Service User, Carer, Practitioner and Academic Partnership in Evaluating Decision Making in Social Work Students

1. Service User, Carer, Practitioner and Academic Partnership in Evaluating Decision Making in Social Work Students Gillian MacKenzie (CU Group – Dundee) Elinor Dowson (CU Group – Dundee) Bob Leeson (Perth and Kinross Council) Richard Ingram (University of Dundee) Maggie Gee (University of Dundee) CU Group Dundee

2. Setting The Scene • Project group formed autumn 2006 • Focus on the MSc in Social Work. • Developing the ‘question’ • Developing the instruments of measurement.

3. Levels of outcomes • Level 1 Learners Reaction • Level 2a Modification in Attitudes and Perceptions ╬ • Level 2b Acquisition of Knowledge and Skills ╬ • Level 3 Changes in Behaviour • Level 4a Changes in Organisational Practice ┼ • Level 4b Benefits to Users and Carers ┼ • Levels of Outcomes of Educational Programmes • (Kirkpatrick 1967 and Barr et al 2000) • from Carpenter 2005 • ╬ key outcomes of research • ┼ secondary outcomes of research

4. Adopted principles of the research group • The 6 Principles of the University of Dundee Service user and Carer Group • No tokenism. • Fair funding. • ‘Bottom up’ networks. • See change from consultation. • Plain English • Ensure all groups have a voice • (Ager & Gee 2004)

5. Our Three Methods • Vignettes • Self-efficacy questionnaires • NVIVO analysis of student academic work

6. Vignettes • What are vignettes? • A vignette is a character sketch or picture of a situation. • Why use vignettes? • Application of self to ‘real’ scenario • Awareness of the complexity of other people’s lives • Expertise already gained from pilot vignette • Examines knowledge, understanding and how students feel they would act.

7. VignettesDevelopment of components of decision making • Constituents of decision-making: • Service user and Carer involvement; • practice skills; • creativity; • values; • diversity and anti-oppressive practice; • theoretical context. • policy and agency policy context; reflectiveness; emotions.

8. Vignettes • Processes of decision-making: • Clarity about purpose and role; • consultation with stakeholders; • well-reasoned framing of the decision focus and decision-making models; • selecting from options; consideration of risk factors; evaluating process and decision.

9. Self Efficacy Questionnaire • Why self efficacy? • Quantity and focus of questions • Rating scale Bandura ( 1977, 1982, 1986), Holden et al(1996) and Parker (2005)

10. Self Efficacy QuestionnaireReflections and Developments…. • Difficulty in participants remembering ID codes. • Response rate increased when issued within class. • Moved from 5 to 11 response options • Drop in confidence at mid-point of programme • Separation of users and carers

11. NVIVO • Why use NVIVO? • Analyse students written work relating to practice • Explore what underpins students’ decision making. • Development of the components of decision making • Creates and archives relationships between themes

12. NVIVOReflections and Developments…. • Once ‘tree nodes’ were established NVIVO was efficient and practical • Useful links between themes – i.e. link between creativity and AOP. • Identified gaps – i.e. emotional context of practice. • Excellent tool for deep analysis of student work – potential uses across programme to support student learning?

13. A unique partnership….. • Richness of diverse perspectives • Development of real partnership • Focus on decision making rather than on Service User and Carer involvement. • Progress towards positive outcomes.