The Block Placement Field Instruction Program of the Social Work Department of Saint Paul University Philippines _______________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education St. Paul University Philippines Tuguegarao City, Cagayan Philippines _______________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Social Work _______________ Jastin An B. Bundalian Gerly B. Mallillin Ma. Belen M. Ong April Divine C. Wanasen October 2009 Approval Sheet
In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of Science inSocial Work, this thesis entitled the Block Placement Field Instruction Program of theSocial Work Department of St. Paul University Philippines has been prepared andsubmitted by Ma. Belen M. Ong, Jastin An Bundalian, April Divine Wanasen, and GerlyB. Mallillin is hereby recommended for oral examination Mr. Mark Dominador M. Ventura Thesis Adviser Approved by tribunal of oral examination with the grade of __________. TO THE PANEL OF EXAMINERS Mrs. Maricel Grace L. Gomez, MSSW Chairman Dr. Chanda Suppil, MSSW, DPA Mrs. Pilar Acorda Member Member Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the DegreeBachelor of Science in Social Work. Madelyn E. Menor, Ph. D. Agripina B. Maribbay, Ph.D. Program Coordinator Dean Department of Arts School of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education
DEDICATIONTo our dear parents, mentors, friends, and to the Almighty God. . . This piece of work, we humbly dedicate. . . April Belen Gerly Jastin ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study would not have been possible without the invaluable support and assistanceof the following people whom the researchers wish to express their sincerest thanks andgratitude: To our dear parents, who fueled us with their unconditional love, support, guidance,and prayers. They have been our inspiration and strength. Without them, this would not havebeen really possible. To our beloved brothers and sisters for their everlasting support and prayers. To our dear respondents who have really shared their invaluable time and honesty inresponding to our study. To our very patient and considerate thesis adviser, Mr. Mark Dominador M. Venturawho guided us in the conduct of this work and who willingly shared to us his time, knowledgeand expertise. To Mrs. Maricel L. Gomez, our Social Work adviser, for her unceasing support, guidance,and concern to us along the way. To our circle of friends who, in some way have also inspired and challenged us to do ourbest; you have given us reasons to smile amidst the hard moments we went through to finishthis study. Above all, to our almighty God for his divine inspiration and guiding light to carry on. Wethank Him for the gift of hope, strength, and wisdom. Everything would not be possible withoutHim. The Researchers Abstract
The study is entitled “The Block Placement Field Instruction Program of St. PaulUniversity Philippines”. It aims to assess the extent to which the program goals,objectives and activities were met, the quality and effectiveness of supervision, itsinfluence on the professional knowledge, attitudes and skills of the Social WorkGraduates, and the relevance of the perceived suggestions to further improve theprogram. The researchers gathered data from three groups of respondents namely, the socialwork graduates from academic year 2003-2004 to 2008-2009, their supervisors and thebarangay officials of the community where they were fielded. A questionnaire wasutilized to gather and describe the respondents’ perceptions on the field instructionprogram of social work department. The study revealed that the learning goals, objectives and activities of the fieldinstruction program were met at a very great extent. It was also found out that theprogram has a very great influence on the development of the students’ professionalknowledge, attitude and skills since the overall rating of the respondents was 4.29 whichhas an interpretation of “very great extent”. As to the assessment of the role performanceof the Field Supervisors, the Social Work Graduates and barangay officials gave anoverall rating of 4.42 which is interpreted as “very effective”. This implies that thepracticumers were more than satisfied with their supervisors’ role performance. However,the demonstration of Social Work skills by the supervisors had the lowest rating- animplication that the Field Instruction is more task-centered. Most of the suggestions forthe improvement of the Field Instruction program were perceived very much relevant bythe respondents. There are no significant differences on the perceptions of the three groups ofrespondents as the implementation of the Field Instruction program except for theirperception on its influence on the professional knowledge of the students and activitieson working with groups and communities. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title PageTitle Page ……………………………………………………………………… iApproval Sheet ……..………………………………………………………… iiDedication ………………………………………………………………… iiiAcknowledgement ………………………………………………………… ivAbstract ………………………………………………………………………. vTable of Contents ………………………………………………………… viiList of Tables ……………………………………………………………….... viiiList of Figures ……………………………………………………………….... ixChapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATEDLITERATURE..…………………………………… 1 Introduction……………………………………………………. 1 Related Literature and Studies………………………………… 3 Conceptual/Theoretical Framework …………………………… 16 Statement of the Problem ……………………………………… 19 Hypotheses …………………………………………………….. 20 Significance of the Study …….......…..………………………… 21 Scope and Limitation …………………………………………… 22 Definition of Terms ………………………………………….. 22 2 METHOD ……………………………………………………... 25 Research Design …………………………………………... 25 Respondents of the Study ……………………………………… 25 Instrumentation……..…………………………………………… 26
Data Gathering Procedure ……………………………………… 26 Data Analysis …………………………………………………… 27 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………… 30 Results……………………………………………………………. 30 Discussion ……………………….…………………………… 68 4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………………. 69 Summary ……………………….…………………………… 69 Conclusions ……………………….…………………………… 74 Recommendations………………………………………………… 75APPENDIX ……………………….……………………….…………………… 76REFERENCES ……………………….…………………………………………... 93CURRICULUM VITAE ……………………….…………………………………. 95
List of TablesTable No. Title of Table Page 1 Frequency and percentage Count of the Respondents………… 30 2.1 Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception on the extent to which learning goals and objectives of the field instruction program are met…………… 31 3.1 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working with individuals were being met…………………………………………………. 33 3.2 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working with groups were being met…………….. 34 3.3 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working with communities were being met……………………………………………………….. 36 3.4 Mean and Descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the extent to which activities on Supervision and Training were being met…………………………………… 38 3.5 Summary table on the Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the extent to which activities of the block placement field instruction
program are met………………………………………………… 40 4.1 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction program on the students professional knowledge………………………………………… 414.2 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction program to the students professional attitudes………………………………………….. 43 4.3 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction program on the students professional skills……………………………………………………………. 46 4.4 Summary of the mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the influence of the Field Instruction program on the students professional knowledge, attitude, and skills………………………………… 495.1 Mean and Descriptive Interpretation of the Respondents Perception as to the performance of administrative roles by the field supervisors………………….. 505.2 Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the performance of teaching roles by the Field Supervisors……………………………………………… 53
5.3 Mean and Descriptive Interpretation of the Respondents Perception as to the performance of enabling roles by the field supervisors………………………………………….. 565.4 Summary of the mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the role performance of the field supervisors………………………………………… 586 Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the relevance of the perceived suggestions to improve the Field Instruction program……….. 597 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on the significant difference among the perception of the three groups of respondents as to the extent to which the learning goals, objectives, and activities were met when grouped according to type of respondents……………………………… 628 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on the significant difference among the perception of the three groups of respondents as to the influence of the Field Instruction program on the students professional attitude, knowledge and skills……………………………………………………….. 649 Analysis of Variance on the significant difference among
the perception of the two groups of respondents on the role performance of the Field Supervisors………………… 6510 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on the perception of the respondents on the relevance of the perceived suggestions to further improve the Field Instruction program… 66
List of FiguresFigure No. Title of Figure Page 1 Paradigm ………………………………………….. 18
Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUREIntroduction The modernizing society has given rise to complex social issues that affect manand his environment (Serafica). In order to alleviate the social issues that threaten man’ssocial functioning, many humanitarian professions have sprung. One of those which havebeen existing since the early times is the Social Work profession. As the world becomeseven more complex and challenging, Social Workers are demanded to become moreresponsive and adaptable to the call of the times. It is therefore important that SocialWorkers, as they perform their roles in responding to the changing needs and demands ofthe various sectors, should be well equipped with necessary knowledge, attitudes, andskills for a more competent practice. Social Work can be described as a practicing profession that requires soundknowledge and competency in practice (Hepworth, Looney, & Larsen, 2002). Studentshave to learn and acquire knowledge and skills throughout the entire course. They arealso expected to perform these knowledge and skills in various occasions in the course,such as in lectures, in seminars, and most importantly, the fieldwork placements. FieldInstruction Program in the Social Work curriculum performs a very vital role in thetraining of future Social Workers. It enables the students to concretize the theories andconcepts they have learned in the classroom, it allows the students to test their abilities insupervised educational settings and enables them to master and synthesize Social Workknowledge, values and skills.
Field Instruction is one component of the BS Social Work curriculum whichoffers opportunities for the integration of theories and practice which could be within anestablished social agency or community (Kerson, Toba Schwaber, 1994). The studentsare placed in Social Welfare settings and communities to undergo supervised training inprofessional development. Its inclusion in the Social Work curriculum was mandated bythe National Association of Social Work Education (NASWEI) to all Social WorkSchools. According to Republic Act 4373, Social Work students are required to complete1000 hours of practical training on an established Social Work agency under thesupervision of a qualified Social Worker. This curricular area of the program is arequirement before a Social Work graduate is permitted to take the board examination.(Field Instruction Manual) The non-government and government organizations/institutions, and communitieswhere students are fielded serve as the teaching-learning situation where they hone theirskills and develop a degree of professional competence necessary to contribute tocommunity and national development. The Social Work profession is not merely “academic and theoretical” but is“definitely practical”. Indeed, there is no better way for the students to synthesize andincorporate learning than to be given the opportunity to experience the actual jobsituation through the Field Instruction Program. Hence, an assessment of the extent to which its goals and objectives are achieved,the quality of supervision and instruction, and its effectiveness in developing thestudents’ knowledge, attitudes, and skills to find out the areas which need furtherimprovement is very important.
Related Literature This section provides more background information and insights about the presentstudy. It is divided into four subsections namely: foreign literature, foreign study, localliterature, and local study.Foreign Field instruction program is also offered in every school of Social Work and it isbeing held in various settings, requirements and guidelines. In Belmont University, the Field Instruction Program is a two (2) semester sequenceof courses. Supervision is provided by practitioners with either a Bachelor or Master’sdegree. The students complete 250 clock hours of work each semester. The fieldplacement is seen as the culminating experience which begins when the student takesIntroduction to Social Work (SWK 2000). The program aims to prepare students for thebeginning level of generalist social work practice. (http://www.belmont.edu/socwork/pdf/FieldManual.rev.12.06.0web.pdf) The Field Practicum of Jane Addams University is also geared on working withindividuals, groups, families, and communities and is further concerned with therestoration, maintenance and enhancement of social functioning and experience withvarious clienteles including diverse racial and ethnic groups and those populations at-riskor economically deprived. (Jane AddamsUniversityhttp://www.uic.edu/jaddams/college/field/field_instruction_MSW.html) In North Carolina University, Field Instruction is taken concurrently with FieldInstruction Seminar. The seminar is said to provide an opportunity to generalizeprinciples beyond the specifics of the particular agency and community in which the
students are taking field instruction. In addition to this, the students at the beginning ofthe field placement, undergo an orientation to the agency wherein the personnelpractices, organization and structure, philosophy and objectives of the agency,community resources linked with the agency, the issues of personal safety while onagency business, and organization of the office space are discussed. Planning for thestudent’s arrival is also extremely important for them. The Field Instructor has weeklyindividual conferences with the students wherein the students take responsibility ofplanning of the issues to be discussed in the conference. (http://www.uncg.edu/swk/docs/bsw/pdfs/2009%20Field%20Application.pdf) In Austin Peay University, students become eligible for admission to the fieldpracticum upon successful completion of the subject Seminar for Field Instruction (SW4400) and all courses in: • the Social Work Practice • the Human Behavior and Social Environment • the Social Welfare Policy and Services • Research MethodsTheir Field Practicum component consists of two courses: • SW 4410 Field Instruction. Students receive 12 semester hours credit for the supervised field teaching-learning component within an approved agency setting. Students do a one semester block placement for a total of 480 clock hours. • SW 441C Field Instruction Concurrent Seminar. Students receive 3 semester hours credit for this classroom seminar. The seminar focuses on integrating
learning and skill development. Students meet class for three hours once a week on campus. The students are fielded in a variety of rural and urban locations and in mentalhealth, health care, home health, hospice, child welfare, alcohol and substance abuse,hospital Social Work, sexual abuse, domestic violence, corrections, juveniledelinquency, behavioral health services for adolescents and adults, day care, aging, HIV/AIDS, and School Social Work. Meanwhile, the Field instruction program of the Elizabeth Town Universityrequires grades of “C” or higher on the major Social Work courses/ subjects. Fieldexperiences in this university are arranged to meet the student’s individual interest. Itinclude but are not limited to such areas as child welfare, corrections, mental health,hospitals, rehabilitation, health care, schools, and aging.Their field instruction courses are the following:470 Field Instruction I- This is equal to 6 credits. The students undergo supervised fieldinstruction for at least 200 hours in an agency plus a weekly on-campus seminar. Thestudents begin to assume responsibility with client systems like monitoring tasks,providing support, conducting group activities, and assisting the Social Worker withother professional responsibilities.471 Field Instruction II- This is a 12-credit course which consists of 400 hours fieldpractice plus a weekly on-campus Seminar. The Students proceed from an “assistant”position to one of complete client responsibility under direct supervision. Roles studentsassume may include advocate, enabler, social broker, and program planner.
The following are the target knowledge, values, and skill areas that the studentsshould acquire through successful participation in SW 470 Introductory Field Instructionand SW 471 Advanced Field Instruction as stated in the field instruction manual of theElizabethtown College:Knowledge1. understand the field agency: its history, philosophy, client populations, funding, andorganizational structure in order to influence and critique its policies.2. understand the professional Social Workers role in ethics, confidentiality andaccountability to clients.3. knowledge of the theoretical frameworks from both liberal arts and the Social Workcurriculum to develop a foundation for professional practice.4. knowledge of the structure and function of community resources and social servicedelivery systems.5. knowledge of assessment, goal setting, intervention, evaluation and termination aspracticed in generalist social work at micro, mezzo and macro levels.6. knowledge of effective intervention strategies to promote social and economic justiceand to overcome obstacles of oppression and discrimination to population at risk.Values.7. practice without discrimination and with respect to clients’ age, class, color, culture,disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, marital status, national origin, race,religion, sex and sexual orientation;8. sees problems as challenges and believes problem situations can change.9. sees the inequalities in society and the need for societal change;
10. understands their own style of helping as a growing individual with strengths andweaknesses;11. practice in accordance with Social Work values and ethics;12. accepts responsibility for their own ethical conduct and development of knowledgeand skills;Skills13. use supervision appropriately to develop as a professional Social Worker;14. communicate and interact effectively with individuals, groups, families andorganizations, respectful of diverse populations of all categories;15. use social service networks to link resources with client needs, make referrals, andrecord results;16. advocate with clients and colleagues towards social change efforts in response tocommunity needs for social and economic justice;17. relate to clients, colleagues and supervisors with good communication skills in oraland written forms;18. integrate and apply knowledge, theory and critical thinking skills gained in liberal artsand social work courses to actual Social Work situations;19. assess the effectiveness of helping systems and assist in promoting effective, just andresponsive service delivery systems; and20. Utilize research related to Social Work practice to implement effective interventionsacross client populations. (http://www.etown.edu/docs/SocialWork/SW%20Student%20Handbook%202007-2008.pdf)
Meanwhile, in Livingstone College, Field Instruction is scheduled during thesenior year. At this time, students are assigned to a social agency or community setting tocomplete 504 hours of placement. Agencies are selected based on their ability to provideexperiences in generalist Social Work practice.Local Literature The Social Work Department of St. Paul University conducts Field Instruction ina Block Placement model. This means that the basic courses in Social Welfare Policies,Programs and Services (SWPPS), Human Behavior and Social Environment (HBSE),Social Work Methods, and all major subjects must have been completed first by thestudent before he enrolls in the Field Instruction Program. This is unlike the concurrentone, which is composed of four field Instruction courses namely: Field Instruction I (FI I)which focuses on casework; Field Instruction II (FI II) which focuses on group work;Field Instruction III (FI III) which gives emphasis in community organization; and FieldInstruction IV (FI IV) which covers supervision and training. In block placement FieldInstruction, the four Field Instruction courses are fused into only two courses. Fieldinstruction I is a fusion of casework (FI I) and group work (FI II) while Field instructionII is a fusion of community organizing (FI III), and supervision and administration (FIIV). Field Instruction I, a ten unit course, covers structured-setting experiences,techniques and guidelines in data collection and documentation such as interviewing,recording, etc. It also aims to give the students an opportunity to experience and learn theskills in working with individuals and groups. The students are given five hundred (500)hours to finish the course. On the other hand, Field Instruction II covers the community
setting and training and supervising: a) out-of-school youths; b) youth leaders c)women’s group d) community leaders e) volunteers and others. The students are alsogiven five hundred (500) hours to finish the course for a total of the required 1000 fieldhours as provided in RA 4373, otherwise known as the Social Work Law. The students are fielded in various agencies here in Region II like the Departmentof Social Welfare and Development, Reception and Study Center for Children, Haven forWomen, Regional Trial Court, Green Meadow, Overseas Workers’ WelfareAdministration, Cagayan Valley Medical Center, Lingap Center, etc., and also inagencies located at National Capital Region as Saint Luke’s Medical Center, Hospicio deSan Jose, Drug Rehabilitation Center, Molave Youth Home, etc,. In Field Instruction II,the students are fielded in depressed, deprived, and underserved communities and theyare usually based in the Community Development Center of St. Paul UniversityPhilippines. In the selection of placement agency or community, the Social Work Departmentof the University considers the background, experiences, educational needs and interestof students, as well as the existing facilities of the agency/ community. In the choice ofcommunities for field work placement, the security of the practicum students andaccessibility for supervision is considered. The basic functions and responsibilities of the Field instructor, supervisor andstudents are listed based from the Block Placement Field Instruction manual. Field Instructor:Basic Functions:
The roles and responsibilities of the faculty adviser center on his/her liaisonfunctions between the school and the agency. He/ She focuses on what the student isgaining and learning in the field instruction program, in relation to the student’s totalacademic experience.Duties and Responsibilities: 1. consults with the agency field supervisor about the placement of the student assigned in the agency; 2. makes available to the agency the background information of the students; 3. holds regular conferences with the students and the agency supervisor; 4. keeps a record of the student’s program, including notes of consultations; 5. when necessary, offers counseling assistance to the students; and 6. computes the grades of the students.Agency Field SupervisorBasic Functions: The role of the agency supervisor is to facilitate the learning process of thestudents when it comes to the application of the various concepts and theories of socialwork.Primary Duties and Responsibilities: 1. plan together with the Program Coordinator and Field Instructor the activities of the students in the agency and other matters that are related to field instruction; 2. orient the students on the agency goals, objectives and agency’s practicum program; 3. selects and assigns appropriate cases, groups and activities related to practicum;
4. plans and facilitates student’s participation in staff meetings especially those that would contribute/ affect student’s practicum activities; 5. evaluates the student’s performance in the agency; 6. submits a written evaluation on the student’s performance at the end of the semester; and 7. attends, whenever possible the seminar and meetings sponsored by the school. In the early years of Field Instruction, the Field experience at the undergraduatelevel was distinguished from that at the graduate level in three major aspects: (1) thestudent at the undergraduate experience was learning about Social Work, what its goalsare, its operations and problems, rather than acquiring skills in how to practice SocialWork; (2) the field work experience was to train students to observe and gathermeaningful information about social services rather than developing their skills tobecome practitioners: and (3) the time required for field experience was considerably lessthan in the graduate level, which was 1000 hours. But now, Social Work Field Instructionat the undergraduate level is already 1,000 hours, and the students are given greateropportunities to integrate theory and practice in a generalist model and prepare them fordirect Social Work practice. Meanwhile, the University of the Philippines College of Social Work andCommunity Development praxis is anchored on people’s participation andempowerment, personal and social transformation, solidarity with marginalized groups,and gender-responsiveness. Its pursuit of academic excellence rests on integration oftheory and practice, and is infused with passionate scholarship, critical thinking,innovativeness and creativity.
The University of the Philippines also has a number of Social Work practitionerswho now assume sensitive and highly specialized functions and responsibilities in bothgovernment and non-government institutions. Their undergraduate training has beencircumscribed to a generalist practice orientation. (http//cswcd.upd.edu.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=1) The Field Instruction Learning Goals of the University of the Philippines are asfollows: 1. to analyze issues, concepts, principles and processes related to social welfare policy formulation and implementation; 2. to apply skills in influencing policy development; and 3. to use appropriate strategies in the analysis, formulation and implementation of plans and programs within and outside the agency. The students start earning their field work hours in their third year either in aconcurrent or a block placement model. (http://cswcd.upd.edu.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=1) In University of Mindanao, the subjects: Social Work and Social Legislation (SW37), Project and Resource Management in Social Work (SW 42), and Helping Processand Approaches in Working with Communities (SW 44) must first be completed by thestudents before they are qualified to enroll the Field Instruction Program. Theircurriculum has four field instruction courses; the first one which is taken during thesummer of the junior year is a three-unit course. On the first semester of the senior year,Field Instructions 2 and 3 – which are five units each are offered. Then at the lastsemester, only a 2.5 unit Field practice was offered together with the subjects: career and
personality development (Caed 500b), seminar in Social Work (SW 43), HumanBehavior and Social Environment (SW 54), Social Welfare Policies and Programs (SW55), and Social Work Methods (SW 58). (http//www.umindanao.edu.ph/index.php?com=com_content&id=154) At the Centro Escolar University, the first semester of field work is called FieldObservation. The goal is to enable the student to gain an understanding of the socialenvironment where his potential clients live as discussed in the classroom. This is donethrough actual observation of the activities of public and private agencies in thecommunity which develop awareness of the available resources, problems and needs ofthe people in the community. The students assist Social Workers by visiting homes ofclients, attending case conferences, participating in other activities that offer themlearning experiences. These activities are correlated with their Social Work subjectsduring the semester such as interviewing and recording, social case work and socialgroup work. (Report on the 2nd National Workshop on Social Work Education, July 17-19, 1968).Related StudiesForeign Hepworth and Larsen, in their study entitled “Enhancing the effectiveness ofpracticum instruction: An Empirical Study” (1982) revealed that students taught underthe competency-based/task-centered methods of practicum instruction performed at ahigher overall level of competence and had more confidence in their skills than thosetaught under the traditional method. (http//www.task-centered.com/larsen82htm).Furthermore, the study of Mofatt (1977) which used the task-centered model in a student
unit in a general medical practice in Australia found positive reactions from the clients,referral sources, and students. (www.task-centered.com/moffatr.htm) Meanwhile, the study of Hepworth and Larsen (1982) also revealed that practiceinstructors play a strategic role in assisting students gain the competence essential toeffective practice. However, according to Caspi (1997) practicum teaching methods arerarely clearly structured. Furthermore, there are few approaches that operationalizeprinciples of quality field education. Although field instructors are responsible forassisting students learning, there is a paucity of models with detailed guidelines thatstructure the field instruction process and offer methods for achieving practicumobjectives. As such, many practicum instructors educate using a personal, oftenunstructured approach to supervision raising concerns about accountability and qualityfield instruction. His study entitled “The Task-Centered Model for Field Instruction”aimed to gain insight into the task-centered model for field instruction performance. Datacollection strategies included interviews, critical incident reports, contracts, a self-evaluation instrument, audio taped supervision meetings, and interpersonal process recall.Findings were used to modify and improve the model. The result is a refined model, withstep-by-step guidelines, ready for application and further testing. (www.nhf.com/html/lib/umi/1997.htm)Local An assessment of the concurrent Social Work field instruction program of St. PaulUniversity was conducted by Melida Tomas in 1999. The respondents were the socialwork graduates from the school year 1981 to 1986. It found out that the objectives of the
program and all the activities under working with individuals, groups, communities andsupervision and training were all perceived by the respondents as very good. The supervisors were also found to be effective in performing their role andimparting to the graduates or respective supervisees the knowledge, skills and attitude tobecome Social Work practitioners. However, the field supervisors do not possessadequate educational qualifications expected of a supervisor. (Tomas, 1999) Meanwhile, Editha Pagulayan conducted a study entitled, “Bachelor of Science inSocial Work of St. Paul University Philippines: An Appraisal” in 1992. On area of FieldInstruction, it found out that the ratio of students to faculty was very limited.Furthermore, the conditions prevailing in Field Instruction were viewed as moderatelyextensive. Dialogues between and among the agency supervisor, faculty of department ofSocial Work and the students are found quite irregular or unsatisfactory. Also, the extent of how the institution is meeting the requirements for SocialWork laboratories, like varied social welfare agencies, the competence andresponsiveness of social welfare agencies’ staff in assisting were considered asmoderately extensive. (Pagulayan, 1992) The study also revealed that there is a need to designate a Field Instructioncoordinator with the corresponding remuneration and convenient schedule so that a moresystematic planning, organizing and supervising field placement of the students can bedone. The study also found out the coordination between community involvement andinstructional schedules of students is quite unsatisfactory.
A survey presented in the 1999 Convention of the National Association of SocialWork Education Inc. among nine schools highlighted the problems usually encounteredin Field Instruction. These problems are: very limited agencies with licensed SocialWorkers, supervisors who could not communicate or facilitate effective learning,inadequate supervision by some agency Field Instructors, no specific work areadesignated for students, personality conflict with the supervisor, lack of time forsupervision, students’ weak facility for expression, poor documentation of experiences,limited budget; minimal travel allowance for Field Instruction. They also presented thefollowing solutions: conduct an agency supervisors’ training, dialogues, set concreteguidelines, students advised to consult with their Agency Field Supervisors (AFS)regularly or as the need arises, requested the agency or the Barangay officials to provide aplace for field instruction, supervisors should understand and do their job, maximizeconsultations, recommend school follow-up of communications; screening of students,and required field instruction fees (BOR Res. No. 11S. 1997)Conceptual Framework Like many other professionals, the Social Worker is more of a technologist than ascientist. The Social Worker draws on knowledge related to social conditions andproblems, social policies and programs, social phenomena, the Social Work profession,and various practice theories in order to facilitate the process of change. Students areexpected to upkeep themselves with these knowledge in the fieldwork placements andthroughout their professional lives as Social Workers in the future. The Social Worker isexpected to be a competent professional, which means much more than possessing
knowledge of practice theory. Competent practitioners must be able to transformknowledge into action. In Social Work, it is not possible to separate theory from practice or concept fromaction. In fact, practice is the process of using knowledge and applying theory in order tobring about specific types of change. A practice uninformed by theory tends to becomerepetitive and sterile, whereas theory uninformed by the realities of practice tends to bemerely interesting and usually irrelevant. This is why Field Instruction Program isessentially included in every Social Work curriculum. It is through this course thatstudents are given an opportunity to experience, test out, match, apply and integratetheories and concepts learned from the classroom. It enables students to develop the skillsand techniques of social work practice. It is where students move from "knowing" and"understanding" to actual "doing." Undoubtedly, the Field Instruction Program wasconsidered as the “core of Social Work education”. (National Association of Social WorkEducation Inc.,) It is important therefore that the quality of the program be assured throughassessment. Assessment is a basic condition for the development and improvement of anexisting system or program. It is a process in which the strengths and weaknesses of asystem or program are discovered and analyzed. Analysis of these strengths andweaknesses may reveal the extent of the system or program effectiveness in theattainment of the goals and objectives of an organization and at this point, innovation andcorrective policy guidelines should be immediately formulated.
Light and Smith advocated assessment to be established in on-going program development and should not be treated as a separate endeavor from program as usually practiced. Assessment is inevitable. It provides sound evidence of the effectiveness or failure of a system or program. It encourages innovative introduction of new procedures to further improve and strengthen such system and program. Not distinct from any other programs, the Field Instruction Program, as mentioned a while ago, also needs to be continuously assessed in order to reassure that its goals are being met and that it goes with the thrust of the Social Work Program which is to prepare the students for competent, direct Social Work practice in any setting and develop the students into responsible and useful members of the society. Furthermore, assessment of the Field Instruction Program would open doors for innovation and improvement. Paradigm of the Study INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT1. Field InstructionProgramGoals and objectivesactivities Recommendations forsupervisors role Assessment of the a more responsive,performance Field Instruction and comprehensive, and2. The influence on thestudents’ professional its influence of the effective Fielddevelopment students’ professional Instruction program2.1 Knowledge development for social work2.2 Attitude students2.3 Skills Feedback
Figure 1 The paradigm shows that through assessment of the program goals and objectives,activities, and its influence on the students’ professional development, the researcherscould be able to come up with recommendations for a more responsive, comprehensive,and effective Field Instruction Program for the Social Work students which will lead toquality Social Work Graduates.Statement of the Problem This study aims to assess the Block Placement Field Instruction Program of theSocial Work Department of St. Paul University Philippines. Specifically, it attempted toanswer the following questions:1. To what extent are the following components of the Field Instruction met in terms of: 1.1 Learning goals and objectives; 1.2 Activities; 1.2.1. Working with individuals; 1.2.2. Working with groups; 1.2.3. Working with communities; and 1.2.4. Supervision and training.2. What influence on the following has the Field Instruction program had upon thestudents’ professional formation/development? 2.1. Knowledge 2.2. Attitude 2.3. Skills
3. How effective was the role performance of the Field Supervisors as perceived by therespondents in terms of the following: 3.1 Administrative roles; 3.2 Teaching roles; and 3.3 Enabling roles4. How relevant to the respondents are the perceived suggestions to further improve thefield instruction program of the Social Work Department?5. Is there a significant difference between the perception of the three groups ofrespondents on the extent to which the learning goals and objectives, and activities aremet?6. Is there a significant difference between the perceptions of the three groups ofrespondents regarding the influence field instruction had on the development of studentsSocial Work knowledge, attitudes and skills?7. Is there a significant difference between the perception of the Social Work graduatesand barangay officials in the role performance of the supervisors?8. Is there a significant difference on respondents perception on the relevance of thesuggestions to improve the field instruction program?Hypotheses This study aimed to determine if there exist significant differences on therespondents’ perception on the components of the Block Placement Field InstructionProgram of the Social Work Department.
1. There is no significance difference in the perception of the three groups of respondents on the extent to which the learning goals and objectives, and activities are met. 2. There is no significant difference between the perceptions of the three groups of respondents regarding the influence field instruction had on the development of students Social Work knowledge, attitudes and skills. 3. There is no significant difference between the perception of the Social Work graduates and barangay officials in the role performance of the supervisors. 4. There is no significant difference on respondents perception on the relevance of the suggestions to improve the field instruction program.Significance of the Study This study endeavored to assess the Field Instruction Program of the Social Workcurriculum. Specifically, the researchers are conducting this study to serve the followingpurposes: For the Social Work Department. This study could provide information regardingthe effectiveness of the Field Instruction program which could serve as their basis indecision-making, program enhancement and/or planning, and formulation of new policiestowards a Field Instruction Program that is more comprehensive and responsive to boththe needs of the students and of their clients. The findings of this study will also urgethem to integrate more practical and workable teaching strategies that will help preparethe students to fully face the actual work.
For the Field Supervisors. This study will enable them to know whether they andtheir agency are able to meet the standards of the Field Instruction Program, and urgethem to make necessary actions for improvement. For the Practicum Students. Assuring the quality of the Field Instruction programwill contribute greatly into its responsiveness and effectiveness for the students’ trainingneeds. Thus, helping the students become more competent and well-equipped in theirfuture career. For the Future Researchers. This study will serve as their reference for similar orrelated studies they are conducting.Scope and Limitations This study concentrated on the assessing the Block Placement Field InstructionProgram of the Social Work Department of St. Paul University Philippines from theAcademic Year 2003- 2004 to 2008- 2009. First, it looked into what extent the goals,objectives, and activities in the Field Instruction Program were met. Second, it assessedthe extent of influence it had on the students’ professional development in three aspectsnamely their Social Work knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Third, it assessed the roleperformance of the Field Supervisors. Lastly, it looked into the relevance of the perceivedsuggestions to further improve the Field Instruction program.Definition of Terms The following terms were enumerated and defined to provide clear understandingof the study. Agency. The social welfare agency which has been set up by the government or agroup of concerned citizens to deal with the social, economic, personal problem of
individual human beings who are experiencing some problems in the management oftheir personal lives. (Leonora de Guzman, 1992) Block Placement Field Instruction Program. It is the Field Instruction Programimplemented by the Social Work Department of SPUP wherein all major subjects inSocial Work have been first completed before they enroll in Field Instruction. Field Instruction. It pertains to an educational process (Leonora de Guzman,1992) where the student is placed in a particular social welfare agency setting to integrateand apply Social Work theory as well as principles of practice into actual situations,where the student develops his competence as a professional social worker. It is one ofthe four major curricular areas in professional Social Work education. (Manual for FieldInstruction) Field Instructor. This refers to a qualified Social Worker who focuses on givingtheoretical inputs that would guide the students in their practicum. Field Supervisor. This refers to a qualified social worker in the field/ agencydesignated to carry out the responsibility for the work and learning process of a SocialWork student undertaking his field practicum. A supervisor is a licensed Social Workerwho has had adequate experience in Field practice. Social Work Practice. The professional application of social work value,principles, methods and techniques to one or more of the following objective and goals:to help people obtain tangible services, counseling and psychotherapy with individual,families and groups; help groups and communities provided on their own or with externalassistance in their economic condition, facilitate and enable people to become more
economically productive and be involved in participating in the community and localaffairs, especially those that affect them directly (Ronnie, Hepworth and Larsen, 1997). Chapter 2 METHODS This chapter describes how this study was conducted. It presents a description of theresearch design used, the respondents of the study, research instrument used, samplingtechnique, data gathering procedures, and statistical treatment of data.Research Design
This study made use of the descriptive-survey method of research to gather anddescribe the perceptions/assessments of the respondents on the Block Placement fieldinstruction program of the Social Work department.Respondents To be able to assess the Block Placement Field Instruction Program objectives,goals, activities; determine the level of its influence on the professional development ofthe students in terms of knowledge, attitudes, and skills; and the relevance of perceivedsuggestions for the further improvement of the program, the Social Work Graduates ofSt. Paul University Philippines from the Academic Year 2003-2004 to 2008- 2009, theField Supervisors, and the Barangay officials in Barangay Estefania, Amulung werechosen as the respondents. In assessing the role performance of the Field Supervisors,only the Social Work graduates and officials of Barangay Amulung (community wherethe students from batch 2004-2008 had their field practicum) were the chosen as therespondents. The respondents were determined using the convenient sampling technique.Instrumentation Questionnaires were used as data-gathering instrument. The questionnaires are based on the evaluation tool in the Block Placement FieldInstruction Manual and on the one used by Tomas (1999). Other items on thequestionnaire were also formulated by the researchers basing on the concepts in SocialWork practice. The questionnaire consists of three parts: the first part was used to rate the extentto which the goals, objectives and activities of the field instruction program were met. It
contains 36 questions which are rated using the scale of 1-5 from “least extent” to “verygreat extent”. The second part has 55 items that evaluates the influence of the program to thestudents’ professional knowledge, attitude and skills. The scale used in the first part ofthe questionnaire was also used. The third part on the other hand, assesses the role performance of the supervisorsusing the 1- 5 scale from “very effective” to “very ineffective”.Data Gathering Procedure The researchers made a letter addressed to the Head of the University Registrar,Dr. Rosalinda Tanguilan, requesting for a list of the Social Work graduates fromAcademic Year 2003- 2004 to 2008- 2009. The researchers personally floated thequestionnaires to the respondents. Some of the questionnaires were also sent through e-mail. This is because some of the respondents are already employed in the different partsof the country. The data gathered were tabulated and analyzed to come up with accurate results inresponse to the research problems.Data Analysis The following statistical tools were used in the analysis and interpretation of datacollected. 1. Frequency and percentage Count. This was utilized to present the number of respondents and their percentage distribution per academic year;
2. Weighted Mean. This was used to determine the average responses of the respondents as to their evaluation of the Block Placement Field Instruction program; and 3. (Analysis of Variance) ANOVA. This was also used to determine if there are significant differences on the perceptions of the three groups of respondents as to their evaluation of the Block Placement Field Instruction program. To evaluate the extent to which the learning goals and objectives, and activities ofthe Field Instruction Program are met, the researchers used the following arbitrary scale: Scale Descriptive Interpretation 4.20- 5.00 Very Great Extent 3.4 - 4.19 Great Extent 2.6 - 3.39 Moderate Extent 1.8 - 2.59 Little Extent 1.0 - 1.79 Least Extent To determine the influence on the knowledge, attitude, and skills that the FieldInstruction Program had upon the students’ professional formation or development, theresearchers used the following arbitrary scale: Scale Descriptive Interpretation 4.20- 5.00 Very Great Extent 3.4 - 4.19 Great Extent 2.6 - 3.39 Moderate Extent 1.8 - 2.59 Little Extent 1.0 - 1.79 Least Extent
To assess the role performance of the field supervisors, the arbitrary scale belowwas used: 4.20- 5.00 Very Effective 3.4 - 4.19 Highly Effective 2.6 - 3.39 Effective 1.8 - 2.59 ineffective 1.0 - 1.79 very ineffective To determine the relevance of the perceived suggestions for the improvement of theBlock Placement Field Instruction Program, the researchers used the following arbitraryscale: Scale Descriptive Interpretation 4.19- 5.00 Very Much Relevant 3.4 - 4.19 Much Relevant 2.6 - 3.39 Moderately Relevant 1.8 - 2.59 Fairly Relevant 1.0 - 1.79 Not Relevant Chapter 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the data gathered from therespondents.
1. Frequency and percentage count of the respondents Table 1 Frequency Count and Percentage Distribution of Respondents Type of Respondent Frequenc Percentage y SOCIAL WORK GRADUATES AY 2003-2004 3 6.66 % AY 2004-2005 5 11.11 % AY 2005-2006 2 4.44 % AY 2006-2007 3 6.66 % AY 2007-2008 2 4.44 % AY 2008-2009 10 22.22 % Barangay officials 10 22.22% Supervisors 10 22.22% TOTAL 45 100% Table 1 shows that the Social Work graduates have the highest percentage in thetotal number of respondents with 55.56%. The Barangay officials and supervisors areequal in number, each of which is 10.2. The extent to which learning goals and objectives of the field instruction program weremetTable 2.1.Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception on the extent to whichlearning goals and objectives of the field instruction program are met
Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Over-all Mean and Item Social Supervisors Barangay Descriptive Work officials Interpretation Graduates1. To provide the students 4.54 4.2 4.4 4.38with the opportunities tointegrate the theory and Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Greatpractice under supervision. Extent Extent Extent Extent2. To assist the students in 4.54 4.2 4.5 4.41acquiring an understandingof the realities in practice Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Greatand in assessing his own Extent Extent Extent Extentfitness for social work3. To enhance the students’ 4.56 4 4.4 4.32development of practiceskills that will prepare him Very Great Great Very Great Very Greatfor competent practice Extent Extent Extent Extent4. To develop a 4.54 4 4.43 4.32commitment in servingothers and in the creation of Very Great Great Very Great Very Greata just society Extent Extent Extent Extent5. Develop a critical 4.38 4 4.4 4.26awareness of the differentissues through her/his Very Great Great Very Great Very Greatexposure to existing Extent Extent Extent Extenteconomic, political, socio-cultural reality situations6. To develop appreciation 4.62 4.3 4.5 4.47of the social workprofession. Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent ExtentCategorical Mean 4.51 4.12 4.42 4.35 Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent
Table 2.1 shows that all the goals and objectives of the field instruction program, as perceived by the Social Work graduates and barangay officials were met to a "very great extent". Both the Social Work graduates and barangay officials gave it a categorical rating of 4.51 and 4.42 respectively. The Field Supervisors had a lower rating of 4.12 with a descriptive interpretation of “great extent”. Specifically, items 3, 4 and 5 got “great extent” ratings from the supervisors. This implies a difference on the level of expectations of the supervisors as to how goals and objectives of the Field Instruction program were being attained. Even so, it garnered an over-all mean of 4.35 interpreted as “very great extent” which implies that all of the goals and objectives of the Block Placement Field Instruction Program were successfully attained. 3. The extent to which Activities on the Field Instruction Program were met 3.1. Working with individuals Table 3.1 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working with individuals were being met Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Overall Mean and Social Work Supervisors Barangay Descriptive Graduates Officials Interpretation1. Home visits and Collateral 4.58 4.5 4.5 4.53interviews Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent2. Making Case studies 4.75 4.5 4.3 4.52
Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent3. Counseling 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent4. Observing/conducting 4.08 3.6 4.2 3.96therapy sessions Very Great Great Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent Extent5. Referral works 4.17 4.2 4.4 4.26 Great Extent Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent6. Intake interviews 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.5 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent7. Documentation 4.54 4.3 4.5 4.45 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent8. Case Presentations 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.4 a.) flow and organization Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Greatof the presentation Extent Extent Extent Extent b.) Facilities andequipments used (conferenceroom, use of technology, visualaids, handouts, etc.)9. Case Management 4.46 4.4 4.43 4.39 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent
Categorical Mean 4.42 4.29 4.36 4.36 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent Table 3.1 shows that eight (8) activities under working with individuals were perceived met at a "very great extent". Only item number 4 was perceived as being met to a "great extent". It could also be noted that the supervisors gave item number 4 the lowest rating of 3.6. This is supported by the fact that therapy sessions are usually conducted in settings that serve groups of clientele whose problems are emotional and psychological and at the same time, confidential in nature. An example is the Reception and Study Center for Children and Regional Haven for Women and the agencys Social Workers or Field Supervisors rarely endorse the holding of therapy sessions to the students. 3.2. Working with groups Table 3.2 Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working with groups were being met Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Overall mean and Descriptive Social Work Supervisors Barangay Interpretation graduates officials 1. Interviewing 4.79 4.3 4.4 4.50 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 2.Facilitating of group 4.58 3.7 4.5 4.26 sessions/ meetings Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 3.Assisting groups in 4.58 3.8 4.3 4.23 problem-solving
Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 4. Organizing/ 4.45 3.8 4.6 4.28conducting trainingsseminars, Workshops Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent5.Organizing group 4.42 3.8 4.6 4.27members Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 6.Tapping of 4.17 3.7 4.4 4.09resources Great Extent Great Very Great Great Extent Extent ExtentCategorical mean 4.5 3.85 4.47 4.35 Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent As presented in table 3.2, five (5) out of the six (6) activities under working withgroups were generally perceived by the respondents as met at a "Very Great Extent".Only one of the items- the tapping of resources- was perceived as being met at a "GreatExtent", specifically by the Social Work graduates and Field Supervisors. This could beattributed to the limited sanctions given to the students in welfare agencies to link withresources. It could also be noted that 5 out of the 6 items rated as “very great extent” bythe students and barangay officials were rated only as "Great Extent" by the supervisors. 3.3 Working with CommunitiesTable 3.3Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the extent to which activities on working withcommunities were being met
Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Overall Mean and Social work Supervisors Barangay Descriptive graduates officials Interpretation1. Conducting 4.42 3.9 4.5 4.27community surveys Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent2. Helping 4.5 3.6 4.3 4.13communitiesidentify, assess and Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extentsolve problems Extent Extent3. Strengthening 4.38 3.7 4.6 4.23community groupsand structures Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent4. Creating/ 4.42 3.5 4.2 4.04organizing newgroups Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent5. Identifying and 4.25 3.8 4.3 4.12developing potentialleaders Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent6. Building linkages 4.33 3.7 4.2 4.08with agencies andinstitutions outside Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extentthe community Extent Extent7. Mobilizing 4.42 3.8 4.2 4.14community Very Greatresources Very Great Great Extent Extent Great Extent Extent8. Use of the three 4.58 3.8 4.2 4.19communityorganization models Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent a.) Communitydevelopment
b.) Social planning c.) Social action Categorical Mean 4.41 3.73 4.41 4.18 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent Table 3.3 shows that six (6) out of the eight (8) activities given under workingwith communities are met to a "great extent" while only two (2) items were rated as metat a "very great extent". Most of the items were rated as only "great extent". This result issupported by the reason that the standard duration of working with communities is 5years and the Practicumers are fielded in the community for only 500 hours whichimplies that the complexity of the community system along with the duration of FieldPlacement makes it a little difficult to meet the activities at a very great extent.Nevertheless, the activities in working with communities are still generally perceived asmet to a "Great extent" with an overall mean of 4.18. This may be attributed to thestudents immersion in the community. Moreover, since block placement FieldInstruction requires that all major subjects should have been finished first before it couldbe enrolled in, the students already have more time to focus on their Field Practicum thus,it was perceived still as met at a "great extent". It is again noted that the Social Work graduates and barangay officials rated all ofthe items as met at a “very great extent” while the supervisors rated all as met only at a“great extent”.
3.4. Supervision and TrainingTable 3.4Mean and Descriptive interpretation of the respondents perception as to the extent towhich activities on Supervision and Training were being met Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Over All Mean and Descriptive Graduates Supervisors Barangay Interpretation Officials 1. Organizing and 4.42 4.2 4.4 4.34 conducting seminars/ training Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 2.Tapping of 4.25 4.1 4.1 4.15 resource system Very Great Great Extent Great Extent Great Extent Extent 3. Mobilizing 4.25 3.9 4.2 4.12 inner resources Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent 4. Imparting 4.45 4.2 4.4 4.35 knowledge and skills through Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great trainings and Extent Extent Extent Extent seminars 5. Using 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.36 supervisory and administrative Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great skills Extent Extent Extent Extent a.) Planning b.) Organizing c.) Coordinating d.) Directing
e.) Controlling f.)Communicating Categorical Mean 4.38 4.14 4.28 4.27 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Table 3.4 shows that items 1, 4, and 5 were perceived by the respondents as beingmet at a "very great extent". However, two of the items were perceived as met only at a"great extent". These items are tapping of resource system and mobilization of innerresources. This could be attributed to the fact that since students are fielded in depressed,deprived and underserved communities, mobilization of resources is being hampered bythe limited resources in the area. Furthermore, no Social Welfare agency has themonopoly of programs and services for all client needs. Bureaucratic processes inagencies where outside resources could be tapped also made it a little difficult to tapresources at a very great extent. Even so, both items were still perceived as met at a"great extent". Generally, the Social Work graduates and Barangay officials perceived activitiesunder working with communities as met at a “very great extent” while the supervisorsrated lower at 4.14 interpreted as “great extent”.Table 3.5
Summary table on the Mean and descriptive interpretation of the respondents perceptionas to the extent to which activities of the block placement field instruction program aremet Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Overall Mean and Social Work Field Barangay Descriptive Graduates Supervisors Officials Interpretation Working with 4.42 4.29 4.36 4.36 individuals Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent Working with groups 4.5 3.85 4.47 4.35 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Working with 4.41 3.73 4.41 4.18 communities Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent Administration and 4.38 4.14 4.28 4.27 Supervision Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Three of the four activities in the block placement field instruction program wererated as met to a “Very Great Extent” by the respondents. As shown in the table above,working with individuals had the highest weighted mean of 4.36, next are working withgroups and administration and supervision, both having general weighted mean of 4.28.Working with communities got the lowest weighted mean of 4.18 with a descriptiveinterpretation of “great extent”.4. Influence of the block placement field instruction program on the students’ professional development
1.1. KnowledgeTable 4.1Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction programon the students professional knowledge Item Mean and Descriptive Interpretation Overall Mean and Descriptive Social Field Barangay Interpretation work Supervisors officials graduates1. Social welfare agencies, 4.5 4 4.2 4.23programs, services,structure, functions, and Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Greatprocedures. Extent Extent Extent2. Nature of the clientele 4.5 4 4.2 4.23system and problemsituation Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent3.Documentation and 4.58 3.7 4.3 4.19process recording Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent4. Internal and external 4.33 3.9 4.2 4.14resources (NGO’s, GO’s,PO ) Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent5. Research 4.25 3.4 4.3 3.98 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent6. Principles of leadership 4.33 3.9 4.4 4.21 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent7. Community values 4.33 3.8 4.3 4.14 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent
8. Meeting community 4.17 4.1 4.3 4.19procedures Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent9. Problem-solving process 4.33 4 4.2 4.18 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent10. Goal and objective 4.54 4.1 4.2 4.28setting Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent11. Management and 4.33 3.8 4.4 4.18program implementation Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent12. Techniques in assessing 4.45 3.8 4.3 4.18programs and activities Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent13. Situational realities 4.25 4 4.3 4.18 Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent14. Current trusts, issues, 4.54 3.9 4.2 4.21and trends Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent15. Roles and contributions 4.45 3.9 4.4 4.25of social work professionin national development Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent16. Clearer 4.54 3.9 4.3 4.25view/perspective on theroles performed by social Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Greatworkers in different Extent Extent ExtentsettingsCategorical Mean 4.40 3.89 4.28 4.19
Very Great Great Extent Very Great Great Extent Extent Extent As shown in table 4.1, seven (7) out of the sixteen (16) items were rated by therespondents as having “very great extent” of influence on the knowledge of the students.It has an overall mean of 4.19 interpreted as “great extent”. It could also be noted that allexcept one of the items were rated as “great extent” by the Field Supervisors. This is onlymanifested by the fact that classroom discussions are rarely held as the students enroll inField Instruction. 4.2. AttitudesTable 4.2Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction programto the students professional attitudes Item Mean Overall Mean Social work Field Barangay graduates Supervisors officials 1. Demonstrate conscious 4.38 4.3 4.4 4.36 and disciplined use of professional self Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 2. Identification with the 4.33 4.3 4.4 4.34 philosophies, principles, values, and ethics of the Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great social work profession Extent Extent Extent Extent 3. Recognize and use 4.33 4.2 4.3 4.28 student role as learner Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 4. Appreciate working in a 4.58 4.2 4.2 4.33 given structure
Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent5. Acceptance of the 4.54 4.2 4.5 4.41nature of the clientele Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent6. Acceptance of the 4.67 4.1 4.5 4.42nature of their work andhis role in national Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Greatdevelopment Extent Extent Extent7. Appreciation for 4.67 4 4.4 4.36writing recording anddocumentation Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent8. Appreciation of the 4.67 4 4.5 4.39value of research in agiven community Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent9. Willingness to involve 4.58 4.1 4.5 4.39and commit oneself toclients and assigned cases Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent10. Willingness and 4.67 4.1 4.5 4.42resourcefulness toidentify, create, mobilize, Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Greatand utilize resources Extent Extent Extent11. Positive attitude 4.71 4.1 4.3 4.37towards continuousreflection to improve Very Great Great Extent Very Great Very Greatperformance; willingness Extent Extent Extentto improve performanceconsidering suggestionsraised12. Flexibility and 4.63 4.3 4.3 4.41adaptability Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent
13. Being courteous and 4.58 4.4 4.2 4.39 respectful to others Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 14. Sensitive to individual 4.71 4.3 4.3 4.44 needs and feelings ( to client, staff, co-field Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great workers) Extent Extent Extent Extent 15. Punctuality and 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.3 attendance Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 16. Unceasing 4.67 4.4 4.2 4.42 commitment and enthusiasm Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 17. Patience, perseverance 4.71 4.3 4.3 4.44 and willingness to take chances/ risks/ challenges Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent 18. Display the ability to 4.63 4.3 4.3 4.41 use supervision in learning Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent Categorical Mean 4.59 4.21 4.35 4.38 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent Table 4.2 shows that the impact of the block placement field instruction programon the students professional attitude is at a "very great extent" with an overall mean of4.38 as perceived by the three groups of respondents. This result implies that the studentswere being guided by the rules and policies stipulated in the Block Placement FieldInstruction manual in terms of student demeanor. It could also be inferred from the data
that supervisors and instructors also give importance and attention to the upholding ofSocial Work values, principles and ethics in Field Practicum. 4.3 skillsTable 4.3Mean and descriptive interpretation as to the influence of the Field Instruction programon the students professional skills Item Mean Overall Mean Social work Field Barangay graduates Supervisors officials1. Ability to establish rapport 4.71 4.2 4.2 4.37 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent2. Ability in interviewing 4.63 4.2 4.2 4.34 Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent3. Ability to use existing written 4.54 4.1 4.3 4.31materials (eg. records, reports) Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent4. Ability to organize, analyze, 4.63 3.8 4.1 4.18and interpret data gathered Very Great Great Great Great Extent Extent Extent Extent5. Ability to formulate 4.75 4 4.2 4.32diagnostic assessments, andtreatment plans Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent6. Ability to identify appropriate 4.63 3.9 4.3 4.28strategies and intervention Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent7. Ability to identify, match, 4.42 4 4.3 4.24
and utilize resources Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent8. Skill in preparing evaluation 4.54 4 4.4 4.31guide. Ability to assess whethergoals/ objectives are achieved Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent9. Ability to deliver practical 4.58 4.3 4.4 4.43services; ability to utilizeprograms and services of the Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Greatagency. Extent Extent Extent Extent10. Ability to sustain interest 4.75 4.4 4.3 4.48and zeal of clients to attainingset objectives; skill in Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Greatencouraging, involving, Extent Extent Extent Extentfacilitating participation of theclients11. Skill in dealing with the 4.63 4.2 4.3 4.38clients’ feelings Very Great Very Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent12. Skill in making referrals 4.42 4.1 4.3 4.27 Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent13. Skill in identifying, 4.5 3.9 4.3 4.23utilizing, and redirecting forcesin the group Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent14. Ability to function within 4.5 4.1 4.5 4.37the agency structure Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent15. Ability to interpret programs 4.5 4 4.5 4.33and services to client system Very Great Great Very Great Very Great Extent Extent Extent Extent16. Skill in recording and 4.71 4.1 4.3 4.37documentation