbers. Priority should be given to the expansion of post-qualifying
programmes, especially for practice educators, and advanced practitioners.
Without this, an expansion in qualifying places may well result
in a less than "good enough" learning experience for
a proportion of those qualifying as social workers. I note the
drive to attract those who have left the profession back into
employment. Whilst some may not wish to be in front line practice,
they may be appropriately skilled, knowledgeable and experienced
to fill some of the gaps in the practice educator workforce.
May 2009
| 
