‘Fit and proper’ and fieldwork: A dilemma for social work educators?

Abstract

This article will focus on the four major issues that we have identified relating to 'fit and proper' policies and fieldwork. The first is the different levels of information that are held and shared by different entities. The second is the potential for such policies to directly contradict the principles of social work, and in particular social justice. Thirdly, it looks at the implications of being in a 'contracting' environment, and fourthly the position that social work educators are placed in as the 'expert' assessors of risk. Finally, we present some ideas that we hope will instigate a discussion amongst our profession and stakeholders. Throughout the article vignettes show practical applications of the issues that the article raises. While the vignettes are directly based on experiences that we have had while coordinating fieldwork, they do not correspond to specific cases.

Student selection process effectiveness: Correlations between task performance and undergraduate success

“…It is important that any selection tool is used in such a way that guards against the exclusion of students who could be supported to do well in their studies, and to become appropriately fit and proper social work practitioners in the process. This issue is particularly important for a profession that espouses social justice, inclusion, and the possibility of transformative change (see Apaitia-Vague et al, 2011).…”

“…The regulation of social work education in Aotearoa New Zealand Apaitia-Vague, Pitt, and Younger (2011) point to a central contradiction surrounding efforts to admit students to social work programmes who will succeed and be fit to practise: a need for "accountability to clients to ensure that workers are safe to practice, and social work values such as inclusion, social justice, the right to education, and a belief in the power of transformative change" (Hughes et al, 2016, p. 103; see also Dillon, 2007;Pelech, Stalker, Regehr & Jacobs, 1999;Sowbel, 2012). How can admission criteria help ensure student success, without screening out potential students who may succeed in programmes when given the proper support and encouragement?…”

Social work and social justice: The relationship between fitness to practise and criminal convictions for non-violent activism

“…The Ministry of Justice's Request for Criminal Conviction History form is something all social workers and social work students will be familiar with (Apaitia-Vague, Pitt, & Younger, 2011). As social workers are regularly required to disclose their criminal convictions, the effects of their convictions can be felt across the entirety of their career.…”

“…Dennett and Pratt (2016) reported on a community social worker who could not find employment as a social worker despite being qualified and applying for numerous positions, due to a conviction from 34 years earlier. Apaitia-Vague et al (2011) published the difficulties of finding a position for students with criminal convictions in a generally risk-averse environment. When considering the effects of having a criminal conviction can have within the social work profession, we need to consider differences in conviction rates in Aotearoa New Zealand.…”

Hic sunt dracones: Here be dragons! Difficulties in mapping the demand for social work placements in New Zealand

“…292-293). Gatekeeping practices may include developing and implementing policies and regulations, upholding academic and professional standards, challenging unsuitable or unethical student conduct, preventing students going on placements or removing them if unprofessional behaviour occurs (Apaitia-Vague, Pitt & Younger, 2011;Elpers & FitzGerald, 2013). In order to sustain placement opportunities TEIs rely on maintaining positive relationships with social service agencies.…”