Thinking through Quality in Field Education: Integrating Alternative and Traditional Learning Opportunities

Abstract

In this article, we look at two intersecting imperatives in social work and university education and how they shape our thinking about quality in field education. We will explore how practices of new managerialism and the desire for diversity come into conflict when trying to assess the quality of field‐based learning. Drawing on findings from a pilot research project we completed at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, we propose that it would be beneficial for Canadian schools of social work to rely less on assessing quality in terms of standards and specifications and more on a transformative notion of quality that speaks more clearly to empowering students and enhancing their knowledge and skills.

Keywords:

• Field Education
• Quality
• Social Work
• Transformation

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the work of their research assistant, Anupriya Sethi, who made a significant contribution to the literature review and data collection. Also, many thanks to Purnima Sundar and two anonymous reviewers who read an earlier draft of this paper and provided helpful feedback.

Notes

1. New managerialism is a term used in the British literature on education and social work. It refers to practices in which the ‘right to manage’ is prioritized over all other discourses. Universities and social services are understood as having more significant similarities to, rather than differences from, manufacturing organizations and, by extension, their performance can be maximized (in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and quality) using general management skills and theories (Harris, 1998, 2003). This is sometimes referred to as neoliberal managerialism to highlight the convergence between neoliberal ideologies and new managerialist practices (Davies, 2005).

2. The competence of a social worker is measured by whether a worker or student can display these skills rather than whether they have the appropriate educational certification. For a critical discussion of the recommendation and competencies in general see Rossiter (2002), Westhues (2002) and Thilakaratne and Kvan (2006).

3. The Canadian Association of Social Work Education (CASWE) was previously known as the Canadian Association of Schools of Social Work (CASSW).

4. The accreditation standards used by the CASWE can be found at: www.cassw‐acess.ca.

5. At Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, the person who is a professional in the field and who facilitates the learning that happens there is called a field supervisor.

6. For an in‐depth discussion of this type of shift in quality assessment see Harvey and Newton (2004) and Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2005).

7. The focus on structural social work in a number of these quotes reflects the orientation of our school of social work, which attends to the ways in which social structures shape people's individual experiences.