Training of Children and Families Social Workers - Children, Schools and Families Committee Contents


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







 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Prepared 30 July 2009