Social Work EducationVol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–38.docx

Social Work Education
Vol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–381
Going Beyond Training: Theory and
Practice in Managing Learning
Kate Skinner & Bill Whyte
The establishment of new bodies to replace the Central Council
for Training and
Education in Social Work (CCETSW) and to regulate the social
work profession
provides the opportunity to establish an improved progressive
system of qualifications
and continued professional development in the coming years.
With the current pressure
on social work agency budgets it is imperative that precious
training resources—staff and
money—are used to make the maximum impact on service
delivery. Our involvement
in the provision of a range of training programmes leads us to
believe that much of the
staff development and training effort invested by agencies in
their staff often seem to
have a limited impact on effectiveness. A change in approach is
needed so that learning
is placed at the heart of organisational processes to maximise
the benefits of affirmation
and growing professional confidence. This is essential if we are
to continue to ‘nurture’
valuable professional staff and ensure that services remain
flexible, creative and respon-
sive in meeting ever-rising public expectations.

This paper examines some of the challenges of evidence-based
practice and the
demands for routine evaluation and objective-setting. The
advantages and disadvantages
of a competence specification approach within the development
of service and occu-
pational standards as the basis for professional education are
discussed. The paper
argues that strategies for practice learning require the
development of learning organisa-
tions and a better academic and agency partnership to support
more effective pro-
fessional education and continued professional development.
Keywords: Post-qualifying Social Work; Social Work Training;
Deep Learning
Introduction
The integration of all local authority social work services
within Scottish social
work departments as a result of the Kilbrandon report (SED,
1964), with its
Correspondence to: Bill Whyte, Criminal Justice Social Work
Development Centre for Scotland, University
of Edinburgh, School of Social and Political Studies, 31
Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LJ, UK.
Email: [email protected]
ISSN 0261-5479 print/1470-1227 online © 2004 The Board of
Social Work Education
DOI: 10.1080/0261547042000244991

366 K. Skinner & B. Whyte
emphasis on social education and social learning approaches to
change, made an
organisational leap which set Scotland on a distinctive path in
the social work field.
This change has had long lasting effects on practice ideologies
and on academic
teaching in Scotland. However serious questions about the
capacity of generic
social work training to equip people to operate as social
workers within local
authorities in Scotland has been a live issue since the
implementation of the Social
Work (Scotland) Act 1968, which provides the legislative
framework for these
services.
Since the establishment of Scotland’s Parliament, the Scottish
Executive has
published proposals for ‘modernising’ social work (Scottish
Office, 1999, Cm 4288)
and legislation to set up a Scottish Social Services Council
(SSSC) has been
implemented. The Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001 maps
out a future for
social work within a regulated framework, which will require
the registration of
practitioners operating from a baseline of service objectives and
standards. The
Council’s role is to raise standards across the whole of social
care by regulating the
workforce. From October 2001 the SSSC replaced CCETSW as
the statutory regu-
lator of professional social work training and post qualifying
training and will

manage national training for the sector. Quality Assurance
Agency benchmarking
statements have been published highlighting the need for
effective ‘joined up’
thinking. National Care Standards on residential provision for
older people, people
with mental illness and children will be implemented by the
Scottish Commission
for the Regulation of Care beginning in April 2002. National
Occupational Standards
for social work roles are also under development by
employment representatives
through the national training organisation.
All of these developments provide a map for the direction of
social work practice
and management and the basis for a new progressive system of
qualifications
to be introduced by 2002/3. The increase in pace of change in
the service has
been dramatic in recent years and the demands for professional
knowledge, skill
and expertise have never been greater. Policy is now being re-
formulated by
the current administration within the context of its social
inclusion strategy and
within the framework of ‘best value’ and the imperative of
establishing ‘what
works?’.
Sinclair (1998) suggests that, historically, social interventions
have not been
subject to the same imperative for rigorous testing that has
applied to medical
interventions and that policy has often been based on value
positions or on custom

and practice. Despite considerable input of time, effort and
resources to alleviate
social problems over many years, many stubbornly persist. This
perception has
contributed, at a time of economic restraint, to the demand for
public services to
demonstrate that their expenditure is justified by the positive
outcomes achieved. To
address the question of ‘what works?’ requires access to sound
knowledge and
information about the impact of current policies and practice, an
evidence-led
approach to planning provision and an allied training strategy.
The requirement for
managers and practitioners to have deep and critical knowledge
and expertise in
their field is self-evident.
Social Work Education 367
Evidence-based Practice
The tentative move within social work towards evidence-based
practice is highlight-
ing many of the issues facing the profession today. Evidence-
based practice is
founded on measurement and evaluation—measurement of work
done and aims or
objectives achieved. There is much debate about the ‘how’ and
‘what’ of measure-
ment in social work. Traditional methods used within the
natural sciences, for
example counting the number of interventions, measuring the
length of interven-

tions, are not wholly useful in a discipline with as many un-
quantifiable variables as
there are in social work (Smith, 1995). There are also many
cultural objections to
overcome, not least because in social work we have a limited
history of getting
research into practice (Nutley et al., 2000, p. 3) and of
measuring what we do and
how we do it. Inevitably, then, this shift towards providing
evidence needs to take
place incrementally, and possibly experimentally, in the first
instance in order to
begin to identify which approaches seem to work for some
people some of the time.
A central part of evaluation is that of measurement and
assessment against
pre-determined criteria (Utting & Vennard, 2000). For social
workers carrying out
individual or group work with service users, this requires
setting objectives for their
work with each service user or group of service users. For
managers it requires
setting objectives for each managerial task or project.
Objectives need to be explicit
and ‘SMART’—specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and
time-bound—both
input-process objectives and output-outcome objectives
(Chapman & Hough, 1998,
para 7.7). How many practitioners and managers routinely set
transparent and
measurable objectives like these? Probably few, and some of
those who do may be
doing so without the support, knowledge or expectation of their
agency.

In areas where service standards have been set either at a local
or national level,
the process should be greatly assisted. Work has been done
within criminal justice
social work through the publication and enforcement of
National Objectives and
Standards in Scotland (SWSI, 1991) and is being replicated in
other areas of social
work, such as child care, youth justice, social work with older
people and people with
mental illness. In community care local standard-setting
exercises have taken place
and performance criteria set. The contribution of inspection to
the process of
standard setting is considerable and no doubt will be built on in
all the services.
It is important not to overlook the anxieties that might be
generated by a
movement towards standard and objective setting. We have
experience of running
short courses on evaluating social work practice and have
become acutely aware of
the discomfort caused by the introduction of this approach.
Deep down many
practitioners and managers seem to have doubts about their own
capacity or the
capacity of their agency to deliver a measurably high quality
service. Measurement
brings with it the risk that this incapacity will be exposed.
There is also the attendant
fear that ‘nothing may work anyway’ so there may be some
resistance to declaring
an intention to bring about change in intractable situations.
Unfortunately, the
‘nothing works’ label can then become attached to the

provision. Equally there is a
risk that political and managerial pressure for evidence of what
works ‘reveals an
over-simplified and over-certain view of what evidence does or
might consist of, and
of how it should be interpreted and used’ (Smith, 2000, p. 1).
Part of the value of
the exercise then may be in recognising that some things are not
readily changeable
and should therefore not be a primary focus for effort and
activity. Hopefully this
will be compensated for by the affirmation that can be derived
from those objec-
tives—however modest—which have been met for some people,
in some circum-
stances.
It will take more than a degree of professional confidence to
strike out and be the
first in a workplace to start operating in such a developmental
way. Professional
confidence can only come from a belief that what needs to be
done is worthwhile
and from knowledge that an effective contribution can be made.
This takes us back
to the need for practitioners to be thoroughly steeped in their
own discipline. It
simply is not enough to be qualified and then well-versed in
agency policy and
practice (Marsh & Triseliotis, 1996). The knowledge-base needs
to reach deep into

the core of theory and research in the field of work so that the
objectives set call on
what is known about the effectiveness of methods in the area of
practice.
A Competence-specification Approach
Hey (1990) suggested that the pressures for change in social
work have arisen from
socio-technical developments on a global scale. The behavioural
technologies now
increasingly being used are associated more with the fields and
disciplines of
education and psychology. However it is not the focus on
behavioural change itself
that is new to social work. We detect a gradual and sustained
shift in emphasis from
concepts and language of therapeutic or treatment interventions
based on psycho-
dynamic theories as the principal means of achieving behaviour
change towards
techniques based on learning theories (Andrews & Bonta, 1997;
Sheldon, 1994). This
‘social learning’ approach is more compatible with a strategy of
‘social inclusion’ and
social justice, which recognises the influence of structural
factors and social context
on individual change, and with the traditional emphasis in
social work theory of
working with individuals within their social context (Siporin,
1975). It remains to be
seen how far practitioners’ repertoires can be expected to
encompass technologies
which are based on significantly different approaches and
styles, albeit requiring
certain common knowledge and skills.

Of particular interest is the extent of knowledge, skill, and
competence required
at various stages of professional development to operate within
an increasingly
regulated framework of service standards whose emphases are
consistent with the
shifts to quality control by way of outputs and outcomes rather
than inputs and
process. While increasingly policy makers are concerned only
with outcomes, the
most effective and efficient means of achieving these outcomes
lie within the
professional domain. A critical understanding of process
remains essential and
requires rigour in examining how outcomes are produced, and
how knowledge and
theory are applied within the context of the ‘principles’ of
benchmarking and best
value. These steps can ensure that service delivery is systematic
and results-
orientated, without denying that process and context remain
crucial in the evalu-
ation of social programmes (Pawson & Tilley, 1997).
The adoption of output specification through statements of
competence has
influenced much of the thinking in social work training in
recent years. It has been
adopted in large measure as the model for all levels of training
from SCOTVEC

National Certificates through to higher awards. The
‘competence approach’ provides
a model that seeks to establish occupational standards which
individuals are ex-
pected to meet in their work. National occupational standards to
be developed for
social work will provide statements of competence which
attempt to bring together
the skills, knowledge and values necessary to carry out the
work. The aim of this
approach is to reduce complex behaviour to a set of single
behaviours which are
observable, definable and measurable. The approach attempts to
make performance
visible and hence improve the chances of holding people
individually accountable,
increasing inter-assessor reliability, and thus making
assessments of various kinds
fairer, reducing iniquitous emphasis on personal qualities by
concentration quite
properly on work output performance (Joss, 1990).
Despite the increasing reliance on vocational competences, the
approach has also
been subject to much criticism particularly in its application to
higher levels of work.
The theoretical assumptions of such an approach remain largely
untested empirically
and create numerous conceptual and methodological problems
(Clark & Arkava,
1979; Marsh & Clark, 1990). Much of the developed analysis of
vocational compe-
tencies has concerned employment involving relatively low
status work in more
technical kinds of employment (Winter, 1990) and even here
problems have been

experienced in applying the approach. However simple and
straightforward a
competence may seem it is inextricably entangled with all the
other competences
that were rejected as too complex to start with (Hey, 1990).
Whatever its benefits, the competence approach has significant
disadvantages,
particularly for professional social work. Joss (1990) argues
that it denies the holistic
nature of such human relations work, showing what people must
do but not how or
why. As a consequence it fails to provide an explanation of the
importance of the
exercise of discretion in social work, thus devaluing the fact
that equally competent
performances can arise from quite different actions. It may
consequently be viewed
as discouraging creativity and risk-taking, and be over-reliant
on quantitative
measures to the exclusion of abstract concepts such as reflective
insight, which are
not easily amenable to observation. Similarly this approach can
be a limited training
tool since it cannot shed light on the learning process, only on
the acquisition of (or
lack of) competence (Joss, 1990).
Clark (1995, p. 564) has argued also that competence alone is
inadequate as a
principle of professional formation and that consequently any
attempt to build
professional training on it would be misguided. A competence
approach relies on
observed worker-activity outcomes as the key test rather than
performance in

traditional academic tests of knowledge or skill. While
attractive in theory, to
translate this principle adequately into action it is necessary to
identify the roles,
tasks and skills that comprise the job and to create valid
assessment tests. The
building of an evidence base is inextricably linked with its
utilisation. This has hardly
begun in social work. If this process is to be progressed,
assessment criteria for
professional competence would need to be derived from
research on effectiveness in
specific circumstances. It remains to be demonstrated that any
practical and sensible
assessment system can fairly and rigorously test for
professional competence. It is to
be hoped that examples such as the ‘Pathfinder’ initiative
(Home Office, 1998) and
‘Getting Best Results’ (Scottish Executive, 1999), in attempting
to identify ‘effective-
ness criteria’ based on research evidence, will assist in the
accreditation of pro-
grammes of intervention in criminal justice. As a consequence
this will assist the
process of ‘accreditation’ and professional training. Such tests
are not currently
available and, in any case, may prove difficult to devise and
implement.
The Nature of Learning for Professional Practice

Heron (1981) suggests that there are three types of learning
needed to link theory
and practice. These are: factual knowledge, practice knowledge
and experiential
learning. Learning by reflection has been defined as ‘a process
of internally examin-
ing and exploring an issue of concern triggered by an
experience, which creates and
clarifies meaning in terms of self and results in a changed
conceptual perspective’
(Boyd & Fales, 1983, p. 113).
Service users often learn as they reflect on what they do and
this process is
mirrored in the learning by the practitioner. This process occurs
when the prac-
titioner reflects on the service user’s learning and achievement
and on their own
experience as a change agent. Each social problem is
experienced by an individual as
unique, open to many different explanations and cannot be
resolved simply by the
application of previously formulated techniques (Trotter, 1999).
Social problems are
extraordinarily complex and resistant to intervention. The kind
of solution or
constellation of solutions developed to tackle a situation
depends on the analysis of
the problem in the first place (or, more subtly), whether the
situation is deemed a
problem, or more subtly still, whether it is deemed a problem
that should be tackled
(Joss, 1990).
Attempts to apply technical/rational models and concentration
on problem solv-

ing methods, as in a competence-based approach, run the risk of
neglecting the key
issues of problem identification, naming and framing, which are
highly political and
value-laden activities. Practitioners must learn how to frame
and reframe situations
in different ways and to engage in a process of questioning,
improvisation, invention
and testing strategies in response. There is an art of problem
framing, an art of
implementation and an art of improvisation as well as the art of
influencing and
motivating (Schon, 1987). Similarly even an appropriate
technical ‘solution’ such as
a structured programme of intervention with pre-set aims,
measurable objectives
and relevant content must be delivered in a way that matches
the learning style of
the individual participant (Trotter, 1999). These are important
characteristics of
‘reflective’ and critical practice.
An important requirement for good professional social work
provision is an
holistic approach to service delivery both in a theoretical and in
a practical and
discretionary way. The ability to apply subtly different
responses to the different
needs of different situations, while working to explicit
objectives and direction may
itself be a key competence. For this reason Clark (1995)
suggests that competence

will not do as a single path to specifying social work knowledge
and skill and
that establishing an empirically grounded account of the role of
theory in practice
is also required. His typology of knowledge covers
observational, contextual,
abstract and theoretical knowledge, of which theoretical
knowledge comes ‘top of the
tree’. He suggests that practitioners typically have an amalgam
of well-founded
knowledge, personal impressions, practice wisdom and
experience. In their work
they must address a series of ‘instances’ in providing services
and enter a process of
practical theorising whereby they formulate the purposes
appropriate to the
‘instance’. The exercise of professional expertise subsists in the
art of practical
theorising.
In this context professional discipline requires ‘deep learning’,
a duality of
learning based on a deep understanding of theoretical
principles, application of the
rules of evidence, methods of enquiry and performance
objectives and standards,
combined with creativity. Deep learning is achieved when
formal learning and
personal experience are brought together within a learning
environment (Entwhistle
& Ramsden, 1983). The task of introducing evidence-based
practice must also
involve getting professionals to stop doing things, where there
is evidence of
ineffectiveness as well as promoting new practices based on
promising evidence of

effectiveness (Nutley et al., 2000, p. 5). ‘Unlearning’ has been
used to describe the
need to cast off previously established ways of doing things in
order to be able to
take on board new understandings.
The task for social work education and training is to achieve
deep learning within
a dual curriculum involving theoretical knowledge and the
practical application of
knowledge and skills in the work situation (Dale, 1994).
Research by Marton & Saljo
(1976) and Newble & Entwhistle (1986) shows that students
often adopt either a
surface or deep approach to learning. Those using a surface
approach concentrate on
remembering facts in order to pass examinations. Those using a
deep approach seek
to discover why something is the way it is and search for its
meaning.
Lowe & Kerri (1998) attempted to discover whether a reflective
learning approach
led to a higher level of deep learning than more conventional
didactic methods.
Their experiment with two groups of student nurses
demonstrated that there was no
significant difference between the level of learning achieved in
the two groups. What
did emerge, however, was that the group of students learning by
reflective methods
learned more quickly than those learning by conventional
methods. This has clear
implications for those organising learning programmes, in that
their design and
delivery needs to embody principles and practice of reflective

learning, where
participants have the opportunity to apply their understanding to
their own practice.
A further aspect still to be researched is that of retention of
deep learning—does the
method of learning influence how much is retained over a
period of time?
The Role of Social Work Education: Post-qualifying Training
The nature and structure of social work training is subject to
review in Scotland and
proposals for the future direction are expected shortly. It
remains to be seen whether
or not a competence-based approach is continued or a new
model adopted.
A major difficulty with the competence approach is in trying to
distinguish
between different levels of performance and specialism. It
remains to be seen how far
practice requirements can be adequately captured in statements
of competence in a
way which is sufficiently unambiguous for qualitatively
different standards to be
established (Hey, 1990, p. 10).
In the current framework for social work training, statements of
professional
competence often amount to descriptions of professional
practice which are not
level-specific. The three-tier structure of current social work

qualification attempts to
reflect different levels on a ladder of learning. To some degree
the existing model in
Scotland attempts to mirror some aspects of medical training
with progression from
general practitioner, to specialism and to a more advanced level
required by those
offering specialist assistance to others. At the stage of
undertaking a social work
qualifying programme (DipSW), the aims of learning are
expressed in terms of six
core or general competence and practice requirements
(CCETSW, 1997). Basic skills
in critical assessment, intervention planning and responsiveness
to the capacity and
style of the user, and the ability to work ethically under the
direction of an
experienced professional are sought. These skills are not role-
specific and are
intended to be transferred to many professional social work
roles, in children and
family work, community care, youth and criminal justice.
Specialist or deep and
detailed knowledge consolidated through experience may well
be provided by a
practice teacher, supervisor, or consultant to support the newly
qualified worker in
practice.
At the post-qualifying stage (PQSW), practitioners are required
to extend their
level of competence beyond that of DipSW level to work more
independently and
effectively in complex situations, exercising their powers and
responsibilities ethically
as professional social workers, including the use of discretion

and the management
of risk (CCETSW, 1997). Specialist knowledge is developed
and skills consolidated
through more independent application within a framework of
supervision. Specialist
consultancy may be required to assist specific areas of practice
and extend knowledge
and skills. Over the past two years a set of occupational
standards have been
developed for child care social work at post-qualifying level
and a national PQSW
course in criminal justice social work has been developed. This
trend towards
service-specific competence is likely to be continued in other
areas of provision.
The current Advanced Award (AASW) requires holders to make
a significant
contribution to service development and provision by
researching, planning, imple-
menting and monitoring strategies for change using a wide
repertoire of methods.
The ability to enhance the capabilities of others is central to the
Advanced Award
which may relate directly to users or equally to assist those at
DipSW or PQSW level
work more effectively by operating as a consultant. The
advanced practitioner or
manager must demonstrate evidence of leadership, the ability to
work independently
yet accountably and the capacity to assist other professionals to

achieve a high level
of performance.
The three current awards with their different levels can be seen
to offer a
framework within which individual social workers can progress
while maintaining a
degree of general practice training and the development of a
specialism. The nature
of the framework suggests that progression takes place over
time, and that learning
comes from experience ‘on the job’ supported by academic
programmes. The level
of performance, both professional and academic, required at
post-qualifying level is
higher than that required at qualifying level and suggests that
knowledge and skills
have been both widened and deepened and are applied to more
specific specialisms.
This may well correlate to Gardiner’s (1988) concepts of levels
of learning, where the
deepest learning ‘requires the ability to learn and to transfer
both the content and
the learning to new and different situations’ (p. 102).
Experience in Scotland to date indicates that the response of
employers to
post-qualifying awards in social work has been mixed,
particularly the Advanced
Award, and few courses have been established. Some agencies
have grasped them
enthusiastically as an aid to their own staff and service
development strategies, some
have barely recognised their existence. Perhaps even more
negatively, we know of
one large Scottish Authority which took a policy decision that

resources should not
be invested in post-qualifying initiatives. There is, of course, a
range of less polarised
responses in between. The ‘modernising’ agenda may see
radical alterations to this
structure. It is important that competences are developed in
consultation with
practitioners and professional bodies as well as with employers
and where possible
have some empirical basis for their promotion. If those
developed are exclusively in
the control of employers, there is a risk that they will do little
more than promote
a top-led uncritical and mechanistic practice rarely challenged
by front line workers,
when what is needed is accountable professional judgement and
expertise based on
evidence where this exists.
Those agencies that have welcomed and built on the post-
qualifying framework
have used it to put into place a cadre of specialists or
consultants who are more able
to take leadership in their field and act as resources to their
staff groups. The
investment of resources in these processes, which might be
described as training for
a specialism, has carried with it a clear expectation that
practitioners will use their
learning to influence practice, practice outcomes and the
generation of new knowl-
edge.
Management Learning in Practice
Our experience of running a short management training

programme for criminal
justice managers and an Advanced Award programme/MSc for
staff and managers
in criminal justice social work settings may have something to
offer here. The
Advanced Award/MSc programme is a two year part-time
programme for experi-
enced practitioners or managers, delivered on a modular basis,
with practice or
management options. The short programme was commissioned
by the Scottish
Executive to support the establishment of specialist criminal
justice social work
management within 32 Scottish Local Authorities following
local government reform
in 1996. The programme, 20 days in all, was run four times for
approximately 20
managers, senior and middle, each time. As well as detailed
feedback evaluation
throughout and at the end of each programme, at the end of the
four programmes,
we surveyed all the participants to canvass their views on the
programme and how
they had made use of it.
Our expectation had been that very experienced participants in
the management
programme would come brimming with knowledge about the
social policy, the law
and research base of their specialism. What we discovered was
that many were quite

uninformed about these aspects of their work context, though
we also noticed that
it was not easy for them to acknowledge this! Our insistence
that this material
needed to be addressed before other more functional aspects of
management
training were tackled met with some resistance and perplexity.
As the programme
progressed, it became apparent that much management activity
centred on carrying
out procedures and requirements set by more senior managers,
and that little room
was left for reflection and creativity in managing the
organisation’s precious human
resource. The prospect of reading about innovation and research
was seen as almost
unreachable, as was the opening up of the debate around
evidence-based practice
and evaluation of their own work with senior professional
managers.
We also heard about agencies where a ‘blame’, as opposed to a
‘learning’, culture
made it difficult for staff to talk about areas which were not
working well. Fear of
being victimised in some way as trouble-makers, with the
attendant worries about
career prospects, seemed common place. This has enormous
implications for
potential of ‘whistle blowing’—if it is not easy to raise
concerns about areas of
practice which are ineffective, how will it ever be possible for
staff members to
identify areas of practice which are unsafe, either for staff or
service users, or to
address the limitations as well as the strengths of an evidence

led approach to
practice?
We were left wondering how the role of the professional
manager was seen within
social work agencies, many of whom had invested considerable
resources in creating
opportunities for managers to undertake MBA programmes.
Covey (1992) talks of
the sixth habit of highly effective people being synergy—
creative cooperation—
which values differences and builds on them. There is clearly a
role here for
professional managers to set the culture of ‘learning’ within an
organisation. This has
to be done in staff groups and teams in real work situations.
This situation may have
been further complicated in the last few years as many
professionally trained
directors of social work have been replaced by managers
without social work
experience or qualification.
We hoped to gain an insight into the process of transfer into the
workplace of
learning by following up participants after they had completed
the short manage-
ment programme. We discovered that, despite learning methods
that centred on
participants’ work experience and on practical problem-solving
approaches, partici-

pants experienced real difficulty in translating their learning
into their workplaces.
Some identified the blockages as coming from colleagues who
were not sympathetic
to trying out new ideas, others referred to senior managers who
were actively
dismissive of the relevance of knowledge and theory to
workplace issues. Most,
however, talked of the difficulty of implementing new ideas
without parallel learning
having taken place with their senior colleagues. Taking the risks
associated with
trying out new activities without the active support and
commitment of colleagues
is a lonely business, and most were finding it a struggle to see
the way forward after
a short period. The constant barrage of operational problems
soon seemed to
outweigh enthusiasm for innovation.
It was clear to us that knowledge and experience in the agency
are important as
is the context for the work, but on their own will not be enough
to promote effective
practice. A cultural acceptance of learning as a way of
managing and practising needs
to permeate the whole organisation, with managers taking a
professional lead by
demonstrating a commitment to their own learning and then
setting practice
standards which are rigorous in their formulation and in their
evaluation. The
feedback loops which are then generated will provide important
information about
work at an individual, service and agency level and contribute
significantly to service

planning and development. An important benefit of this
approach is that staff
routinely receive feedback on the effectiveness of their work
which will eventually
improve morale—but the key to this is the setting of relevant
and achievable
objectives so that staff and service users are not set up
themselves to fail.
In addition to the need for staff to be better informed about the
effectiveness of
their own work is a necessity for agencies to be better informed
about the work being
carried out across the whole staff group. Information systems
are gradually being put
into place to ensure the collection of quantitative data. This
needs to be more
routinely part of the management agenda of oversight of work
done. At least as
important as these steps are those which centre on the collection
and analysis of
qualitative data, which are the results of accumulated evaluation
across teams and
services. Experience suggests that agencies and staff still have
some way to go in the
development of skills in qualitative data collection and analysis,
but these can be
learned provided there is recognition of the significance and
limitations of such data.
Agencies as Learning Organisations
Social learning theorists have emphasised the significance of
observational learning
in changing the behaviour of groups or individuals. The
characteristics of social

learning suggests that the process requires:
• a model;
• that the learning may take place without the specific intention
of either the model
to teach or the learner to learn;
• that specific behaviours and more general states can be
learned in this way;
• that the consequences of the learning depend on the
consequences of the change
and that the characteristics of the model influence the learning
which takes place
(Bandura & Walters, 1963).
Much of the character of organisations results from the social
learning which is
available to its staff through the behaviour of its significant
members. This places an
important responsibility on those in a leadership role to
demonstrate and value the
kind of behaviour they want to encourage throughout the
organisation. Structures
and processes within the organisation need to facilitate, indeed
demand, the kind of
learning which enables the social learning process to take place
at every level.
We suggest that a culture of ‘curiosity’ and of learning needs to
be established and
maintained if staff are to be nourished and supported in taking

the risks involved in
this, or indeed any other, new way of working. The risks are
about the work undone
while this learning takes place and the attendant risk that a
close examination of
practice may reveal uncomfortable issues. Discomfort may arise
from practitioners
and managers who, when encouraged to evaluate their
effectiveness against pre-de-
termined objectives, become anxious that they have not been, or
will not be, able to
deliver what is needed. More generalised fears about whether or
not the service can
be effective in supporting individual change for service users
may be a more
worrying consequence. Clearly some of this fear is related to
that which accompanies
any kind of change and is one of the main issues which
managers need to address
in order to bring change about and then to make it ‘stick’. In
this regard, using the
principles of learning organisations becomes both the means and
the end; or put
another way, becoming a learning organisation is both the
change which needs to be
achieved and the way to achieve major change.
Successful learning organisations (Senge, 1992) empower all
within them to take
responsibility for the important aspects of the organisation’s
business, both intern-
ally and externally. Top down management can de-skill and de-
motivate staff,
preventing them from being effective where they can do their
best work.

Learning organisations are those which have strong linkages
between the three
levels of activity—operations, strategy and policy (Garratt,
1987). Diagrammatically
(Figure 1), the arrows between the three levels need to go in
both directions, so that
operations inform and are informed by policy and strategy and
vice versa. This, for
some organisations, will mean a considerable shift from the
present style of working
in which strategic plans are put together hastily and by senior
staff alone. Often
reference is not made to either operational staff, to service users
or to external
stakeholders within and outwith the agency.
In Senge’s model of change, staff are invited to evaluate their
ongoing work and
to use this knowledge and experience to contribute to
continuous service improve-
ment and to organisational development. Five learning
disciplines within a learning
organisation are identified as:
• personal mastery—an organisational climate which encourages
its members to
develop themselves towards the goals and purposes they choose;
Figure 1
• mental models—reflecting upon, continually clarifying, and
improving our inter-

nal pictures of the world, and seeing how they shape our actions
and decisions;
• shared vision—building a sense of commitment in a group, by
developing shared
images of the future we seek to create, and the principles and
guiding practices by
which we hope to get there;
• team learning—transforming conversational and collective
thinking skills, so that
groups of people can reliably develop intelligence and ability
greater than the sum
of the individual members’ talents;
• systems thinking—a way of thinking about, and a language for
describing and
understanding, the forces and interrelationships that shape the
behaviour of
systems.
Adopting such an approach would require some generosity of
spirit and the
capacity to re-prioritise work in order to make space for staff to
study professional
literature, to discuss what they discover and to apply it to their
own practice. Setting
a climate of learning will not be easy in the face of increasing
demand and limited
resources. Yet it is the only way forward if effort is to be
targeted and resources
focused on producing results.
Occupational standards are required but these need to be based
on a thorough
functional analysis of the roles staff are required to carry out.

Attempts to recruit
into posts for which there is only a superficial job description
or person specification
can be no more than haphazardly successful as the process and
selectors will base
decisions on insufficient information to ensure a good match
between candidates
and posts. Once an individual is in post her or his continued
development within the
organisation needs to be directed in ways which will, in the
medium to longer
term, contribute to high quality practice standards and to
Senge’s five learning
disciplines.
For social work organisations to become learning organisations,
many will need to
concentrate on first and second order change (Garratt, 1987).
First order change is
that which takes place at the operational end of the
organisation. In this context first
order change might involve incremental learning about skills
development—objec-
tive setting, gathering and analysing qualitative data, setting up
data standards and
information systems to store and retrieve data. Second order
change refers to change
at a strategic level. The second order changes are about the re-
framing necessary for
management structures and processes to become truly in tune
with the external

environment, where senior managers look upwards and
outwards, interpret their
observations or findings to inform policy which in turn informs
strategy and
operations. Boisot (1987) talks about organisations which
codify and diffuse organ-
isational knowledge. Garratt (1987) makes the point that
‘learning is much too
important to be left as the province of personnel or, even worse,
training depart-
ments’. The message here is clear—senior managers have to
recognise their role in
learning on behalf of the organisation, and then need to oversee
the development of
structures and processes which bridge between the literature and
research, data
collected through information systems and the need to bring
about changes to
practice.
Attention equally needs to be paid to the role of research and
the literature base
in informing practice standards, and staff will need to become
critical consumers of
research and part of the debate on the nature of evidence which
directs practice.
Again these skills can be learned and utilised if an organisation
declared them
relevant to its core business.
A further feature of the social learning model is the opportunity
it offers to service
users. Much of the work done with service users by main grade
staff stems from the
principles of social learning theory. This can be made more
effective if the same

social learning principles permeate the organisation at every
level. It was argued in
traditional social work literature (Mattinson, 1975) that in staff
supervision social
workers may behave in a way which is similar to that of a
service user with whom
they are closely involved. Although something of a caricature,
social work organisa-
tions could also be described as having a tendency to share the
characteristics of their
clientele, like an ineffective parent, they seem to ignore bad
behaviour until too late,
pay too much attention to trivial matters, respond
inconsistently, fail to back up
their requests, and are subject to sudden bouts of arbitrary
severity. It may be safe
to assume, therefore, combining what is known about social
learning and the
reflection process, that this phenomenon may also occur in
reverse, i.e. that service
users may model the behaviour of practitioners. In order, then,
to achieve the
maximum amount of positive behaviour change in service users,
the organisation
should take care to ensure that its structures and processes are
such that appropriate
behaviour is recognised and rewarded.
The Need for Academic and Agency Partnerships
There are many opportunities for formal learning or training
made available to

social workers. Much of the resources spent, however, could
well be considered
wasted if the individuals then seem unable to apply or sustain
their learning when
they return to the workplace. It is our observation that social
work qualifying
students are less likely to learn from what they are taught in
class and more likely
to learn from, and have their practice influenced by, what they
see going on in
agency placements. Even experienced practitioners and
managers seem to struggle to
make use of acquired knowledge when an agency culture is
unreceptive to the
challenges and the consequence of change and innovation.
An evidenced led approach to practice development requires
closer working
relationships between agencies and academic institutions to
ensure the two way flow
of information about current policy and practice issues. Such
partnerships can
provide agency staff with the opportunity to remain aware of
the strengths and
limitations of research in their field and help support a sound
empirical basis for
learning programmes which take account of the changing needs
of practice develop-
ment. Formal links between academic institutions and ‘learning’
agencies which
foster some sharing or shadowing of staff to allow both sets to
contribute to research,
evaluation and service effectiveness would seem to be essential.
This would also assist
the promotion of meaningful and effective Continuing
Professional Development

(CPD) requirements that are likely to be introduced by the
Scottish Social Services
Council and assist agencies in making better use of evidence in
planning services and
in building in evaluation at the service planning stage. There are
too few good
examples of such partnerships in Scotland.
Conclusion
We have argued that in our experience much of the staff
development and training
effort currently being invested by agencies in their staff will not
achieve its desired
outcome or even may be wasted without a significant shift in
approach. Professional
staff struggle to hold on to their learning in, at best, unreceptive
climates and, at
worst, discouraging and negative milieus. Social work agencies
need to move towards
becoming learning organisations which, by instituting parallel
learning at all levels,
provide fertile ground from which practitioners and managers
can nurture and
integrate their own learning and development and bring
innovation into the
mainstream.
Training programmes of all types need to be negotiated with the
active involve-
ment of managers. Those same managers need to be involved in
parallel learning, so
that the climate surrounding staff is one where learning is
encouraged, valued and
supported. ‘Learning by doing’ is an important part of
individual development in

most professions, and the advent of evidence-based practice
provides a culture for
promoting objective-setting and evaluation as parts of normal
routine in social work
practice and management. These notions bring with them both
threats and opportu-
nities. If the opportunities are enthusiastically grasped within a
learning organisation
framework the threats which are perceived to spring from the
prospect of measure-
ment of effectiveness can be minimised. This will maximise the
learning and
development of individuals and will move services closer to
evidence-based practice
and true best value. The only … person … who is educated is
the … person … who
has learned how to learn … how to adapt and change … who has
realised that no
knowledge is secure (adapted from Rogers, 1990, p. 304).
References
Andrews, D. & Bonta, J. (1997) The Psychology of Criminal
Conduct, 2nd edn, Anderson
Publications, Cincinatti.
Bandura, A. & Walters, R. (1963) Social Learning and
Personality Development, Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, New York, London.
Boisot, M. (1987) in The Learning Organisation, B. Garratt,

Fontana, London.
Boyd, E. & Fales, A. (1983) ‘Reflective learning: key to
learning from experience’, Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 99–102.
CCETSW (1997) Assuring Quality for Post Qualifying
Education and Training—1, Requirements for
the Post Qualifying and Advanced Awards in Social Work,
CCETSW, London.
Chapman, T. & Hough, M. (1998) Evidence-based Practice: A
Guide to Effective Practice, Home
Office, London.
Clark, C. (1995) ‘Competence and discipline in professional
formation’, British Journal of Social
Work, vol. 25, pp. 563–580.
Clark, F. & Arkava, M. (1979) The Pursuit of Competence in
Social Work, Jossey-Bass, London.
Covey, S. (1992) The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People:
Restoring the Character Ethic, Simon
and Schuster, London.
Dale, A. (1994) ‘The theory–practice gap: the challenge for
nurse teachers’, Journal of Advanced
Nursing, vol. 20, pp. 521–524.
Entwhistle, N. & Ramsden, P. (1983) Understanding Student
Learning, Croom Helm, London.
Gardiner, D. (1988) ‘Improving students’ learning—setting an
agenda for quality in the 1990s’,
Issues in Social Work Education, vol. 4, no. 2, Winter, pp. 95–
105.
Garratt, B. (1987) The Learning Organisation, Fontana, London.

Heron, J. (1981) ‘The role of reflection in a co-operative
inquiry’, in Philosophical Bases for a New
Paradigm in Human Inquiry: A Source Book of New Paradigm
Research, eds P. Reason & J.
Rowan, Wiley, Chichester.
Hey, A. (1990) Post Qualifying Education and Training in the
Probation Service, CCETSW, London.
Home Office (1998) Effective Practice Initiative: A Pathfinder
Approach, Home Office, London.
Joss, R. (1990) ‘Competency-led assessment’, unpublished
paper, Brunel University, Bristol.
Lowe, P. & Kerri, C. (1998) ‘Learning by reflection: the effect
on educational outcomes’, Journal
of Advanced Nursing, vol. 27, pp. 1030–1033.
Marsh, P. & Clark, C. (1990) Research Issues in Social Work
Education, Universities of Edinburgh
and Sheffield, Edinburgh.
Marsh, P. & Triseliotis, J. (1996) Ready to Practise?: Social
Workers and Probation Officers; Their
Training and First Year in Work, Avebury, Aldershot.
Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1976) ‘On qualitative differences in
learning: outcome and processes’,
British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 41, pp. 4–11.
Mattinson, J. (1975) The Reflective Process in Casework
Supervision, Institute of Marital Studies,
London.
Newble, D. & Entwhistle, N. (1986) ‘Learning styles and
approaches: implications for medical

education’, Medical Education, vol. 20, pp. 162–175.
Nutley, S., Davis, H. & Tilley, N. (2000) ‘Getting research into
practice’, Public Money and
Management, Oct.–Dec., pp. 3–6.
Pawson, R. & Tilley N. (1997) Realistic Evaluation, Sage,
London.
Rogers, C. (1990) The Carl Rogers Reader, Constable, London.
Schon, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner, Jossey
Bass, San Francisco.
SED (1964) Children and Young Persons (Scotland) (Cmnd
2306), SHHD, Edinburgh.
Scottish Executive (1999) Getting Best Results, SWSI,
Edinburgh.
Scottish Office (1999) Aiming for Excellence: Modernising
Social Work Service in Scotland (Cm
4288), The Stationery Office, Edinburgh.
Senge, P. (1992) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of
the Learning Organization, Century
Business, London.
Sinclair, R. (1998) ‘Developing evidenced-based policy and
practice in social interventions with
children and families’, International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, vol. 1, no. 2,
pp. 169–176.
Sheldon, B. (1994) ‘Social work effectiveness research:
implications for probation and juvenile

justice services’, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 33,
no. 3, pp. 218–235.
Siporin, M. (1975) Introduction to Social Work Practice,
Macmillan, New York.
Smith, D. (2000) ‘The limits of positivism revisited’, paper
presented at ESRC funded seminar
What Works as Evidence for Practice? The Methodological
Repertoire of an Applied Discipline,
Cardiff.
Smith, J. (1995) Social Workers and Beneficiaries of Research,
Social Work Research Centre,
University of Stirling.
SWSI (1991) National Objectives and Standards for Social
Work Services in the Criminal Justice
System, Scottish Office, Edinburgh.
Trotter, C. (1999) Working with Involuntary Clients: A Guide
to Practice, Sage, London.
Utting, D. & Vennard, J. (2000) What Works with Young
Offenders, Barnardos, Ilford.
Winter, R. (1990) ‘Beginning to identify post-qualifying
professional competences’, in Social Work,
Asset Programme Working Paper No. 1, ed. R. Winter, Anglia
Higher Education College,
Chelmsford.
Accepted September 2002

Toggle navigation
Assessments/ExamsAssessments/ExamsExam
DevelopmentScheduling Your ExamScore Verifications Exam
AppealsItem WritingCPCEJurisprudenceBusiness/Licensure
SupportBusiness/Licensure SupportState
LicensureCredentialingCredentialingACS | SupervisionBCC |
CoachingBC-TMH | Mental HealthDCC | DistanceGCDF |
CareerHS-BCP | Human ServicesCredential Holder
SearchTrainingCoach TrainingCareer TrainingMental Health
TrainingProctor
TrainingAboutAboutBoardContactCareersProCounselor

Toggle navigation
menu
Assessments/ExamsAssessments/ExaminationsExam
DevelopmentScheduling Your ExamScore Verifications Exam
AppealsItem WritingCPCEJurisprudenceBusiness & Licensure
SupportBusiness Support & Licensure ServicesState
LicensureCredentialingCredentialingACSBCCBC-
TMHDCCGCDFHS-BCPCredential Holder
SearchTrainingCoach TrainingCareer TrainingMental Health
TrainingProctor
TrainingAboutAboutBoardContactCareersContactProCounselor
HS-BCP HomeRequirementsExamination
InformationMaintaining Your CredentialMarketing Your
CredentialContinuing
EducationStudentResourcesFAQCostsEthicsApplication
HS-BCP
Human Services-Board Certified Practitioner
CredentialingHSBCP“The HS-BCP opens doors and
gives credibility to the work that I do.”
—Tommy Lopez, HS-BCP, Chair, Human Services Technology
at Central Piedmont Community CollegeWhat is the Human
Services-Board Certified Practitioner credential?
The Center for Credentialing & Education (CCE) created the
Human Services-Board Certified Practitioner (HS-BCP) with the

assistance of the National Organization for Human Services
(NOHS) in consultation with the Council for Standards in
Human Service Education (CSHSE). The credentialing process
was designed for human services practitioners seeking to
advance their careers by acquiring independent verification of
their practical knowledge and educational background.How will
the HS-BCP help me?
With increased competition in this growing field, human
services practitioners are finding that board certification in
human services shows their attainment of high standards and a
commitment to maintaining their place at the top of their field.
The independent HS-BCP credential allows human services
practitioners to stand out as a part of a distinguished group
known for their commitment to the field.How do I get approved
for the HS-BCP?
Applicants holding an associate, a bachelor's or advanced
degrees obtain the HS-BCP credential through an independent
review of their qualifications. Approval is based upon
demonstrating the achievement of the required educational and
professional experience and by passing a national examination
developed by human services subject matter experts for human
services practitioners. See the examination section for more
details.
Apply today and stand out with the HS-BCP credential.Where
can I find a human services college or university program?
http://humanservices.cce-global.org/homeHS-BCP Application
Packet
If you have any questions after reading the HS-BCP Application
Packet, please feel free to contact us at [email protected] with
the subject line: "HSBCP".
Questions:
Name

Email Address
Phone Number
Message
Submit
Complete Captcha

CCE
3 Terrace Way
Greensboro, North Carolina 27403-3660
More InformationAboutCCE PolicyContactSite MapReach
Outtel: +1 336.482.2856fax: +1 336.482.2852email:
[email protected]directions
© 2016-18 | Center for Credentialing & Education
Stay current with CCE ConnectionsVIEW/SUBSCRIBE
Member LoginForgot password?Not a member yet? Join
CSHSEBlog
Search for:

HomeAbout UsOur HistoryOur
MissionBoard of DirectorsCHEASelf-Study ReadersCSHSE By-
LawsCSHSE Logo PolicyMembers And Accredited
ProgramsCSHSE MembersCSHSE Accredited ProgramsAccredit
Your ProgramStandardsMembership Application and
FeesMember BenefitsPolicies and ProcessesResource
LinksFAQMembership ResourcesMember
Handbook2Accreditation Forms and TemplatesSelf-Study
Instructional ResourcesCSHSE BulletinPublicationsContact Us
Promoting Excellence in
Human Service Education
Find Out How We Do This
Is your Human Services Program
accredited by the Council for Standards
in Human Services Education?
Become Accredited Now!
Council for Standards in Human Service Education
ASSOCIATE DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES

BACCALAUREATE DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES
MASTER'S DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES
Is your program a member of the
Council for Standards
for Human Services Education?
Home
admin
2018-11-08T12:35:46+00:00

The Council for Standards in Human Service Education was
established in 1979 to give focus and direction to education and
training in mental health and human services throughout the
country. CSHSE is recognized by the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation. Our Mission
The Council is committed to improving the quality, consistency,
and relevance of human service education programs and
assuring best practices in Human Service Education through
evidence-based standards and a peer-review accreditation
process.Our Vision
To promote excellence in human service education, to provide
quality assurance, and support standards of performance and
practice.Accreditation Process
To assist programs in self-study evaluation and continual
improvement as they prepare human service
practitionersBECOME A CSHSE
MEMBER
Online Membership ApplicationApplication form for Initial
Accreditation
Apply Now!Interim Report and Reaccreditation
Apply Now!Membership
Mail-in Application.BlogCSHSE Founding Member Dies

Gallery
CSHSE Founding Member Dies
UncategorizedCSHSE Founding
Member Dies
Jean Macht, founding member of CSHSE and NOHS died
October 24, 2018. The CSHSE Board sends our condolences to
the family and acknowledges the tremendous insight and vision
she had for the human service profession [...]Read MoreReasons
For Accreditation
Gallery
Reasons For Accreditation
AccreditationReasons For Accreditation
CSHSE is committed to improving the quality, consistency, and
relevance of human service education programs and assuring
best practices in Human Service Education through evidence-
based standards and a peer-review accreditation process. Our
accredited programs demonstrate: [...]Read MoreAbout UsOur
HistoryOur MissionBoard of DirectorsCHEACSHSE
BylawsSelf-Study ReadersCSHSE Logo PolicyMEMBERS AND
ACCREDITED PROGRAMS CSHSE MembersCSHSE
Accredited ProgramsACCREDIT YOUR
PROGRAMStandardsMembership Application and FeesMember
BenefitsPolicies and ProcessesResource
LinksFAQMEMBERSHIP RESOURCES Member
HandbookAccreditation Forms and TemplatesSelf-Study
Instructional ResourcesCSHSE BulletinPublicationsCONTACT
US
CSHSE
3337 Duke Street
Alexandria, VA 22314

571-257-3959
Copyright © 2018 | Privacy Policy | Sitemap Website
Designed & Developed | Search Optimization by ASCENT
Management, LLC.
CSHSE Members, the member only section will be active soon.
Shortly you will receive an email with all the details you need
to access:Member only pagesMembership online payment
If you have any questions or need to make a credit card payment
for your membership, please call 571-257-3959 or send us an
email.

Loading...
Skip to Main Content

Folder Access and HelpSign In
Folder
PreferencesLanguageEnglishDeutschEspañolΕλληνικάFran
çaisItalianoMagyarPolskiPortuguês (Brasil)Português
(Portugal)РусскийTürkçe‫يبرع‬简简简简简简简简简简简가가가简简简简
简简简HrvatskiČeštinaBahasa
Indonesia‫ִע‬ ‫ב‬
ְ ‫ִר‬ ‫ב‬‫ת‬RomânăSlovenskiSlovenčinaNederlandsSvenska‫ف‬
‫یررا‬SuomiDanskNorskAsk a Librarian
Browse Resources toolbar
Thoreau: New Search
Journal & Book Finder
Databases A-Z
How to Search
Get Library Help
citation_instruction

Accessibility Information and Tips Revised Date: 07/2015A
critical call for connecting students and professional
associations
Search
Search Thoreau
@ Walden University Library
EBSCOhost Search
Select a Field (optional)
Select a Field
(optional)
TX All Text
AU Author

TI Title
SU Subject Terms
SO Journal
Title/Source
AB Abstract
IS ISSN
IB ISBN
join operator
AND
AND
OR

NOT
Select a Field
(optional)
TX All Text
AU Author
TI Title
SU Subject Terms

SO Journal
Title/Source
AB Abstract
IS ISSN
IB ISBN
join operator
AND
AND
OR
NOT

Select a Field
(optional)
TX All Text
AU Author
TI Title
SU Subject Terms
SO Journal
Title/Source
AB Abstract
IS ISSN

IB ISBN
Add RowRemove
RowBasic SearchAdvanced Search
Search History
Walden University Library

Result ListRefine SearchResult
1
of
1
CitationTitle:A critical call for connecting students and
professional associations.Authors:Simon, Shirley R.. School of
Social Work, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, US,
[email protected]Webster, Joyce A.. Jewish Child and Family
Services, Chicago, IL, US, [email protected]Horn, Karen.
Hillside East Academy, Chicago, IL, US,
[email protected]Address:Simon, Shirley R., School of Social
Work, Loyola University Chicago, 820 North Michigan Avenue,
Chicago, IL, US, 60611, [email protected]Source:Social Work
with Groups: A Journal of Community and Clinical Practice,
Vol 30(4), 2007. pp. 5-19.NLM Title Abbreviation:Soc Work
GroupsPage Count:15Publisher:US : Haworth PressOther
Publishers:United Kingdom : Taylor & FrancisISSN:0160-9513
(Print)
1540-9481 (Electronic)Language:EnglishKeywords:students,
professional associations, connections, Master of Social Work
students, Association for the Advancement of Social Work with
GroupsAbstract:This article describes a model aimed at
facilitating connections between students and professional

associations. It assesses efforts to link Master of Social Work
(MSW) students and the Association for the Advancement of
Social Work with Groups (AASWG), and delineates the
rationale, underlying assumptions, process, impact, and critical
factors. Suggestions are offered for creating and enhancing
connections between these two constituencies. (PsycINFO
Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)Document
Type:Journal ArticleSubjects:*Graduate Students; *Professional
Organizations; *Social Casework; *Social Workers; Social
Work EducationPsycINFO Classification:Professional Education
& Training (3410)Population:HumanAge Group:Adulthood (18
yrs & older)Format Covered:ElectronicPublication
Type:Journal; Peer Reviewed JournalRelease
Date:20071022Correction Date:20100322Digital Object
Identifier:http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1300/J009
v30n04_02Accession Number:2007-14483-002Number of
Citations in Source:16Database:
PsycINFOResult ListRefine SearchResult
1
of
1
Toggle panel
Document Viewing Options:
Detailed Record

Similar Results
Find Similar Results
using SmartText Searching.
Toggle panel
ToolsGoogle DriveAdd to folderPrintE-
mailSaveCiteExportCreate NotePermalinkShare

Social Work EducationVol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–38.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Social Work EducationVol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–38.docx

Similar to Social Work EducationVol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–38.docx (20)

More from samuel699872

More from samuel699872 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Social Work EducationVol. 23, No. 4, August 2004, pp. 365–38.docx