The Robert Gordon University Change Academy Project 2007-08

1. The Robert Gordon University Change Academy Project 2007-08 “Evidence based practice in relation to key capabilities: embedding this in the curriculum” Robert Buckley & Sheila Slesser

2. Aims of the Workshop • To share our experience of the Change Academy with colleagues in social work education • Share how we developed an EBP approach to embedding Key Capabilities in Child Care and Protection into the curriculum • To generate discussion with colleagues in social work education on the gathering and presentation of evidence on Key Capabilities in Child Care and Protection within practice learning

3. Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection - The Context • Produced by Scottish Government, SSSC & IRIS (2006) • Mapped to existing Framework for Standards in Social Work Education (SISWE) (Scottish Executive, 2003) • Introduced following political fall out from the publication of the O'Brien Report (2003) into the death of Caleb Ness • Introduced to all social work courses in September 2007

4. Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection – 2006 • Effective Communication • Knowledge and Understanding • Professional Confidence and Competence • Values and Ethical Practice

5. Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection (2006) and Practice Learning • Requirement 1 - “whatever practice learning opportunity a student is engaged in, they must be able to evidence their knowledge and application of child care and protection, as it is relevant to their setting”. • Requirement 2 – “during one of their assessed practice learning opportunities, students should undertake an assessment of a child or of parenting capacity”.

6. What is Change Academy? • Change Academy is a year-long programme of support for teams from higher education institutions that enables them to develop the knowledge, capacity and enthusiasm for achieving complex institutional change

7. Change Academy for Social Work Scotland (CASWS) • Higher education community • Universities Scotland • Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) • The Institute for Research and Innovation in Social Services (IRIS) • The Quality Assurance Agency (Scotland) QAA • Scottish Funding Council (SFC) • Funded by Scottish Government Delivered by the Higher Education Academy and • The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education

8. Timetable of events - Process • May 2007 – Change Academy focus on social work announced • June 2007- RGU topic selected from the range of options provided • June – Sept. 2007 – Internal Mapping of all relevant Course Modules to the Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection • Sept. 2007 – Change Academy Team chosen • Dec. 2007 - Semester 1 Practice Teacher's Workshop • Jan 2008 – Change Academy Block Week– Teams actively start on projects • Jan. 2008 - Feedback from students • May 2008 - Feedback from students • June 2008 - Semester 2 Practice Teacher's Workshop • June 2008 – Staff Workshop • Autumn 2008 – Final Report with Team recommendations on best practice and possible future areas of change across the range of themes addressed through Change Academy project

9. Objectives • To embed Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection in the curriculum. • Focusing initially on Key Capabilities, to embed and enhance an Evidence-based Practice approach within the curriculum. • To engage with RGU colleagues in debating the range of Evidence-based Practice approaches that may be embedded in the curriculum. • To engage with Stakeholders and Practice Learning colleagues in debating the range of Evidence-based Practice approaches that may be embedded in the curriculum. • To share with other HE Institutions our experience of using an Evidence-based approach to Key Capabilities in the curriculum. • To explore how the embedding of Key Capabilities in Child Care and Child Protection in an evidence-based way may be transferred to Adult Support and Protection using models developed at the Change Academy.

10. Professional judgement Best research evidence Service user’s and Carers perspectives Change Academy Team - agreed working definition of Evidence Base Practice Evidence-based practice is the integration of best research evidence with clinical expertise and service user values. Organisational and Political context Adapted from Sackett et al., 2000

11. Reasons for adopting an EBP approach • Ethical reasons: professionals have the obligation to do more good than harm. • Professional aspiration and obligation: practice should be based on the best knowledge available in order to deliver effective social interventions. • Accountability reasons: EBP helps make defensible decisions.

12. SISWE EXPECT NEWLY QUALIFIED SOCIAL WORKERS TO • locate, understand and critically evaluate research findings and literature that is relevant to social work practice; • use professional and organisational supervision and support to research, critically analyse, and review the EVIDENCE BASE FOR EFFECTIVE PRACTICE.

13. Feedback from Practice Teachers -Positives • On the whole very positive feedback about this including; • ‘raising awareness in team of requirement to consider Child Care & Child Protection issues in daily practice’ • ‘it ensures the student has an opportunity to look at parenting and child care issues before qualifying’

14. Feedback from Practice Teachers -Challenges • ‘if it hadn’t been for this one case I would have struggled to find anything suitable without going well outside the setting’ • ‘requires innovation in seeking out opportunities’ • ‘lack of information on legislation from my own setting’ • ‘main difficulties stemmed from the suddenness of implementation’ • “I felt I was doing all the work in evidencing the key capabilities on the proforma” • “I don't see why the student doesn't have to provide the evidence of meeting the KCs”

15. Overall issues from Practice Teachers • Need for greater understanding and consistency about volume of evidence, the quality of the evidence and how it is best presented • Need for clear guidance from the University and The Practice Assessment Panel on what was required at different stages of the respective courses • What is ‘good enough’ in terms of experience and evidence? • Should Practice Teachers or Student provide the written evidence? • Recognition that Child Care and Child Protection work has potential to overwhelm the placement in non Child Care settings

16. Feedback from Students - Positives • It helped student focus on the needs of children irrespective of practice learning • Drew together theory and practice on children and families • Helped focus attention on practice skills • Improved reflective practice on child centred issues • Enhanced knowledge and understanding of social work role in child care and protection • Focused attention on child protection issues within some adult services

17. Some positive feedback from Students in non child care settings • “It didn't link to my practice in terms of my keyworking responsibilities but it raised my awareness of child protection issues” – a learning disabilities KR1 • “gave me some insight into this area of practice” – supported accommodation for young adults, KR2 • “It helped me an understanding of child protection within an adult setting” – day care for adult with learning disabilities , KR1 • “I leaned more about the responsibilities of all social workers in child protection” – older people setting, KR1

18. Feedback from Students -Challenges • Length of time between being made aware of the KCs and having to work towards meeting them • Confusion, lack of awareness from Practice Teachers and Link workers on what was required • Confusion and inconsistency in the approach to KCs from University staff • A perception of having to make the placement “fit the requirements”

19. Feedback from Students - Challenges • A feeling that in some settings the “what if” scenarios were superficial and tokenistic • The work on KCs was often perceived as an extra task in addition to meeting SISWE requirements • KCs not well integrated with SISWE and required dedicated attention even within child care settings

20. Summary of feedback from Students • The vast majority of Practice Teachers and Link Workers were very helpful and supportive in working with Key Capabilities • In child care settings the KCs helped focus the development and application of knowledge and practice skills • The more specialist non child care settings presented a challenge • In some of these settings students felt the exercise in meeting KR1 was somewhat contrived

21. Staff Experiences of working with Key Capabilities in Practice Learning settings • The time frame for implementation had presented a major challenge to tutors, practice teachers, link supervisors and students • There is a need for further development work on achieving greater consistency across the various courses on embedding KCs in practice learning • Despite concerns with the process and timescales of implementation, Practice Teachers and link supervisors had embraced spirit of KCs

22. Staff Experiences of working with Key Capabilities in Practice Learning settings • In child care settings the KCs helped focus the development and application of knowledge and practice skills • The more specialist non child care settings presented a challenge • Still a danger that in non child settings that the focus on KCs may compromise or marginalise the emphasis given to the service user group where the student is placed

23. Staff Experiences of working with Key Capabilities in Practice Learning settings • How might we better integrate the KCs within the existing Key Roles within the SISWE framework • Should there be greater emphasis on the student providing the evidence (or reflection) on KCs

24. Issues for consideration • How well has the current system working in this first transitional year? • Is the “light touch” of Practice Teachers “signing off” KCs the most effective way of evidencing the fact that students have met the requirements? • Should the emphasis be changed to the student providing the evidence of meeting the KCs • How do we address the question of KCs and the SQAF levels?

25. Issues for consideration • Is there a need for some brief written guidance from University or PAP for Practice Teachers / Link Workers? • What is the exact role of the Proforma reader? • Is there a need for some brief written guidance from University or PAP for Proforma readers? • What are the expectations and role of Practice Teachers in European settings in respect of KCs?

26. Issues for consideration • What do we mean by assessment of parenting capacity? Can we / should we develop a working definition? • What do we mean by assessment the needs of a child? Can we / should we develop a working definition? • Do we have a measure of consistency in our interpretation of “as it is relevant to their setting” in KR1?