Work-based Supervisors: The Neglected Partners in Practice Learning

Abstract

The introduction of the Degree in Social Work programme in 2003 prompted considerable diversification in arrangements for practice supervision, teaching and assessment. A small scale exploratory study was undertaken into a model which utilises work-based supervisors, working in tandem with off-site practice teachers who are primarily responsible for the assessment of student social workers. The study focused on exploring the experiences of work-based supervisors and off-site practice teachers working to this model. The findings pointed to increased anxiety and confusion about roles amongst work-based supervisors and off-site practice teachers. Work-based supervisors described themselves as the 'neglected partners' in the learning process, taking on most of the work, but with limited recognition, reward or status. Work-based supervisors valued the new range of professional development opportunities to support them in their role but had difficulty in accessing these due to other professional commitments.

Listening to student experiences of supervision

“…One-to-one semi-structured interviews were used to gain understanding of participants' lived experiences of supervision, and have been used effectively in previous studies of supervision (Davys, 2005;Henderson, 2010;Tsui, 2008). Participant recruitment resulted in seven social work students participating in the research.…”

Being the University: Liaison Persons' Reflections on Placements with Off-Site Supervision

“…Parker's research that explored difficulties in placement mentioned that students wanted liaison persons to be proactive in making contact and checking progress, and at times take initiative and remove them from unsafe placements (Parker, 2008). In her British study focusing on the work based supervisors of placement students, Henderson (2010) suggested that the liaison person was seen as holding expert powers, and occasionally seen as excluding work-based supervisors and not sharing sufficient information about students' past progress and history (2010). Henderson (2010) found that in placements with off-site supervision the liaison persons mainly communicated with the off-site supervisors, giving less attention to the work-based supervisors.…”

“…In her British study focusing on the work based supervisors of placement students, Henderson (2010) suggested that the liaison person was seen as holding expert powers, and occasionally seen as excluding work-based supervisors and not sharing sufficient information about students' past progress and history (2010). Henderson (2010) found that in placements with off-site supervision the liaison persons mainly communicated with the off-site supervisors, giving less attention to the work-based supervisors. Other research exploring off-site supervision in social work placement, highlighted the importance of triad relationship and communication between the off-site supervisors, work-based supervisor and the student (Abram, Hartung, & Wernet, 2000); this USA based research did not refer to the liaison role or experience.…”

“…Liaison persons in those situations are often involved in professionally supporting isolated workers through training programs, professional supervision, access to resources and professional development activities (Alston, 2007). Henderson (2010) concurs that staff in agencies without social work staff needed extra training and support, and highlights the need to appropriately provide liaison persons with the resources and time to support placements with off-site supervision. Karban (1999) notes that some students in her study into placements with off-site supervision accessed the liaison person as an alternative source of support.…”

“…The limited literature available about field education with off-site supervision highlights the importance of the triad relationship (Abram, et al, 2000), the support needed for field educators, work-based supervisors and students (Clare, 2001;Henderson, 2010), the need to clarify the responsibilities of the supervisors (Karban, 1999) and the potential for power imbalances between the on-site and off-site supervisors (Henderson, 2010). There are concerns raised about the students' learning in placements supported by an off-site supervisor, for example, about their experiences, learning and assessment and whether the lack of clearly defined social work roles adversely affects the development of social work identity (Plath, 2003).…”