Introduction

1. “Working in an Information Society” : One specificresponse to ECDL equivalence.Janice West School of Health and Social Care, GCU

2. Introduction This workshop will : outline the rationale behind the development of the module explore some of the pedagogical issues related to its application Offer participants access to course materials and student feedback Discussion of issues raised and sharing of experiences JSWEC 2008

3. Rationale for the module Background to development: Designed to assist students to meet the requirement within the new Honours degree to: “Make sure that the candidate has the potential and willingness to learn the basic information technology and communication skills they need to get the European Computer Driving Licence, or its equivalent, by the end of their first year of study.” (SISWE 2005) JSWEC 2008

4. Rationale for the module Much of the existing commentary considered the need for social workers to have IT literacy skills to cope with a changing workplace environment : Downing Street, (1999)Modernising Government - Ch 5 Rafferty and Holt (2005) Building Skills into the Curriculum Scottish Government (2006), Changing Lives Report Little comment available about the role of technology in wider aspects of social work practices. JSWEC 2008

5. Beginning the process of development • Careful study of modules within ECDL cross -referenced against the SWE standards framework in Scotland • Identification of core elements of IT Skills module taught to all 1st year students • Identification of gaps in terms of learning needs of social work students • Beginnings of a curriculum

6. Identification of gaps • Social work values and ethics • Exploration of meaning of citizenship and service user involvement • Social inclusion • Legislative responsibilities in informatics • Direct service provision examples- context not content.

7. Pedagogical underpinnings • Learning and teaching strategy required that was inclusive and participatory • Essentially constructivist approach ( Delgarno) • Situated learning ( Lave & Wenger 1991) • Vicarious Learning ( Cox et al 1999)

8. Curriculum development • 12 week semester - 2 hours per week direct class contact + 1 hour directed study • Pedagogy influenced content • Necessity to transfer generalities of IT developments into social work specifics • Desire to help students develop a collective understanding of issues through joint exploration • Decision to assess via a portfolio of evidence

9. Structure of the Curriculum • 12 sessions each exploring an aspect of Information Technology and its application to Social work Practice • E.g. • What are information systems? • How are they organised and what is their relevance to SW? • Making sense of information sources • What are the legislative requirements? • Ethical and values issues • Citizenship and the Digital Divide • Privacy and Accessibility online

10. Structure of the sessions • Each session included some form of didactic input to provide content about a given topic • This was followed by a group task specifically selected to consolidate learning • E.g. • Input on PAPA framework ( Privacy, Access, Property, Accountability) • Group task looking at specific web based resources and the extent to which they meet social work requirements in terms of these elements ( Materials available to workshop if desired)

11. Structure of the sessions • Opportunity for groups to discuss findings with each other thereby allowing individuals to re-construct their own meaning • This was followed by each group member transferring their learning into the linked Portfolio task within their self directed study hour. • Pedagogical rationale for this structure was linked to Cox et al (2001) discussion of Vicarious Learning and the work of Lave and Wenger (1991) on Communities of Practice.

12. Portfolio for assessment • Original idea was that students would accumulate elements of the portfolio over the weeks and be awarded credit on the basis of task completion • This approach was rejected by the External Examiner who wanted a grading system incorporated • Students complete 7 tasks related to module, each valued at 10% and a final short report valued at 30%. • ( again materials available if desired)

13. Advantages of portfolio as a form of assessment • Helps students consolidate learning as they progress through the module • Prevents the usual end of semester rush to complete assessments • Contextualisation seems to make the tasks more ‘real’ • ( again materials available if desired)

14. References • Cabinet Office (1999) , Modernising Government, Chapter 5. http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm43/4310/4310-00.htm accessed 30/6/08 • Cox R, Mckendree J, Tobin R, Lee J, Mayes T 1999, “Vicarious learning from dialogue and discourse -- A controlled comparison” Instructional Science, Vol. 27, No. 6. pp. 431-457. • Delgarno B (2002) “Constructivism and consequences for computer assisted learning” ,British Journal of Educational Technology,Vol 32 No 2 pp 183-194 • Holt J & Rafferty J (2005) Building skills into the Curriculum, SWAP:Social Policy and Social Work Subject Centre, The Higher Education Academy • Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press. • Scottish Government (2006), Changing Lives:Report of the 21st Century Review, HMSO