International Social Work Placements and Learning: Best Practices and Cultural Insights

1. International Conference Journal of Practice Teaching Socrates Curriculum Project Six European Universities: Designing a Curriculum for Practice Learning Janet Williams and Peter Nelson Sheffield Hallam University – July 2005

2. Curriculum Development Projectfunded by E. U.'Socrates'

3. Programme* Introductions* Exercise – placement for a Norwegian student * What we have learnt from sending students to European placements*The SWIPE Project* Exercise - placement for an Estonian student * The value of international placements?

4. Exercise 1 • Bente is arriving from Oslo, Norway for a 3 month placement: • In preparation, what would you do first? • what are your aims for the placement? • what could she contribute to your work setting? • what difficulties do you foresee and how would you tackle them? • how should the college have prepared her?

5. What we have learnt Students say: • roles in relation to tutors and practice supervisors/teachers • observation v. case load v. research • practicalities, money, accommodation • language • courses - theory based or competence based • taking the initiative • experience from previous placement

6. Our experience • UK placements and bureaucracy, not as bad for students coming to the UK • What social workers do in their country : • management of cases or therapy based e.g. social pedagogy • community activity and preventative work • being policy makers and shapers

7. Assumptions ...or not making assumptions about • words, same words can have different meanings • role of the State in people's lives • relationship between State, service user, profession • Values and AOP - conformity and nonconformity

8. Communication OPPORTUNITY ! • false friends • skills in verbal and non-verbal • clear, concise and to the point • how to be polite?

9. P and P development • On the basis that being a professional social worker requires: • creativity and imagination • rigorous analytical thinking • interpersonal skills / communication • resilience • active learning • all are promoted when practising in another culture

10. The Project

11. The Project participants: • Six European Universities LUND UNIVERSITY – SWEDEN OSLO UNIVERSITY COLLEGE – NORWAY SHEFFIELD HALLAM UNIVERSITY – UK TARTU UNIVERSITY – ESTONIA UTRECHT UNIVERSITY – NETHERLANDS VILNIUS UNIVERSITY - LITHUANIA

12. Aims: • Prepare social professional students (social workers, pedagogues etc.) for international placements • And to work with other cultures at home • To meet the social agenda of the European Union

13. History • Germ of an idea ‘practice learning’ • Finding the funding for European project • European Union (E U) promotes work force mobility, through education, training and technology. • Convergence of educational systems ‘Bologna Agreement’ – modules and courses can be used across Europe.

14. The Project - SWIPE • Module • Curriculum to prepare students for practice abroad • incorporating international perspectives into teaching about social work • Greater knowledge about problems associated with globalisation that cross national boundaries

15. Internationalising social work • UK – Academic Benchmark statements include reference to policy, practice and research from outside the UK – beyond the USA? • E U agenda: • Worker and student mobility promoted through exchanges, learning from each other • Life long learning • Social cohesion/inclusion, addressing cross-boundary social problems migrating people, trafficked persons, sexism, racism etc.

16. Practice Teaching in Europe • Literature about practice learning in other countries – only descriptive • Cross-national practice theory not developed

17. Organising our work • Local networks to undertake the work- tutors, practice teachers, students and service users. • International meetings (4) • Lots of communication by phone and email

18. Products • Web site – http://extra.shu.ac.uk/swipe • Audit-database • Commentary/study based on audit • Shared learning outcomes • Teaching materials – university/practice • Module used by all the participating universities • Networks

19. 'Products' • Learning Outcomes: 1 Able to make sensitive cross national comparisons; 2 Demonstrating understanding of the relationship between practice and policy in a different country within a particular setting or service user group; 3 Able to appreciate how power operates within a specified service and its impact upon different professionals, service users and in particular excluded groups;

20. Learning outcomes cont. 4 Able to work effectively and empoweringly within a setting with different values and procedures for working with diversity, racial, ethnic, disability, gender and excluded groups such as asylum seekers or trafficked women; 5 Able to communicate within a different language and cultural context.

21. Teaching exercises • Approached very differently • Starting point theory/practice skills/job/.. • Committed to their standpoint • power • values • gender • Module, Sheffield Hallam University version accepted (?)

22. Why the audit? • Differences : definitions of practice learning, terminology, arrangements for practice • Consensus : values, ethics, knowledge and skills • Database/reference tool ...

23. Exercise 2 • Using the audit pages How is her previous experience of practice learning different? What are the implications of this for you providing her with a placement? Would it be different if she came from Utrecht? Is there anything else that you need to find out?

24. International placementPros and cons • Different sort of learning when they return • Provides new perspective on home policy and practice • Skill development, communication etc. • Resilience • Less UK focussed practice experience • One part of the greater whole...