EVIDENCE, LITERATURE & MANAGEMENT OF SOCIAL WORK STUDENTS IN A HEALTH SETTING

Partnerships in Social Work Clinical Education Presenters: Hans Braaksma Brett Davies Senior Social Worker Social Work Director Logan Hospital Logan-Beaudesert Services Metro South HSD

Issues Identified with Current Student Placement Format  Service structure impact on professional support structures.  Complex skills sets required.  High staff workloads.  Individual focus of student placements. Variable placement experiences. Wide experience levels of supervisors. Impact of workloads. Voluntary and hard to forecast. Vulnerable to personality fit and staff stability.

Engagement with Griffith University  Initial discussion, formulation of a draft business case, and approval for expenditure.  Project goals: Explicit  Scoping of a model for new graduate clinical positions  Enhancement of student placement governance and communication  Review current placement process and identify gaps  Scope the capacity for establishment of structured placement experiences in core services areas; integrate SW core competencies into the placement curriculum and develop a learning package that all students would be exposed to.

 Project goals: Implicit  Develop culture of partnership between tertiary sector and the health setting in managing clinical education (both undergraduate and postgraduate)  Establish a framework to inform the implementation of a permanent joint appointment.  Formation of a steering committee: Lesley Chenoweth, Brett Davies, Helen Redfern.  Recruitment of project officer (8 months): Elizabeth McDonald.

Project Strategies  Literature Review  Limited literature on SW student education  Staff and student survey’s  Focus Groups  Establishment of Specific Initiatives  Monthly PD calendar by GU academic staff  Supervisors forum

Literature Review Principal requirements for successful field placement: 1. Climate of welcoming 2. Sense of belonging 3. Quality and interest of supervisor 4. Learning environment 5. Presence of peers (strongest evidence) Capra (2008)

Literature Review cont’d Transition from University to workplace: 1. Self-initiated active learning 2. Open and welcoming community 3. Newcomer-expert dyad 4. Distributed mentoring Pare & le Maistre (2006)

Literature Review cont’d Challenges for new graduates: 1. Managing full caseload 2. Managing complex cases 3. Having full responsibility 4. Taking up personal authority when not confident 5. Time management 6. Feeling one needs to know everything Smith & Pilling (2008)

Survey of Student Placement Experience  Purpose of evaluation of field placement is to develop a consistent, supported structure to the experience for both students and supervisors  Surveyed 29 students in first placement and seven in second placement

Survey of Student Placement Experience  Explored usefulness of a variety of factors: University Attributes Placement Agency Attributes Field Supervisor Attributes  Explored factors which could help achieve learning goals in field: Agency tour Meeting with field supervisor pre-placement More than one student at facility More information on what to expect Additional online support and resources

Survey of Student Placement Experience Outcomes (Students)  Some results: University: Field Ed’n Manual Year 1: 66% agreed useful Year 2: 100% agreed useful Learning Circles Year 1: 17% agreed useful Year 2: 100% agreed useful

Survey of Student Placement Experience Outcomes (Students)  Some results: Agency: Orientation Year 1: 69% (3% did not occur) Year 2: 100% (14% did not occur) Access to supervisor Year 1: 52% agreed useful Year 2: 100% agreed useful

Survey of Student Placement Experience Outcomes (Students)  Some results: Field Supervisor: Supervision Quality Year 1: 66% felt it was useful Year 2: 86% felt it was useful Supervision Quantity Year 1: 56% felt it was useful Year 2: 86% felt it was useful Feedback re progress Year 1: 69% felt it was useful (did not occur for 10%) Year 2: 14% felt it was useful (did not occur for 71%)

Survey of Student Placement Experience Outcomes (Students)  Some results: Things that helped achieve learning goals: FactorYear 1Year 2 Agency tour with University staff41%14% Pre-placement meeting with supervisor76%57% More than one student at placement agency62%57% Information on what to expect on placement62%43% Additional online support and resources45%14%

Survey of Clinical Education Experiences Outcomes (Staff) Sample:  20 staff (46% of total staff) surveyed (13 [62%] had experience with managing student placements)  4 (31%) had supervised 7 or more, 8 (62%) had supervised 3 or less Results:  Enough time to manage a student: 6 (46%) agreed, 1 (8%) neutral, 6 (46%) disagree  Confidence in skills to teach and guide a student: 4 (31%) strongly agree,8 agree (62%), 1 (8%) neutral

Survey Results Continued  Supported by the University: Prior to placement; 2 (16%) SA, 7 (54%) A, 1 (8%) N, 2 (16%) D, 1 (8%) SD During Placement; 2 (16%) SA, 7 (54%) A, 2 (16%) N, 1 (8%) D, 1 (8%) SD  Organisational Support for student placements: 2 (16%) SA, 9 (69%) A, 1 (8%) N, 1 (8%) D  Organisation promotes a team approach to managing students ( 18 respondants): 4 (22%) SA, 9 (69%), 4 (22%) N, 1 (5%) D

Survey Results Continued  Positive effects of having a student on your practice: Major Themes; Promotes reflection and keeps practice up to date.  Challenges of having a student: Major Themes; Time, workload, keeping up to date with trends in practice.  Effective strategies when having a student: Major Themes; structured supervision arrangements, effective communication, team approach.  Impact of having a student in the unit: Major Themes +ve: decrease in workloads, keep up to date, changes dynamic. Major Themes -ve: time impacts, space, workloads.

Survey Results Continued If you were to get additional support what would you find helpful?  University Communication, professional development re supervision  Organisation time, clinical cover, decreased workload, space, resources, team approach  Line manager support - time off line, space, understanding

Major Themes  Differing needs for 1 st placement and final placement students.  Preparation, agency acceptance and initial orientation to work unit were variable.  Ongoing university and organisation support.  Capacity to provide adequate supervision.  Time commitment and workloads.  Keeping up to date with practice trends.

Strategies for Responding to Identified Needs  Jointly funded education/skills development position. I. Coordination and direct support of student placements. II. Coordinate research and evidence based clinical care models. III. Manage professional development program for SW staff. IV. Direct support for staff accessing post-graduate study applicable to the health care setting. V. Support the development of joint education initiatives: Staff guest tutoring or lecturing. Facilitate input into the undergraduate and postgraduate curriculum.

 Structured placements via the integration of work area competencies with university curriculum. Placements to be a team responsibility and offered concurrently.  Established set of learning experiences based on core competencies.  Delivered via range of formats (lecture, problem based learning tutorials etc) and structured sequentially into the placement bloc.  Primary placement management to remain with the supervisor.  All SW team members to take some role in supporting placements. I. Improved consistency of placement experience and enhanced learning outcomes. II. Improved job readiness for the health sector. III. Less burden on individual staff. IV. Reduced vulnerability to staff movements or interpersonal fit. V. Capacity to skill emerging student supervisors.

 Facilitate the involvement of the tertiary sector in supporting skills development of Social Workers in the health setting. i. Quarterly skills development workshops. ii. Half yearly forums on practice supervision. iii. Subsidised access to postgraduate study. iv. Enhancement of undergraduate & postgraduate curriculum, eg. Elective in health Social Work.