This document summarizes a presentation on developing field education programs for online and distance social work education. It outlines objectives of collaborating to identify key elements and analyze structure. Factors to consider include timing of involvement, locations, reporting structure, vendor involvement, ethics, staffing models, and field instructor requirements. Staffing and liaison models as well as timing, structure, vendor role, locations, requirements and ethics are discussed. Contact information is provided for follow up.
1. Hindsight Is Always 20/20:
What We Wish We Had
Known
Presented by:
Michele Sienkiewicz, MSW – University of Denver
Jackie Votapek, MSW – Indiana University
Stevara Clark Johnson, MSW – Virginia Commonwealth University
Michelle Brandt, MSW – Widener University
2. Objectives
Collaborate with other participants to identify key elements of developing
the field education components of an online or distance education social
work program
Analyze the current structure of their existing field education program, in
order to develop an action plan for their online or distance education
program in the areas of field seminar, agency development, field liaison
visits, and problem resolution.
Understand the challenges of delivering a quality field education program
in an online or distance education social work program.
3. Factors to Consider for Distance
Education Field Programs
Timing of Our Involvement in the Program
Geographic Locations
Internal Reporting/Organizational Structure
Involvement of Online Partner/Vendor
Ethical Issues
Liaison and Field Program Staffing Models
Field Instructor Requirements/Training
5. Timing of Our Involvement
in the Program
Was the field program established when you started in your role?
Were you involved in developing the role/program?
6. Internal Reporting/
Organizational Structure
Who do we report to?
How does our field department divide the work?
What is the level of collaboration with other field staff?
Is there an online partner/vendor involved? If so, what is their role in our
organizational structure?
7. Involvement of Online
Partner/Vendor
Pros:
Guidance/assistance with problem solving with students (in some models)
Guidance/assistance with course development
Cons:
Loss of control? (when online partner is responsible for matching students to
placements)
Different training
8. Geographical Locations
Limited connections/relationships
Unknown state specific requirements
Developing relationships with Field Instructors from a distance
9. Field Instructor & Liaison
Requirements/Training
Off-site vs. On-site
Similar to or different from on campus field instructors & liaisons
Do local field instructors & liaisons in the online program have the option
of attending training in person?
Requirements for licensing (and thus incentive to attend training) vary by
State (eg. SIFI courses in the Northeast)
11. Ethical Issues
Related to:
The corporatization of social work higher education
Historical component of the importance of relationship building in field
placement process
Placement coordinator and liaison dual roles with students
13. Contact Us
Jackie Votapek, Field Coordinator
317-278-9813
jvotapek@iupui.edu
Stevara Clark Johnson, Assistant Professor in Teaching
804-828-0732
scjohnson2@vcu.edu
Michele Sienkiewicz, Associate Director of Online Field Education
303-871-7899
Michele.Sienkiewicz@du.edu
Editor's Notes
JV: 3-4 minutes
JV – this should only take me 1-2 minutes
JV – This should take me 3 minutes
JV – this is not applicable to IU so I have not contribution here
JV – this should only take me 2-3 minutes
JV – this will take me 2-3 minutes
JV – this will take me 2-3 minutes
JV – I can share my perspective but am most interested in the conflict that exists between field placement coordinator/liaison dual role with student