MODERN SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

To
Elizabeth, Emma, Richard
Adam, Amy, Sara
 MODERN SOCIAL WORK
PRACTICE

Teaching and Learning in Practice Settings

MARK DOEL and STEVEN M. SHARDLOW

First published 2005 by Ashgate Publishing

Published 2016 by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright # 2005 Mark Doel and Steven M. .Shardlow

Mark Doel and Steven M. Shardlow have asserted their right under the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the authors of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used
only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Doel, Mark
Modern social work practice : teaching and learning in
practice settings. – 3rd ed.
1.Social work education 2.Social services – Problems,
exercises, etc. 3.Social case work – Problems, exercises,
etc. 4.Social workers – In-service training
I.Title II.Shardlow, Steven, 1952- III.Doel, Mark. New
social work practice
361.3 02 00683

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Doel, Mark.
Modern social work practice : teaching and learning in practice settings / by Mark
Doel and Steven M. Shardlow. - 3rd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-7546-4120-1 (hardback) - ISBN 0-7546-4121-X (pbk.)
1. Social work education. 2. Social service- -Problems, exercises, etc. 3. Social
casework- -Problems, exercises, etc. 4. Social workers- -In-service training. I.
Shardlow, Steven, 1952- II. Title.
HV11.D64 2005
361.3 02 00683- -dc22
2004021202
ISBN 9780754641209 (hbk)
ISBN 9780754641216 (pbk)
Typeset by Tradespools, Frome, Somerset
Contents

List of figures and tables xiii

Acknowledgements xiv
Introduction xv
Modern social work practice: the more things change . . . ? xv
Modern practice learning xvii
The content, structure and purpose of the book xix
Learning xxi
In conclusion xxv
Visit our website xxvi

Part I Foundations of Practice 1–46

CONTEXT: New opportunities for practice learning 3

Where does social work take place? 4
Teaching and supervising the student’s practice learning 4
Benefits of supervising students 6
The Learning Agreement 7
Support for practice learning 9
The tide 10

Chapter 1 Knowing the service user and carer 11–21

About Activity 1 Licensed to learn 11

Activity 1 Licensed to learn 13
Teaching notes: Knowing the service user and carer 16
Opportunities 16
Learning notes: Knowing the service user and carer 18
Who is the ‘client’? 18
The individuality of service users and carers 18
The strengths model 19
The relationship between social workers, services users and
carers 20
Service user and carer control 21

v
vi Contents

Assessment notes: Knowing the service user and carer 21

Further reading 21

Chapter 2 Knowing your self 23–33

About Activity 2 Viewpoint 23

Activity 2 Viewpoint 25
Teaching notes: Knowing your self 27
Opportunities 27
Examples 27
Learning notes: Knowing your self 29
Use of self 29
World-views 30
World-views of service users, carers and other professionals 32
Assessment notes: Knowing your self 32
Further reading 33

Chapter 3 Knowing the role 35–46

About Activity 3 Boundaries 35

Activity 3 Boundaries 37
Teaching notes: Knowing the role 39
Opportunities 39
Different expectations 39
Example 40
Developing a style 41
Learning notes: Knowing the role 42
Process and outcome 43
Occupational control and status 43
Metaphors for the social work role 44
The student role 44
Assessment notes: Knowing the role 45
Further reading 45

Part II Direct Practice 47–117

CONTEXT: Interprofessional learning and practice 49

Terminology 49
Issues concerning interprofessional practice 50
Power and status differentials 52
Interprofessional collusion 52
Issues around interprofessional learning 53
The social work contribution in multidisciplinary teams 53
 Contents vii

Chapter 4 Preparation 55–65

About Activity 4 Starting out 55

Activity 4 Starting out 57
Teaching notes: Preparation 59
Opportunities 59
Expectations 59
Existing networks 59
Induction 60
Learning notes: Preparation 61
First impressions 61
First contacts 61
Attitude 62
Taboo topics 63
Ad hoc contacts 63
Preparing your learning 63
Making your learning explicit 64
Assessment notes: Preparation and the portfolio 64
Further reading 65

Chapter 5 Generating options 67–76

About Activity 5 Open ends 67

Activity 5 Open ends 69
Teaching notes: Generating options 71
Opportunities 71
Recognizing and interrupting patterns 71
Learning notes: Generating options 74
Spirit of enquiry 74
Positive reframing 74
Non-verbal and symbolic communication 75
Action techniques 75
Assessment notes: Generating options 76
Further reading 76

Chapter 6 Making assessments in partnership 77–87

About Activity 6 Hold the front page 77

Activity 6 Hold the front page 79
Teaching notes: Making assessments in partnership 81
Opportunities 81
Your role in teaching about assessment 81
Assessment and intervention 82
Learning notes: Making assessments in partnership 83
Assessment: a note of caution 83
Feedback from Hold the front page 83
viii Contents

A wide range of assessments 84

Assessment and government guidance 84
Working in partnership with people 85
Holistic assessments 85
Assessments and interventions 86
Assessment notes: Making assessments in partnership 87
Further reading 87

Chapter 7 Working in and with groups 89–98

About Activity 7 No-one is an island 89

Activity 7 No-one is an island 91
Teaching notes: Working in and with groups 93
Opportunities 93
Balancing various needs 93
Fears about groupwork 94
Other opportunities 94
Teamwork 95
Learning notes: Working in and with groups 96
Social action 96
Links between groups and teams 96
Meetings and sessions 97
Learning from groups and teams 97
Making the work more visible 98
Assessment notes: Working in and with groups 98
Further reading 98

Chapter 8 Working in difficult situations 99–117

About Activity 8 Difficult behaviour in groups 99

Activity 8 Difficult behaviour in groups 101
The article – Difficult behaviour in groups 103
Further reading 117

Part III Agency Practice 119–176

CONTEXT: Creative practice and procedural requirements 121

Principles underpinning procedures 121
Problems with procedures 122
The retreat from professionalism? 123
Creative practice 124
Procedural and creative practice 126
 Contents ix

Chapter 9 Making priorities 127–138

About Activity 9 Home truths 127

Activity 9 Home truths 129
Teaching notes: Making priorities 132
Ranking criteria 132
Opportunities 133
Learning notes: Making priorities 134
Live and let live 134
Rationing 136
Assessment notes: Making priorities 138
Further reading 138

Chapter 10 Managing resources 139–150

About Activity 10 Travel agent 139

Activity 10 Travel agent 142
Teaching notes: Managing resources 143
Opportunities 143
Key influences on holiday choice 143
Learning notes: Managing resources 145
Care management 145
Resources and change 147
Managing your time 148
Assessment notes: Managing resources 149
Further reading 150

Chapter 11 Accountability 151–162

About Activity 11 Held to account 151

Activity 11 Held to account 153
Teaching notes: Accountability 156
Opportunities 156
Learning notes: Accountability 157
Personal accountability 157
Accountability to the employer 157
Accountability to other organizations 158
Public accountability 158
Accountability to service users and carers 159
Professional accountability 160
Legal accountability 161
Assessment notes: Accountability 162
Further reading 162
x Contents

Chapter 12 Whistleblowing 163–176

About Activity 12 The myth of Sisyphus 163

Activity 12 The myth of Sisyphus 165
Teaching notes: Whistleblowing 170
Opportunities 170
Learning notes: Whistleblowing 172
The legal position 172
The good, the bad and the ugly 173
Whistleblowing in social work 174
Assessment notes: Whistleblowing 175
Further reading 176

Part IV Themes of Practice 177–258

CONTEXT: Evidence-based practice 179

Putting evidence-based practice into effect 181
The empirical orientation 182
The pragmatic orientation 184
The research-minded/research-aware orientation 185
Critical appraisal: using evidence from research in practice 188

Chapter 13 Working with risk 191–205

About Activity 13 Dial ‘D’ for Danger 191

Activity 13 Dial ‘D’ for Danger 193
Teaching notes: Working with risk 195
Opportunities 196
Learning notes: Working with risk 197
Risk assessment 197
Typology of risks 199
Risk management 199
Risk avoidance 200
Assessment notes: Working with risk 203
Further reading 205
 Contents xi

Chapter 14 Anti-oppressive practice 207–218

About Activity 14 The drawbridge 207

Activity 14 The drawbridge 209
Teaching notes: Anti-oppressive practice 210
Helping the student to learn from The drawbridge 210
Opportunities 212
Anti-oppressive practice teaching 213
Learning notes: Anti-oppressive practice 214
Language 214
Using your learning from The drawbridge 214
Power and empowerment 216
Diversity and difference 216
Assessment notes: Anti-oppressive practice 217
Further reading 218

Chapter 15 Law-informed practice 219–232

About Activity 15 A–Z of the law – spirit and letter 219

Activity 15 A–Z of the law – spirit and letter 221
Teaching notes: Law-informed practice 224
Linking social work and the law 224
The growing importance of the law for professional education 226
Opportunities 227
Seeking legal expertise 228
Learning notes: Law-informed practice 230
The approval–disapproval continuum 231
Assessment notes: Law-informed practice 232
Further reading 232

Chapter 16 Generalist and specialist practice 233–246

About Activity 16 Essence of social work 233

Activity 16 Essence of social work 235
Teaching notes: Generalist and specialist practice 238
What is generalist practice? 238
Generic social work practice 239
The significance of the generalist–specialist debate 239
Opportunities 240
Learning notes: Generalist and specialist practice 241
The common base of social work practice 241
What is a specialism? 242
Forms of specialism 242
Generalism and specialism – the future 245
Assessment notes: Generalist and specialist practice 245
Further reading 246
xii Contents

Chapter 17 Comparative practice 247–258

About Activity 17 View from another place . . . another time 247

Activity 17 View from another place . . . another time 249
Teaching notes: Comparative practice 253
Opportunities 253
Learning notes: Comparative practice 254
Dimensions of comparison 254
Assessment notes: Comparative practice 258
Further reading 258

Appendix: National Occupational Standards 259

Glossary of acronyms 265

Glossary of terms 267
Bibliography 275
Index 293
List of figures and tables

Figures

I.1 The contents of Modern Social Work Practice in the style of the
London Underground xxiii
I.2 The learning-practice escalator 9
12.1 The myth of Sisyphus – the boulders 165
IV.1 A categorization of differing orientations towards research 181
IV.2 The parallel processes of ‘doing social work’ and ‘doing research’ 187
13.1 ‘The social worker cannot win?’ by Kevin Kallaugher 204

Tables

IV.1 Simplified representation of some key differences between health

and social care 184
13.1 Strengths/hazards analysis 198
13.2 An example of a risk assessment harm–benefit analysis 201
14.1 Student responses to The drawbridge at the start of their social work
training (n ¼ 25). Numbers of rankings by each character in the story 215

xiii
Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jessica Kingsley Publishers for allowing us to use an

adapted version of the Glossary from Learning to Practise Social Work: international
approaches, edited by Shardlow, S.M. and Doel, M. (2002). Acknowledgement is also
due to Kevin Kallaugher for allowing us to reprint his cartoon (p. 204).
Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to thank all those people who have
helped to develop the materials in this book. We hope that the materials will be
well-used and further refined, so that we can all continue to learn about good social
work practice.

xiv
Introduction

This book is about social work practice, with a particular focus on teaching and
learning social work in practice settings. We hope that readers will find it a useful
and entertaining guide to becoming a social worker. Its first appearance as Social
Work Practice was in 1993, published by Gower in a workbook format. We updated
and revised this in 1998 to produce The New Social Work Practice. This current
incarnation, Modern Social Work Practice, follows the same pattern as its parent and
grandparent, though it has been rewritten to take account of the fast-changing
world of social work practice.
As the authors, we cannot presume exactly who you, our reader, is. If you are a
student of social work you may be using this book independently to support your
learning or, more likely, with a person who is guiding your learning in the agency
setting. If you are the person who has responsibility for helping a student learn
about social work, you may be a practitioner, manager, service user or carer. Your
location may be a statutory agency, such as a social services department, a
voluntary, not-for-profit organization, a private agency, a user-led agency or,
indeed, a place in which social work is not a prime activity. Whatever the site for the
student’s practice learning, it is important to remember that your task is to help the
student learn about social work, not to train them to do your job. In other words, the
specific work in which you are engaged is but one example of practice. Your
perspective as the student’s guide or teacher is immensely valuable, but it should be
set in the broader context.
Helping students to move from the specific of your location to the general of
social work practice, and back to different specifics (not just yours), is a demanding
skill. You may not be wearing the ‘L’ plates, but this is going to be a learning
experience for you, too, no matter how experienced you are.

Modern social work practice: the more things change . . . ?

The opportunity to rewrite and update a book of this kind is also an occasion to
make a statement of what constitutes ‘modern social work practice’. What should
social workers know? How should they be able to ‘do’ it? The modern curriculum
for social work reflects current political as well as professional and service user

xv
xvi Introduction

concerns, and it has been an interesting exercise to decide what changes to make in
the book’s coverage. Indeed, if the lifespan of the qualifications in social work in the
United Kingdom is an indicator, we can see that the pace of change is increasing,
with the Certificate of Qualification in Social Work (CQSW) surviving for over
twenty years and the Diploma in Social Work (DipSW) for barely ten. At this rate,
we could expect the new social work award in the UK (the undergraduate degree)
to withstand a mere five years!
The content of practice learning for social work arises, of course, from the
expectations of government, employers and regulators, as well as from those who
practise social work and those who use it. Occupational standards set by employers’
organizations, such as TOPSS in England (TOPSS, 2002), the requirements of
government departments, such as the Department of Health (DH, 2002), statements
from higher education bodies such as the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA, 2002),
and professional codes of practice, such as those of the GSCC (2002a) and the
respective care councils for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, all shape the final
curriculum for social work education and training.
Social work is a highly contextual form of practice; in particular, the organizations
in which social work is practised have a significant impact on the shape of that
practice. Currently, these organizations are experiencing an extraordinary rate of
change, and the highly fluid and unpredictable organizational context can sap
practitioners’ and managers’ energies. In addition, at a political level, the
expectation of speedy, observable improvements is a further pressure, especially
since, in reality, the horizons for change on this scale are far-reaching.
Yet, amidst the whirlwinds of change, there is much that endures. We might
transform our wardrobe with increasing frequency, but the body beneath hardly
alters. One constant is the mission of social work to combat social injustice and
oppression by working with people who are at the margins of society, and the
commitment of practitioners to that mission. Almost a century ago, Clement Attlee
(1920) claimed that social workers will always be agitators. Of course, we cannot
expect to receive thanks for our ability to remind the wider society of the effects of
inequality and poverty. No change there. Competent social work practice continues
to depend on an unusually broad, and often contested, repertoire of knowledge,
values and skills – not just in direct work with individuals, families, groups and
communities, but also in negotiating complex organizations. Capable social workers
continue to need qualities that help them cope with dilemma and doubt on a daily
basis, and to maintain their intellectual curiosity.
In these circumstances, it is crucial that we find ways of making social work
attractive to those who are not yet committed. In a careers choice survey of more
than 1000 students conducted by the Careers Research Advisory Committee in 2003,
17 out of 100 students favoured management as a career choice, 13 chose banking
and financial services, and 12 sales and marketing. Careers in the public sector were
the least popular, with only 3 out of 100, and just 1 out of 100 choosing ‘social
healthcare’ (Times Higher Educational Supplement, 13 June 2003). Any literature which
captures the imagination of possible practitioners is to be welcomed. We hope this
book will be a contribution to the mission to explain social work to a wider
constituency.
 Introduction xvii

It is not surprising that there is an enduring anxiety in the profession about its
survival. However, contrary to some of the grim audits on offer (for example, Jones,
2001), there is a strong case to be made that social work’s values are being absorbed
by other professions; for example, the occupational therapy described in
Occupational Therapy Without Borders (Kronenberg et al., 2004) is surely social
work by another name? Indeed, social work values, such as celebrating diversity
and difference, are increasingly those of the wider society.
So, whatever the current wardrobe of occupational standards, the fundamentals
change only very slowly. Indeed, in those aspects of life where real change would be
most welcome (poverty and structural discrimination, for example) the pace of
change is imperceptible. Service users continue to experience poverty, injustice and
distress – and many continue to survive these experiences with resourcefulness and
determination. It is important to remember these constants in the midst of the
frenetic activity which is sometimes mistaken for purposefulness.
Speaking in 1981 at an inauguration ceremony at Birmingham Polytechnic (now
the University of Central England), Dame Eileen Younghusband reviewed several
decades of social work education, training and practice. In addition to looking back
over several decades, she also looked forward to the year 2001:

There will be some things which won’t change. What really matters, in the last resort, what people
in perplexity, sorrow or disgrace really want is commitment to them as people – staying on the job,
being ‘for them’, being understanding and determined to help them, and having the imagination,
the knowledge, the confidence and the resources to do so. It is that, more than anything else, that I
hope will be alive and active in the year 2001.

Her vision for the year 2001 is just as true for the year 2021 and beyond.

Modern practice learning

The new social work qualification has been introduced to ensure that the training of social work
students will result in higher standards of service delivery to the people who will rely on them in
times of need, and ensure that graduates are confident and competent to practise on qualification.
We have always made it clear that the emphasis of training must be on practice and the practical
relevance of theory. This means that students need a plentiful and varied supply of good
opportunities to practise and learn safely. The success of the new qualification depends on this.
(Stephen Ladyman, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Community, Foreword to Practice
Learning Taskforce, First Annual Report, 2004)

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is. (Anon)

There is no doubt that the place of practice teaching and practice learning in social
work has been transformed over the last two decades. Students themselves have
long reported favourably about their placements, and this message has been heard
in the arrangements for social work education, as indicated by Stephen Ladyman’s
xviii Introduction

statement (above) and by the increased resources available to practice learning. For
example, the Practice Learning Taskforce (PLTF), which was established to increase
the opportunities for practice learning in England and Wales, disbursed £400 000 to
support seventy-two regional development projects in a five-month period up to
March 2003 (PLTF, 2004: 5).
There are early indications that the arrangements for practice learning in the new
social work award in the UK will offer a broader range of sites for students’ learning
(Kearney, 2003). Many programmes are taking the opportunity of an increase in the
number of days in practice learning to introduce a range of opportunities, often at
three or even four separate sites.1 The hope is that students will experience ‘non-
traditional’ learning, sometimes in sites which are not specifically social work, and
from a broad range of teachers, which will include service users and carers. This is a
tremendous opportunity and one which other professional groups are likely to
follow with keen interest. In the field of occupational therapy, for example,
Fieldhouse (2003) has noted the opportunity for developing practice by learning from
service users, in this instance via the impact of a gardening group on the mental
health, well-being and social networking of the group members.
The emphasis on practice learning follows the successful evolution of ‘student
supervision’ to ‘practice teaching’ over the last few decades. In both its
conceptualization and its application, practice learning has been transformed,
with the role of the practice teacher now firmly established as that of a teacher and
mentor, not just an experienced role model. The opportunities for continuing
professional development for practitioners (via the Practice Teaching Award in the
UK) have consolidated these changes, even if they have not been able to prevent a
haemorrhage of practice teachers into social work management. There is relatively
little on offer for managers, by way of education and training, so we should not be
surprised that practice teaching courses have been seen as a valuable foundation for
staff supervision.
Modern practice learning is, therefore, at an exciting stage of development, with
the expansion into new learning sites and the potential for students to develop new
and different services. However, we should not underestimate the challenge of
increasing the numbers of opportunities and sites for practice learning, with
shortfalls in England calculated in June 2004 as running at anything up to a
requirement for a 140 per cent increase in provision by 2006–7 (PLTF website). We
must also ensure that the practice community learns from these experiences, since
we still know too little about what actually occurs in the detail of practice tutorials2
or about the suitability of different kinds of arrangement for practice teaching and
learning. The Practice Learning Taskforce noted in its 2004 Annual Report (p. 9) that
‘there is no common agreement between agencies, particularly Local Authorities,
regarding which staff are suitably qualified or experienced to take on the practice
assessor/teacher role’.

1
We use the term ‘site’ to describe the place where practice learning takes place; this is different
from ‘practice learning opportunity’ which may not necessarily be a physical location.
2
Our preferred name for ‘student supervision session’, though we use both terms in this book.
 Introduction xix

It will also be important to be vigilant that the emphasis on the practical relevance
of theory does not lead to the thinking aspects of social work being eclipsed by the
doing aspects. As one student commented about theory-less practice, ‘it’s like an
airfix kit without the instruction book’. We hope this book provides both the kit and
the instructions.
These themes continue to be explored in greater detail throughout the book, and
especially in the introduction to Part I.

The content, structure and purpose of the book

Modern Social Work Practice builds on features from Social Work Practice and The New
Social Work Practice. The four parts remain in place: Foundations of Practice; Direct
Practice; Agency Practice; and Themes of Practice. Taken together these parts define
a curriculum for practice learning. However, the Introductions to each of the four
parts reflect the changing context of practice: new opportunities for practice
learning; interprofessional learning and practice; creative and procedural practice;
and evidence-based practice.
We have also introduced new topics which reflect developments in social work
practice, such as Whistleblowing and Working with Risk. That is not to suggest that
these are new concerns; the complex dilemmas of what to do when faced with
questionable practices and the need to be aware of, and balance, risks are hardly
novel. However, they are attracting increased attention, as evidenced in the
occupational standards for social work (TOPSS, 2002) and the Benchmark Statement
for social work (QAA, 2002).

Activities

Readers of Social Work Practice and The New Social Work Practice have commented
favourably on the technique of having one substantial activity to introduce the
theme of a chapter, and this approach has been maintained for Modern Social Work
Practice. Most of the activities are new to this book, and each is introduced with its
purpose, a suggested method to use it and ideas for variations on this method. In
addition, we give consideration to how students from other related professions
could use the activity, either together with social work students or independently,
and we link the theme of the chapter to occupational standards for social work.
These standards underpin the new social work award in England and Wales,
though they have wider relevance to the role and tasks of social workers.
Although individual activities can be used on a one-off basis, it is better to
become acquainted with the whole beforehand, and to return to activities at
different stages in the student’s learning. The topics in Parts I, II and III are in no
strict chronological order, and the themes in Part IV run through the whole of social
work practice. A knowledge of the whole curriculum for general practice will help
when searching for the right activity for the occasion. A ‘teachable moment’
xx Introduction

happens when the learner is particularly receptive to the teaching, and a well-timed
activity can help these moments to occur.
The activities which introduce each chapter in this book are designed to help
participants to explore issues in practice as well as enhance technical skills. They
develop an ability to learn, which we believe is a necessary condition to develop a
competence to practise. Work-based supervisors, practice teachers and assessors
need to make links between the learning which takes place via these activities and
the student’s direct practice with people using the agency’s services.
Sometimes it is helpful to translate an activity into circumstances which reflect the
particular practice setting. This has its value. However, it is also true that it is easier
to ‘think outside the box’ if you are not actually in it! In other words, new kinds of
situation are less likely to rely on established patterns of thinking and doing. We
return to this theme later in the section on simulated learning.
The activities can be used to assess students’ practice learning as well as to
develop it. In particular, revisiting an activity towards the end of a period of
practice learning is a good way of measuring changes in the understanding of
practice. However, participants should always be clear about the purpose of any
activity and what uses may be made of it.
Following each activity are two sections – one about teaching and the other about
learning, and each related to the theme of the chapter. The teaching notes consider
likely opportunities for the topic of the chapter and explore the topic in greater
detail. The learning notes conclude with a section about issues of assessment in the
topic under consideration, with pointers to further reading. Although each set of
notes addresses the reader as the teacher and the student respectively, you will
nevertheless find it helpful to read both sets of notes, whatever your role, since there
is considerable overlap between teaching and learning. However, just occasionally
there is a suggestion in the guidance for the activity that you do not read the notes
until after the activity has been completed.

Terminology

Developments in practice have their parallels in changes in terminology. The term

‘service user’ has superseded ‘client’. The name used to describe the person who
facilitates the student’s learning in practice settings and assesses their ability has
also seen changes. This person was for many years known as the student supervisor
(field instructor in North America). Towards the end of the 1980s ‘student
supervisor’ was replaced with the term ‘practice teacher’ in a move which reflected
the increasing importance of the educational function of supervision with students,
and to differentiate it from staff supervision. (In North America, practice teacher is a
term already in use, but it describes a person who teaches social work practice in the
college setting.)
With the introduction of a new social work award in the UK, there have been
some references to ‘practice assessors’, presumably as a desire to emphasize the
assessment function in this role. This change has not been embraced by the field,
with some suspicion that the educational aspects of the role are devalued by this
new term, and it is too early to know whether the term will gain currency. Even so,
 Introduction xxi

new arrangements for practice learning will challenge us to reconsider who might
take on the role of ‘practice teacher’, with students likely to experience some day-to-
day supervision with people who are not social workers, including service users
and carers. This book is written with these new developments in mind.
We have included a glossary towards the end of the book, as a guide to
terminology and acronyms (pages 265–274).

Learning

. . . and participation

The kind of activity-based learning advocated in this book is participative in a

number of ways. Practice teachers and practice learners are undergoing a similar
process, whilst recognizing their different roles. The teacher is not a repository of
knowledge who fills the student’s empty vessel, but rather a person with
considerable experience who is prepared to look at practice critically and
reflectively. This applies to the teacher’s own practice as well as the student’s.
Activity-based learning acknowledges that students bring knowledge, beliefs,
values and skills which will have a vital impact on their practice and, perhaps even
more crucial, on their ability to learn practice.
Those who use these activities must, therefore, be prepared to be open about their
own practice and experience. Learning flourishes in a creative and energetic climate,
but conjuring up this environment in a busy day is not easy. The activities can add
spice to student learning and staff development, and we would be surprised if they
did not have an impact on everyone’s practice, whether ‘teacher’ or ‘learner’.
In summary, the activities are participative in two ways: as a method of learning
which is engaging and active, but also as a process in which all participants
(whether they are styled teachers or learners) are learning.

. . . and simulation
There are different ways of learning. Learning by doing is one, and it has been used
heavily by student supervisors in the past. The student experiences direct practice
with people and learns ‘on the job’, with some preparation beforehand and
discussion afterwards with the supervisor. Although the student gets an authentic
experience of the coalface, this method of learning tends to perpetuate existing
practices – good and bad – and often fails to highlight the learning which may have
taken place. When learning opportunities come solely via direct practice experience
it is difficult to pace them in a way that can match the individual student’s needs
and abilities.
Live teaching in the same room uses direct practice with people as a learning
opportunity. The practice teacher can give direct feedback to students about their
work, and this has an immediate impact on the students’ practice in a way that is
not possible when the practice teacher is absent. The advantages of such immediate
xxii Introduction

feedback are clear, but the presence of the practice teacher has to be carefully
managed.
Another way of learning, illustrated by the activities in this book, is by using
materials which simulate practice situations. These can be very close approximations
to practice, like flight simulations used to train pilots, or activities which, by their
very distance from direct practice, help to cast it in a new light. Sometimes an
interesting mix of distance and proximity can be achieved by using metaphors, and
a number of activities in the book are based on metaphor.
We have described the advantages of using these kinds of teaching materials
elsewhere (Doel and Shardlow, 1996). Simulated practice is a relatively safe
environment for learning because the pace of action can be controlled and the
consequences of taking risks are not serious. In these circumstances, the learner can
feel free to experiment and be open to new approaches. The learner can also take the
time to reflect on the issues which underlie the practice, especially the assumptions
and values which might otherwise remain hidden or unchecked. The practice
teacher can regulate the degree of challenge facing the student, so that it is
sufficiently stretching to break new ground, but not so demanding that it breaks the
student’s confidence. Activities which simulate or represent aspects of social work
practice can accelerate learning by encouraging risk taking.
Opportunities for learning in practice settings remain scarce, so there are
economic as well as educational pressures to consider how opportunities for
simulated learning might be constructed independent of the practice learning site.
However, activities such as the ones in this book are no substitute for direct practice.
Direct practice is essential to put the learning from simulation into action, to test it
out and to experience a sense of imminence and of responsibility (Doel and
Shardlow, 1996).
One of the best-known examples of a successful simulacrum is the London
Underground map. This design icon has helped millions of people to navigate a
large city, and its success lies in its ability to distort the places it portrays, both in
terms of relative distance and position. The powers-that-be initially complained that
it was an inaccurate and misleading guide to London’s real complexities. However,
we – the travelling public – know the diagram’s success to lie in its emphasis on
connections and linkages, because it provides a mental map of the city – and one
that works.
The Underground map is an excellent analogy for the difference between social
work practice ‘on the ground’ and the ability to present that practice in an accessible
manner. The task of the teacher of practice is to create a design based on confidence
that an element of distortion can help learning rather than hinder it, because the
missing parts and the chaotic aspects can be fitted into the student’s mental map
sooner or later, once the basic linkages have been absorbed.
To illustrate this point, we can choose to present the contents of this book in the
conventional linear fashion (see pages v–xii) or as an Underground-style design (see
below).
Which do you find the more illuminating – the sequential presentation or the
design? Some will prefer the former, others the latter. Some might be attracted to the
idea of the design, but find its execution wanting (for instance, the reliance on grey
 Introduction xxiii

Figure I.1 The contents of Modern Social Work Practice in the style of the
London Underground

shading rather than colour is too obscure). Ask yourself why you are more attracted
to one format than another.
It is important to reflect on your own response to these different approaches
because, collectively, they mirror the different responses to styles of learning social
work practice. The search for variety is a vital ingredient of effective teaching and
learning. The topics in this book, and their attendant activities, should provide a
lively and diverse experience, but it is necessary to use them alongside other
methods as well, such as live teaching. It also helps to think of different
arrangements for the practice learning: one-to-one, small groups and so on. In
addition to gaining an understanding of preferred approaches to learning, it is
useful to broaden these preferences. Students should not cut themselves off from
certain kinds of learning experience.
xxiv Introduction

Making use of the opportunities to link simulation and live practice is part of the
art and science of teaching social work practice. The simulated activities provide a
common frame of reference to make sense of what happens in direct practice, and a
chance to rehearse practice dilemmas. We hope this will make the live practice a
more coherent experience for the student.

. . . and unlearning

Perhaps the biggest blocks to learning are the patterns of belief and behaviour
which have become so habitual that they are second nature. The opportunity to be a
teacher of practice is an opportunity to question your own practice and reflect on it.
This can be a difficult process because, as we become more ‘experienced’, we face
greater demands to appear competent and to deny the need for renewed learning.
We can become so good at preventing ourselves from learning that the consequence
is skilled incompetence – ‘people who are incredibly proficient at keeping themselves
from learning’ (Senge, 1990). If making mistakes is not acceptable, we spend so
much time covering them up that there is no time to learn from them.

. . . and reflection

The notion of supervision and practice teaching in social work needs to be informed
by ideas of professional education in general. With reference to this wider canvas
(which, for instance, includes musicians and architects), Schön describes the notion
of a practicum, and characterizes it as:

. . . a setting designed for the task of learning a practice. In a context that approximates a practice
world, students learn by doing, although their doing usually falls short of real-world work. They
learn by undertaking projects that simulate and simplify practice; or they take on real-world
projects under close supervision. (Schön, 1987: 37)

The view that existing professional knowledge cannot fit every case and that not
every problem has a right answer leads Schön to the notion of reflection-in-action,
by which ‘students must develop new rules and methods of their own’. It relates to
a central tenet of social work education – the concept of the transferability of
knowledge; in other words, learning is not about experiencing every possible
contingency (clearly an impossibility), but about making links and connections from
one situation to another, and by creating a greater whole out of the sum of the parts.
Practice learning for professional education transcends both the learning site and
the educational establishment, but must not become divorced from them. Schön
goes even further, suggesting that ‘in order to be credible and legitimate, a
practicum must become a world with its own culture, including its own language,
norms and rituals. Otherwise, it may be overwhelmed by the academic and
professional cultures that surround it’ (Schön, 1987: 170). This moves a long way
from the notion of professional education as an apprenticeship, in which
supervision is primarily concerned with regulating the student’s behaviour to fit
the requirements of work tasks. In this vision of practice learning, the student enters
 Introduction xxv

a distinct world created for the purpose of learning reflective practice. This is
essential in order to establish professional practitioners as opposed to skilled
technicians.
Crucially, supervision which nurtures the reflective student guarantees a future
for the reflective practitioner.

In conclusion

In Modern Social Work Practice we aim to provide a comprehensive guide for all
those engaged in teaching and learning social work practice, an aid to under-
standing and doing social work in the context both of the new curriculum and the
new health and social care landscape. The methods we use are similar to those
employed in Social Work Practice (Doel and Shardlow, 1993) and The New Social Work
Practice (Doel and Shardlow, 1998), using activities to introduce each separate
theme.
There are already texts which are specifically tailored to the new social work in
the UK, such as Parker and Bradley’s excellent series, Transforming Social Work
Practice, which is designed to help students to understand the various components
of the curriculum and we make reference to other books in each chapter as
appropriate. Modern Social Work Practice differs in its specific focus on the learning
which takes place in the practice learning site, and in its aim to include all of those
who are likely to be involved in this endeavour – students, teachers, assessors, users
and carers – in active, participatory learning.
Your comments have been very helpful in our work to transform The New Social
Work Practice into Modern Social Work Practice. Please let us know how you have
used this book and, should we feel inspired to revisit this yet again in another five
or so years, what aspects we should keep and what you would advise we change.

Mark Doel, Steven M. Shardlow,

Centre for Health and Social Care Salford Centre for Social Work
Research, Research,
Sheffield Hallam University, University of Salford,
Collegiate Crescent Campus, Allerton Building,
Sheffield S10 2BP Frederick Street,
email: [email protected] Salford M6 6PU
email: [email protected]
xxvi Visit our website

Visit our website

We have set up a website to complement the book. At the time of publication the
website contains materials that have been previously published by us but have not
been included in the present book. These materials include additional activities that
practice teachers and students may wish to use to promote and develop learning.
In the future we hope the site may be developed to provide other opportunities to
extend the work of this book.
The activities below appeared in Social Work Practice and The New Social Work
Practice and are now freely available for download from our website at:
www.shu.ac.uk/chscr/mswp.html

Believe It or Not Perfect Timing

Dear Mrs Sunderland, Did You Know? Playing Field
Endings Sanction
Essence of Social Work ’98 Signposts
Ethnic Realities Steps
Fruit Salad Sticky Moments
Gulliver’s Travels Supervision - reflections
Headlines Taboo
In My View Tainted Spectacles
Ladders and Snakes Tree
Left Hand Column Topical Islands
Mapping the Work Whanau
Matter of Fact: What is the Problem?
- Less Transplants for Black People Who Takes the Sugar?
- Emily Asserts her Manhood You Are What You Eat
Part I
Foundations of Practice
This page intentionally left blank
CONTEXT: New opportunities for
practice learning

Social work students learn much of their practice in field settings. In the United
Kingdom this kind of practice learning has long constituted 50 per cent of the
programme; this continues to be the case with the three-year social work
undergraduate degree which has become the minimum qualification for social
workers across the UK.
During the 1990s the content of practice learning in the UK was closely prescribed
by ‘six core competences’ (CCETSW, 1991a). This approach reflected the view that
students should focus on learning competences, which in turn centred on the
training function of placements. It emphasized what social workers do rather than
what social work is.
However, during this same period, the notion of the reflective practitioner also
gained ground. Here, learning about social work practice was based on principles of
adult learning, with an emphasis on the education, rather than the training, of
students, and a greater awareness of context and meaning. The tension between
these two approaches led many to polarize the debate. Eventually, however, a
holistic view of this apparent conflict emerged, which enabled students and practice
teachers to find ways to synthesize competence and context (Doel et al., 2002).
Taking the most common structure for the new award in the UK, the move from a
two-year period of study (the Diploma in Social Work) to a three-year under-
graduate degree is increasing the length of time for students to learn about social
work practice by over 50 per cent (on average, from 130 days to 200 days).1
However, it is not just the amount of time which has increased. A desire to see
changes in the kind of learning has been reflected in a change of language, such as
the development of the notion of a ‘practice learning opportunity’ rather than a
traditional placement. Although the occupational standards for social work practice
have to be taught, learnt and demonstrated, like the six core competences before
them, there is less prescription about how, when and where (TOPSS, 2002).

1
Although there are significant variations across the countries of the UK.

3
4 Foundations of Practice

Where does social work take place?

This may seem a strange question to ask, but the hegemony of local government
social services departments in England and Wales and social work departments in
Scotland since the early 1970s has created a very close association between the
profession of social work and the way in which social workers have been employed.
This has not necessarily been the case in many other countries, where examples can
be found of the service user’s own place of work acting as the main provider of
social work services. Now, the situation is changing in the UK. Increasingly, social
workers are being employed outside social services departments, which themselves
are finding new names such as ‘Social Care and Health’ and ‘Housing and Social
Care’. Yesterday’s vision of a unified social work service, epitomized by the social
services department, has transformed into a variety of forms, with significant
movements into health and education. This trend is likely to be accelerated by
developments such as the consolidation of children’s services across health,
education and social services. It is too early to say whether this will constitute a
dilution of social work (as it gets stirred into some kind of multiprofessional soup)
or whether this represents an opportunity to extend its influence and impact
(spicing the soup with its own distinctive flavour). Whether it is a case of diluting or
spicing, social work is no longer consolidated in one primary location.
This diversification opens the way for more flexibility. There are indications that
the search for practice learning opportunities is widening. In the state sector,
practice learning sites are likely to extend from the traditional base of social work
and social care settings into health, education, prisons, police and so on; in the
voluntary, independent and private sectors, these opportunities could extend to the
wider world of social welfare, including small, community projects and user-led
organizations. Social work students will therefore have more opportunities to learn
about social work processes in settings which are not primarily social work
agencies, even theatre groups (Billington and Roberts, 2002). The practice learning
opportunity should therefore do exactly what it says on the tin, and not be seen as
‘work experience’.
Students will also need to be broad-minded and creative in their approach, which
means not being ‘concerned that unless they have a certain type of placement their
employment prospects following the course will be hampered’ (Billington and
Roberts, 2002: 31). Employers, too, will need to be less restrictive in their selection
criteria for interviewing newly qualified social workers.

Teaching and supervising the student’s practice learning

There is a difference between being a good practitioner or an experienced service

user and being able to help somebody learn about good practice or to benefit from
your experience. There are already a number of excellent texts to guide this
transformation (Bogo and Vayda, 1987; Brown and Bourne, 1996; Caspi and Reid,
 New opportunities for practice learning 5

2002; Gardiner, 1989; Hawkins and Shohet, 2000; Shardlow and Doel, (forthcoming)
Shulman, 1999). However, despite the growing literature on practice learning,
Brodie’s (1993) verdict still stands: that we know very little about what actually
takes place within the supervision process generally or the practice tutorial
(supervision session) specifically. This also seems to be the case in North America:
‘much of what occurs in supervision goes on behind closed doors, leaving all
involved unsure whether the [student] is receiving quality education’ (Caspi and
Reid, 2002: 177). By and large, what happens between students and practice teachers
remains a very private affair. We hope that using the activities in this book together
with other students and their practice teachers will open up these processes. They
can, after all, remain confidential without being hidden.
The Code of Practice for practice teachers published by the National Organisation
for Practice Teaching (NOPT, 2000) is a useful checklist of the areas which teachers
and work-based supervisors need to consider, listed under these headings:

. Anti-oppressive / anti-discriminatory statement

. Preparation for placement
. Assessment
. Managing marginal or failing students
. Monitoring and evaluation
. Professional development.

In addition to referring to the NOPT code of practice and reading some of the wider
literature mentioned earlier, it is important that everyone involved in the student’s
learning asks themselves ‘What will make for a good practice learning experience?’.
Those who need to ask this question are not just the student, practice teacher/
assessor, work-based supervisor and college tutor, but also other team members,
agency managers and service users and carers involved in helping the student to
learn about practice.
Clarke et al.’s (2003: 110) findings in respect of the three key factors which help to
create a positive placement experience for student nurses are relevant to social
work, too:

. the ward was prepared for them and had some structure to support the
learning of the students
. staff were interested in them and they felt valued in their role;
. students were able to work with their mentor. (Clarke et al., 2003:110)

It is always important to discover what an individual considers important in the

context of this particular experience. This is increasingly significant as opportunities
for practice learning sites are sought outside traditional ‘placements’, in sites where
experience of social work students (or any from higher education) is limited. There
also needs to be agreement about how the aspirations for a good practice learning
experience will be transformed into concrete reality.
Some state that there has to be a ‘fit’ between student and teacher/supervisor.
However, ‘the establishment of a positive supervisory relationship is not solely
6 Foundations of Practice

based on the ‘‘fit’’ between supervisor and supervisee personalities’ (Caspi and
Reid, 2002: 124), whatever the term ‘fit’ might be taken to imply. It is erroneous to
assume that people with the same kind of biography (gender, ethnicity, age, and so
on) are bound to have a better fit, or that aiming for similarity is automatically
beneficial to learning. If a core social work value is concerned with the celebration of
diversity, let this be modelled in the student–teacher relationship.
Nor, in the excitement about the possibility of new learning opportunities, must
we overlook the potential pitfalls. These are likely to become most transparent when
making assessments of the student’s performance. Of the common mistakes noted
by Kadushin (1992: 365–68), the ‘contrast error’ may be the most frequent. This is the
mistake of comparing the student’s performance to other workers or to the
supervisor’s own standard, rather than to criteria that have been mutually agreed
(see the next section, ‘The Learning Agreement’) and which reflect the fact that this
is a student, not a practitioner.
In particular, new work-based supervisors and assessors need access to support
and consultation from experienced practice teachers, otherwise the following
findings are likely to be replicated:

[I] asked colleagues about their supervisory approaches and received two [kinds of] response. One
group said that they drew upon their own experiences as supervisees, attempting to do (or not do)
what their supervisors did with them. The second group said that they worked extemporaneously,
‘winging it’ and learning through trial and error. (Caspi and Reid, 2002: 173)

Current and future students deserve better.

Benefits of supervising students

There are many benefits to supervising students. A study by Shardlow et al. (2002)
found that practice teachers regarded supervision as an opportunity to reflect on
their own practice, which brought increased confidence and motivation to acquire
more knowledge of research and theory. Students were seen as providing a
challenge, in the best sense of the word.
Experienced practitioners can drift into automatic decision-making, in which
service users ‘are assessed as only needing services that the agency currently
provides within its mission and area of expertise’ (Wayne and Cohen, 2001: 18).
Teaching and supervising a student encourages practitioners to slow down, in order
to explain the thinking behind their actions. This helps not just the student, but also
the practitioner, to consider fresh approaches and new perspectives, and to question
any automatic tendencies in their own practice.
What are the economics of a student placement? Busy teams are often reluctant to
offer a placement to students because of pressure of work, but the balance of input
and output can work in favour of the agency (Shardlow, 1988). The memory of an
individual student who has been the centre of concern, and perhaps much angst,
sadly lives on well beyond the fonder remembrance of the twenty students who
 New opportunities for practice learning 7

gave the agency a good experience. In reality, the benefits to an agency or project of
those twenty students far outweigh the resources allocated to the one failing
student.
A mindset change is needed in order to perceive students as a potential resource,
able to develop innovative services for the agency. For example, practice teachers at
the 2003 annual workshops of the National Organization for Practice Teaching
(NOPT)2 described a number of innovations which included:

. direct work with children which otherwise would not have happened
. a tennis club at a mental health drop-in facility, where the practice teachers
were amazed at the take-up, including people who would not have been
thought as ‘sporty’ types
. a reminiscence group in an older people’s home – a service that was rarely
provided to residents by existing staff members
. in a general practitioner setting, a student who produced an information
booklet for survivors of suicide attempts, which was widely distributed
locally
. a student who designed a questionnaire about the team’s knowledge of the
Race Relations Amendment Act 2000 and led team discussion.

Of course, it is important that students do not fill the gaps of staff vacancies, since
they are not in the agency as a trainee employee; if a student is being used to reduce
a pile of referral forms, this is exploitation. With this caveat, there is no reason why
students cannot create or support services which might not otherwise have been
available. For example, a team might agree that its work would be improved with
more information about the way in which users experience its services, or there
might be recognition that a group for certain service users would be a valuable
addition to current activity. Indeed, students can be a major and positive force for
change, and there is evidence that this kind of proactive practice learning project is
welcomed by the students as well as by the users and carers who experience it
(Butler, 2004; Dent and Tourville, 2002; Muzumdar and Atthar, 2002; Underhill et
al., 2002).

The Learning Agreement

The key to a successful practice learning opportunity is a clear understanding of

expectations. That is not to say that every ‘t’ must be crossed and every ‘i’ dotted,
for there will be plenty of learning which is serendipitous. However, the basic
ground rules should be agreed beforehand. These include practical details, such as
expected times of attendance and resources available (desk, computer and so on),

2
There are also Scottish and Welsh Organizations for Practice Teaching, ScOPT and WOPT.
8 Foundations of Practice

and should also cover lines of accountability, expectations of the frequency and
kind of supervision and the kind and quantity of work available.
The agreement should outline expectations around assessment, examples of how
the student will gather and present their practice, and what will count as evidence
of their abilities. There needs to be agreement about how the student’s practice will
be observed; this will be important not just for their learning and the assessment of
their practice, but also to monitor the quality of service to the users.
Most important of all is agreement about what would happen if there are
difficulties, with concrete illustrations. Although there is a cultural reluctance to
discuss what might go wrong (‘tempting fate’), rehearsing potential issues makes
them less, not more, likely to happen.
It is illuminating to ask students to reflect on their experience so far, and this is
assisted if the student has already undertaken a personal learning audit as
preparation for the Learning Agreement (West and Watson, 2002). The following
account is taken from a post-qualifying portfolio, written by a qualified social
worker reflecting back a number of years on the first weeks and months on her
social work course:

When I started my Diploma in Social Work I was very naive and knew very little about social work.
As a consequence, to begin with, the course proved to be very difficult. I attended every lecture
with enthusiasm, taking in the knowledge provided like a sponge taking in water. The hardest part
to understand initially was the legal and theoretical framework. With perseverance and a lot of
background reading, alongside support from lecturers and a close friend reinforcing that I could do
it, I grasped the fundamental issues in this area and never looked back.

It is important to remember that the student might be in the midst of this stage, ‘the
course proving to be very difficult’, and that your expectations should be of a
student, not a qualified practitioner. The ‘escalator’ in Figure I.2 indicates a range of
responses from novice (towards the bottom of the escalator) to expert (towards the
top). Although progress is not linear, it is expected that the overall direction will be
upwards and, indeed, some students may well show natural abilities to operate
relatively far up the escalator.

Of course, assessing professional practice is not such an exact science that we can quantify the
precise proportion of examples at each step [of the escalator]. The notion of a dilemma or practice
issue is itself equivocal, as is the relative significance of any two such quandaries . . . [However],
this is a more authentic reflection of the shifting reality of professional practice than the illusion of
fixed competencies. (Doel et al., 2002: 148)

Teaching social work practice is more than a technical skill, and the context of
supervision has a significant impact. The supervisory process is influenced by your
perspectives, as teacher and student, as a man or a woman, by your age, ethnicity,
class, sexuality, faith, ability and so on. It is crucial that issues of power are
addressed openly in order to achieve practice learning which is anti-oppressive. In
some circumstances it is appropriate for students to have access to other resources –
for example, it might be worth considering a black mentor for a black student in a
 New opportunities for practice learning 9

Figure I.2 The learning-practice escalator

predominantly white agency. It is crucial that these questions are addressed at the
time of the learning agreement and not in the heat of any later moments.
The student’s experience needs to be integrated not just across class and field, but
also between the various practice learning opportunities. Current practice teachers
and work-based supervisors need to know about the student’s past practice
learning and help them to prepare for future learning. The development of new,
non-traditional settings suggests that students will need even more assistance in
transferring their learning from one situation to another (Cree and Macaulay, 2000).

Support for practice learning

We have noted that students learn about practice from direct placement for half of
their time on the course. In their attempts to integrate the learning in class and the
learning in the field they will rightly expect assistance from the practice teacher and
college tutor and, indeed, from any other people involved in their learning, such as
practice assessors, work-based supervisors, service users and carers. As different
kinds of opportunity are found for students, it will be important that the supports
for this new practice learning are reviewed, especially for people who are new to the
role. Perhaps group provision in the form of college-based seminars and workshops
will become more appropriate than the traditional tutor visit. The role of e-support
systems is also likely to increase; although most experiments in this area have been
with students (Quinny, 2004), it is likely that we will see an extension to practice
educators.
The tutor role has been somewhat neglected in the literature (Degenhardt, 2003).
Fortune and Abramson’s (1993) study concluded that tutors can offer more by
helping, advising and consulting with practice teachers and less by monitoring the
individual student. In a later study, the experiences of over 300 practice teachers
(field instructors) were analysed in relation to two models of liaison between college
and field – the ‘Intensive Model’ and the ‘Trouble-Shooting Model’ (Fortune et al.,
1995). Surprisingly, the evidence suggested that the practice teachers involved
preferred neither model over the other, suggesting that the Trouble-Shooting Model
10 Foundations of Practice

might, therefore, be a better use of scarce resources. The practice wisdom that the
student’s placement should be supported by consistent contact with a tutor perhaps
needs to be reconsidered in favour of more systematic methods of supporting
practice learning opportunities. Certainly, we need more evidence about what kinds
of support for practice learning are most effective.
At a strategic level, the partnerships offering the social work degree in the UK
will need to consider how a wide variety of smaller agencies and projects can be
best represented on formal bodies such as the partnership committees which advise
and support social work programmes.

The tide

In The New Social Work Practice (Doel and Shardlow, 1998), we noted:

It is possible to discern a number of ‘tides’ in the way the various aspects of the activity we call
supervision has, and continues, to progress. Currently, there is a pull between the educative
function, with an emphasis on the student as a learner and the use of a variety of teaching methods;
and the assessment function, with an increasing concentration on the student’s ability to
demonstrate competencies. In this latter case, there is a danger that the processes of teaching
and learning become buried beneath the weight of minutely detailed competencies.

We would like to keep the spotlight on the placement as a learning experience, not a
work experience. As Thomlison and Collins, (1995: 225) note, ‘The primary
responsibility of the (practice teacher) is to facilitate the student’s . . . educational
plan through the service delivery system of the agency’. The agency is primarily a
service organization, and the education of students for professional practice is not a
core concern. In these circumstances, practice teachers and assessors have a crucial
role to mediate the needs of the student with the requirements of the agency.
In this respect, the tide flows in the same direction as we noted in 1998. However,
the widening of practice learning opportunities and the increase in the amount of
time in field settings means that the tide carries a larger and more diverse flotilla,
with different support and service needs. It is a great opportunity for social work to
widen its experience and also to influence the work of others.
Bibliography

A Child in Trust. The Report of the Panel of Inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the
death of Jasmine Beckford (1985), London: London Borough of Brent.
AASW (2000), National Code of Ethics at: http://www.aasw.asn.au/servicing/
index.html.
Adams, A., Erath, P. and Shardlow, S.M. (eds) (2000), Fundamentals of Social Work in
Selected European Countries: present theory, practice, perspectives, historical and practice
contexts, Lyme Regis: Russell House.
Adams, A., Erath, P. and Shardlow, S.M. (eds) (2001), Key Themes in European Social
Work: theory, practice perspectives, Lyme Regis: Russell House.
Adams, D. (2003), The Salmon of Doubt: hitchhiking the galaxy for the last time, New
York: Harmony Books.
Adams, J. (1995), Risk, London: UCL Press.
Adams, R., Dominelli, L. and Payne, M. (2002), Social Work: themes, issues and critical
debates, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Alaszewski, A., Harrison, L. and Manthorpe, J. (1998), Risk, Health and Welfare,
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Allen, J.V. (2000), ‘Financial Abuse of Elders and Dependent Adults: the FAST
(Financial Abuse Specialist Team) approach’, Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect,
12(2): 85–91.
Alsop, A. and Vigars, C. (1998), ‘Shared Learning, Joint Training or Dual
Qualification in OT and SW: a feasibility study’, British Journal of Occupational
Therapy, 61(4): 146–52.
Asch, S.E. (1952), Social Psychology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Attlee, C. (1920), The Social Worker, London: Bell.
Bacon, F. (1605), The Oxford Francis Bacon (2000), ed. G. Rees and L. Jordine, vol. IV,
The Advancement of Learning, ed. M. Kiernan, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baird, P. (1991) ‘The Proof of the Pudding: a study of clients’ views of student
practice competence’, Issues in Social Work Education, 10(1–2): 24–50.
Ball, C., Harris, R., Roberts, G. and Vernon, S. (1988), The Law Report. Teaching and
assessment of law in social work education, Paper 4.1, London: Central Council for
Education and Training in Social Work.

275
276 Bibliography

Ball, C., Roberts, G., Trench, S. and Vernon, S. (1991), Teaching, Learning and
Assessing Social Work Law, London: Central Council for Education and Training in
Social Work.
Bamford, T. (1982), Managing Social Work, London: Tavistock.
Bamford, T. (2001), Commissioning and Purchasing, London: Routledge/Community
Care.
Banks, S. (1995), Ethics and Values in Social Work, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Banks, S. (1998), ‘Codes of Ethics and Ethical Conduct: a view from the caring
professions’, Public Money and Management, 18(1): 27–30.
Banks, S. (2002), ‘Professional Values and Accountabilities’, in R. Adams, L.
Dominelli, and M. Payne (eds), Critical Practice in Social Work, Basingstoke:
Macmillan, pp. 28–37.
Barclay, P.M. (1982), Social Workers: their role and tasks (The Barclay Report), London:
Bedford Square Press.
Barr, H. (2002), Interprofessional Education Today, Yesterday and Tomorrow, London:
LTSN for Health Sciences and Practice.
Barry, M. and Hallett, C. (2003), Social Exclusion and Social Work, London: Russell
House Publishing.
Bartlett, H. (1970), The Common Base of Social Work Practice, Washington DC:
National Association of Social Workers.
BASW (1975), A Code of Ethics for Social Work, Birmingham: British Association of
Social Workers. Revised 1986 and 1996.
Beck, U. (1990), Risk Society: towards a new modernity, London: Sage.
Behroozi, C.S. (1992), ‘Groupwork with Involuntary Clients: remotivating strate-
gies’, Groupwork, 5(2): 31–41.
Beresford, P. and Croft, S. (2001), ‘Service Users’ Knowledges and the Social
Construction of Social Work’, Journal of Social Work, 1(3): 295–316.
Bergmark, A. (1996), ‘Need, Allocation and Justice – on priorities in the social
services’, Scandinavian Journal of Social Welfare, 5(1): 45–56.
Billington, J. and Roberts, S. (2002), ‘Creative Practice Learning: exploring
opportunities to fulfil students’ requirements’, Practice, 14(4): 29–41.
Birnbaum, M. and Wayne, J. (2000), ‘Group Work Content in Foundation Generalist
Education: the necessity for change’, Journal of Social Work Education, 36: 347–56.
Blom-Cooper, L. (1985), A Child in Trust. The Report of the Panel of Inquiry into the
circumstances Surrounding the Death of Jasmine Beckford, London: London Borough
of Brent.
Bodenheimer, T. (1997), ‘The Oregon Health Plan – lessons for the nation’. New
England Journal of Medicine, 337(9): 651–56.
Bogo, M. and Vayda, E. (1987), The Practice of Field Instruction, Toronto: University of
Toronto Press.
Bramson, R. (1981) Coping with Difficult People, New York: Ballantine.
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (1990), ‘On Teaching and Applying the Law in
Social Work: it is not that simple’, British Journal of Social Work, 20(4): 333–53.
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (1992), ‘Honourable Intentions: partnership and
written agreements in welfare legislation’, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law,
6: 511–28.
 Bibliography 277

Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (1995), Empowering Practice in Social Care,

Buckingham: Open University Press.
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (1997) Practising Social Work Law (2nd edn),
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (2002), ‘Social Work and the Law’, in R. Adams, L.
Dominelli and M. Payne (eds), Social Work: themes, issues and critical debates,
Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 62–73.
Braye, S., Lebacq, M., Mann, F. and Midwinter, E. (2003), ‘Learning Social Work
Law: an enquiry-based approach to developing knowledge and skills’, Social Work
Education, 22(5): 479–92.
Brayne, H. and Carr, H. (2003), Law for Social Workers (8th edn), Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Brearley, P. (1982), Risk and Social Work: hazards and helping, London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
Breeforth, M. (1993), ‘Users are People’, in V. Williamson (ed.), Users First: the real
challenge for community care, Brighton: University of Brighton, pp. 19–27.
Brewer, C. and Lait, J. (1980), Can Social Work Survive ? London: Temple Smith.
Broadbent, G. and White, R. (2003), ‘Identifying Underlying Principles in Social
Work Law: a teaching and learning approach to the legal framework of decision
making’, Social Work Education, 22(5): 445–59.
Brodie, I. (1993), ‘Teaching from Practice in Social Work Education: a study of the
content of supervision’, Issues in Social Work Education, 13(2): 71–91.
Brown, A. and Bourne, I. (1996), The Social Work Supervisor, Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Bruggen, P. (1997), Who Cares? True Stories of the NHS Reforms, Charlebury: John
Carpenter Press.
Burr, V. (1995), An Introduction to Social Constructionism, London: Routledge.
Butler, A. (1994), ‘START (Students and Refugees Together): towards a model of
practice learning as service provision’, unpublished paper, Joint Social Work
Education Conference, Glasgow, 2004.
Butrym, Z. (1976), The Nature of Social Work, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Cabot, R.C. (1931), ‘Treatment in Social Casework and the Need for Tests of its
Success and Failure’, Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work (Fifty-
eighth Annual Session), Minneapolis, MN; Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
pp. 3–24.
Campbell, D.T. (1988), ‘The Experimenting Society’, in D.T. Campbell and E.S.
Overman (eds), Methodology and Epistemology for Social Sciences, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Campbell, S., Steiner, A., Robison, J., Webb, D., Raven, A. and Roland, M. (2003), ‘Is
the Quality of Care in General Medical Practice Improving? Results of a
longitudinal observational study’, British Journal of General Practice, 53(489): 298–
304.
Cannan, C., Berry, L. and Lyons, K. (1992), Social Work and Europe, Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
278 Bibliography

Caspi, J. and Reid, W.J. (2002), Educational Supervision in Social Work: a task-centred
model for field instruction and staff development, New York: Columbia University
Press.
CCETSW (1991a), Rules and Requirements for the Diploma in Social Work (Paper 30,
2nd edn), London: Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work.
CCETSW (1991b), Requirements and Guidance for the Approval of Agencies and the
Accreditation and Training of Practice Teachers (Paper 26.3, revised edn), London:
Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work.
CCETSW (1991c), Teaching, Learning and Assessing Social Work Law. Report of the Law
Improvements Project Group, London: Central Council for Education and Training
in Social Work.
CCETSW (1995), Assuring Quality in the Diploma in Social Work – 1, London: Central
Council for Education and Training in Social Work.
CCETSW (2000), Working in a Multi-disciplinary Setting in Northern Ireland, Belfast:
Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work.
Chand, A., Doel, M. and Yee, J. (1999), ‘Tracking Social Work Students’
Understanding and Application of Anti-discriminatory Practice’, Issues in Social
Work Education, 19(1): 55–74.
Chaskin, R.J. (2003), ‘Fostering Neighborhood Democracy: legitimacy and account-
ability within loosely coupled systems’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,
32(2): 161–89.
Children’s Rights Alliance for England (2003), The Case for a Children’s Rights
Commissioner for England, London: Children’s Rights Alliance for England.
Christie, A. and Kruck, E. (1998), ‘Choosing to Become a Social Worker: motives,
incentives, concerns and disincentives’, Social Work Education, 17(1): 21–34.
Christie, A. and Weeks, S. (1998), ‘Life Experience: a neglected form of knowledge in
social work education and practice’, Practice, 10(1): 55–68.
Clark, C.L. (2000), Social Work Ethics, Politics, Principles and Practice, Basingstoke:
Palgrave.
Clark, H., Dyer, S. and Hansaran, L. (1996), Going Home: older people leaving hospital,
London: Polity Press/Joseph Rowntree Foundation/Community Care.
Clarke, C.L., Gibb, C.E. and Ramprogus, V. (2003), ‘Clinical Learning Environments:
an evaluation of an innovative role to support preregistration nursing
placements’, Journal of Learning in Health and Social Care, 2(2): 105–15.
Clough, R. (ed.) (1996), Abuse in Residential Institutions, London: Whiting and Birch.
Cochrane, A. (1972), Random Reflections on Health Services, London: Royal Society of
Medicine Press.
Cochrane Collaboration (2003), at: http://www.cochrane.org/index0.htm.
Cohen, C.S. (1995), ‘Making It Happen: building successful support group
programs’, Social Work with Groups, 18(1): 67–80.
Collins, S. (2001), ‘Bullying in Social Work Organisations’, Practice, 13(3): 29–44.
Commission for Racial Equality (2003), Good Practice: the duty to promote racial
equality, at: www.cre.gov.uk/duty/index.html.
Cooper, A. (1994), ‘A Tale of Two Cultures – race, ideology and child protection in
France and England’, Social Work in Europe, 1(3): 53–60.
Cooper, J. (ed.) (2000), Law, Rights and Disability, London: Jessica Kingsley.
 Bibliography 279

Corby, B. (1996), ‘Risk Assessment in Child Protection Work’, in H. Kemshall and J.

Pritchard (eds), Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management, London:
Jessica Kingsley, pp. 13–30.
Coulshed, V. and Mullender, A. (2001), Management in Social Work (2nd edn),
Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Coulshed, V. and Orme, J. (1998), Social Work Practice: an introduction (3rd edn)
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Cox, R. (2003), ‘Stepping Out’, New Beacon, June, London: RNIB.
Craig, R. (1988), ‘Structured Activities with Adolescent Boys’, Groupwork, 1(1): 48–
59.
Cree, V.E. (1996), ‘Why Do Men Care?’ in K. Cavanagh and V.E. Cree (eds), Working
with Men, London: Routledge.
Cree, V.E. and Macaulay, C. (2000), Transfer of Learning in Professional and Vocational
Education, London: Routledge.
Crisp, B.R., Anderson, M.R., Orme, J. and Green Listor, P. (2003), Learning and
Teaching in Social Work Education: assessment, London: Social Care Institute for
Excellence (SCIE)/Policy Press.
Cull, L-A. and Roche, J. (2001), The Law and Social Work: contemporary issues for
practice, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Cullen, D. and Lane, M. (2003) Child Care Law: a summary of the law in England and
Wales (4th edn), London: British Association for Adoption and Fostering.
Cutler, T. and Waine, B. (2003), ‘Advancing Public Accountability? The social
services ‘‘star’’ ratings’, Public Money and Management, 23(2): 125–28.
Dalrymple, J. and Burke, B. (1998), ‘Developing Anti-oppressive Practice Teaching’,
Practice, 10(20): 25–35.
Davies, M. (1994), The Essential Social Worker: a guide to positive practice (3rd edn),
Aldershot: Arena.
Davies, M. (ed.) (2000), The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Social Work, Oxford: Blackwell.
de Bono, E. (2000), Six Hat Thinking, London: Penguin.
Degenhardt, D. (2003), ‘Teacher or Supporter? The social work tutor’s role in
students’ professional development’, Journal of Practice Teaching in Health and
Social Care, 4(3): 54–67.
Dent, T. and Tourville, A. (2002), ‘University–Community Partnerships: practicum
learning for community revitalization’, in S.M. Shardlow and M. Doel (eds),
Learning to Practise Social Work: International Approaches, London: Jessica Kingsley,
pp. 25–42.
Department of Health (1989), Caring for People: Care in the Community in the next
decade and beyond. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (1990), Community Care in the Next Decade and Beyond: policy
guidance, London: HMSO.
Department of Health (1993), Guidance on Permissible Form of Control in Children’s
Residential Care. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (2000), National Health Service Plan, London: HMSO.
Department of Health (2001a), National Service Framework for Older People, London:
HMSO.
280 Bibliography

Department of Health (2001b), ‘Fair Access to Care Services (FACS), General

Principles of Assessment for adult social care’, www.doh.gov.uk/scg/facs.
Department of Health (2002a), Requirements for Social Work Training, London:
HMSO.
Department of Health (2002b), Reform of Social Work Education, retrieved 14 March
2002, from: http://www.doh.gov.uk/swgualification.
Department of Health (2003a), Assessment in Child Care, London: HMSO.
Department of Health (2003b), No Secrets: Guidance on Developing and Implementing
Multi-Agency Policies and Procedures to Protect Vulnerable Adults from Abuse.
London: Stationery Office.
Department of Health (2003c), Our Inheritance, Our Future: realising the potential of
genetics in the NHS, London: Stationery Office.
Department of Health and Home Office (2003), The Victoria Climbié Inquiry: Report of
an Inquiry by Lord Laming, London: Stationery Office.
Department of Health, Department for Education and Employment, Home Office
(2000), The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families,
London: HMSO.
Devore, W. and Schlesinger, E.S. (1999), Ethnic-Sensitive Social Work Practice (5th
edn), Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Dhalech, M. (1999), ‘Race Equality Initiatives in South West England’, in P.
Henderson and R. Kaur (eds), Rural Racism in the UK, London: Community
Development Foundation.
Doel, M. (1988), ‘A Practice Curriculum to Promote Accelerated Learning’, in J.
Phillipson, M. Richards and D. Sawdon (eds), Towards a Practice Led Curriculum,
London: National Institute for Social Work, pp. 45–60.
Doel, M. (2002a), ‘Interprofessional Working: Berlin walls and garden fences’,
Learning in Health and Social Care, 1(3): 170–71.
Doel, M. (2002b), ‘Creativity and Practice Teaching: editorial’, Practice Teaching in
Health and Social Work, 4(1): 3–7.
Doel, M. (2005), The Groupwork Book, London: Routledge/Community Care.
Doel, M. and Cooner, T.S. (2002), ‘The Virtual Placement’, interactive web-based
program at: www.hcc.uce.ac.uk/virtualplacement.
Doel, M. and Lawson, B. (1986), ‘Open Records: the client’s right to partnership’,
British Journal of Social Work, 16(4): 407–30.
Doel, M. and Marsh, P. (1992), Task-Centred Social Work, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Doel, M. and Sawdon, C. (1995), ‘A Strategy for Groupwork Education and Training
in a Social Work Agency’, Groupwork 8(2):189–204.
Doel, M. and Sawdon, C. (1999), The Essential Groupworker: teaching and learning
creative groupwork, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Doel, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (1993), Social Work Practice, Aldershot: Gower.
Doel, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (1995), Preparing Post-Qualifying Portfolios: a practical
guide for candidates, London: Central Council for Education and Training in Social
Work.
Doel, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (1996a), ‘Simulated and Live Practice Teaching: the
practice teacher’s craft’, Social Work Education, 15(4): 16–33.
 Bibliography 281

Doel, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (eds) (1996b), Social Work in a Changing World: an
international perspective on practice learning, Aldershot: Arena.
Doel, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (1998), The New Social Work Practice, Aldershot, Arena.
Doel, M., Sawdon, C. and Morrison, D. (2002), Learning, Practice and Assessment:
signposting the portfolio, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Doueck, H.J., English, D.J., DePanfils, D. and Moote, G.T. (1993), ‘Decision-Making
in Child Protection Services: a comparison of selected risk-assessment systems’,
Child Welfare, LXXII (5): 441–52.
Douglas, T. (1993), A Theory of Groupwork Practice, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Duncan, T., Piper, C. and Warren-Adamson, C. (2003), ‘Running Rings Round Law?
An ecological approach to teaching law for child-centred practice’, Social Work
Education, 22(5): 493–503.
Durham, A. (2003), ‘Young Men Living through and with Child Sexual Abuse: a
practitioner research study’, British Journal of Social Work, 33(3): 309–23.
Eadie, T. and Ward, D. (1995), ‘The ‘‘Scenario Approach’’ to Teaching Social Work
Law’, Social Work Education, 14(2): 64–84.
Ebenstein, H. (1999), ‘Single Session Groups: issues for social workers’, Social Work
with Groups, 21:(1–2): 49–60.
Ells, P. and Dehn, G. (2001), ‘Whistleblowing: public concern at work’, in C. Cull
and J. Roche (eds), The Law and Social Work, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Encarta (1999), Dictionary, London: Bloomsbury.
England, H. (1986), Social Work as Art, London: Allen and Unwin.
Evans, D., Cava, H., Gill, O. and Wallis, A. (1988), ‘Helping Students Evaluate Their
Own Practice’, Issues in Social Work Education, 8(2): 113–36.
Evans, G. (1997), ‘The Rationing Debate: rationing healthcare by age; the case
against’, British Medical Journal, 314: 822–25.
Fairweather, E. (1998), ‘Exposing the Islington Children’s Homes Scandal: a
journalist’s view’, in G. Hunt (ed.), Whistleblowing in the Social Services, London:
Arnold, pp. 19–40.
Fatout, M.F. (1989), ‘Decision-making in a Therapeutic Group’, Groupwork, 2(1): 70–
79.
Fatout, M.F. (1998), ‘Exploring Worker Responses to Critical Incidents’, Groupwork,
10(3): 183–95.
Fieldhouse, J. (2003), ‘The Impact of an Allotment Group on Mental Health Clients’
Health, Wellbeing and Social Networking’, British Journal of Occupational Therapy,
66(7): 286–96.
Fischer, J. (1976), The Effectiveness of Social Casework. Springfield, IL: Charles C.
Thomas.
Flood, B. (1988), Developing a Cultural Inventory, Oregon: Division of Continuing
Education, Portland State University.
Fook, J. (2002), Social Work: critical theory and practice, London: Sage.
Foot, P. (1997), ‘Footnotes’, Private Eye, (935): 27.
Fortune, A.E. and Abramson, J.S. (1993), ‘Predictors of Satisfaction with Field
Practicum among Social Work Students’, The Clinical Supervisor, 11(1): 95–110.
Fortune, A.E., Miller, J., Rosenblum, A.F., Sanchez, B.M., Smith, C. and Reid, W.J.
(1995), ‘Further Explorations of the Liaison Role: a view from the field’, in G.
282 Bibliography

Rogers (ed.), Social Work Field Education: views and visions, Dubuque, Iowa:
Kendall/Hunt, pp. 273–93.
Fuller, R. and Petch, A. (1995), Practitioner Research: the reflexive social worker,
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Fuller, R. and Tulle-Winton, E. (1996), ‘Specialism, Genericism and Others: does it
make a difference?’, British Journal of Social Work, 26(5): 679–98.
Furniss, J. (1988), ‘The Client Speaks Again’, Pro-file, 3: 2–3.
Gardiner, D. (1989), The Anatomy of Supervision, Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open
University Press.
Gelman, S.R. and Wardell, P.J. (1988), ‘Who’s Responsible? The field liability
dilemma’, Journal of Social Work Education, 24(1): 70–77.
Gelman, S.R., Pollack, D. and Auerbach, C. (1996), ‘Liability Issues in Social Work
Education’, Journal of Social Work Education, 351(3): 351–61.
Getzel, G.S. and Mahoney, K.F. (1989), ‘Confronting Human Finitude: groupwork
with people with AIDS’, Groupwork, 2(2): 95–107.
Gibbs, L. and Gambrill, E. (2002), ‘Evidence-based Practice: counterarguments to
objections’, Research on Social Work Practice, 12(3): 452–76.
Glendinning, C., Coleman, A. and Rummery, K. (2002), ‘Partnerships, Performance
and Primary Care: developing integrated services for older people in England’,
Ageing and Society, 22(2): 185–208.
Goleman, D. (1996), Emotional Intelligence, London: Bloomsbury.
Gray, J.A.M. (2001), ‘Evidence-based Medicine for Professionals’, in A. Edwards
and G. Elwyn (eds), Evidence-based Patient Choice – inevitable or impossible, Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp. 19–33.
GSCC (2002), Code of Practice for Social Care Workers and Code of Practice for Employers
of Social Care Workers, London: General Social Care Council, www.gscc.org.uk.
Gurney, A. (2000), ‘Risk Management’, in M. Davies (ed.) The Blackwell Encyclopaedia
of Social Work, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 300–301.
Hadley, R. and McGrath, M. (1981), Going Local: neighbourhood social services.
London: Bedford Square Press.
Harries, P.A. and Gilhooly, K. (2003), ‘Generic and Specialist Occupational Therapy
Casework in Community Mental Health Teams’, British Journal of Occupational
Therapy, 66(3): 101–109.
Harries, P.A. and Harries, C. (2001), ‘Studying Clinical Reasoning, Part 2: applying
social judgement theory’, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64(6): 285–92.
Harrison (2003), Typologies of Organisational Culture, in C. Jarvis: www.sol.brunel.
ac.uk/bola/culture/harrison.html.
Hawkins, P. and Shohet, R. (2000), Supervision in the Helping Professions (2nd edn),
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Henchman, D. and Walton, S. (1993), ‘Critical Incident Analysis and its Application
in Groupwork’, Groupwork, 6(3): 189–98.
Henderson, J., Scott, H. and Lloyd, P. (2003), ‘In the Real World We’re All Put on the
Spot at Some Time or Other So You Need to be Prepared for It’: an exploratory
study of an oral method of assessing knowledge of mental health law’, Social Work
Education, 21(1): 91–103.
 Bibliography 283

Herod, J. and Lymbery, M. (2002), ‘The Social Work Role in Multi-disciplinary

Teams’, Practice, 14(4).
Heus, M. and Pincus, A. (1986), The Creative Generalist: a guide to social work practice,
Barneveld, WI: Micamar.
Hewison, A. and Sim, J. (1998), ‘Managing Interprofessional Working: using codes
of ethics as a foundation’, Journal of Interprofessional Care, 12(3): 309–21.
Hill, C. et al. (2002), ‘The Emerging Role of the Specialist Nurse: promoting the
health of looked after children’, Adoption and Fostering, 26(4): 35–43.
Hinsliff, G. (2004), ‘They Told Me to Let My Child Die’, The Guardian, 4 January,
p. 12.
Hogg, B., Kent, P. and Ward, D. (1992), The Teaching of Law in Practice Placements,
Nottingham: School of Social Studies, University of Nottingham.
Hollis, E.V. and Taylor, A.L. (1951), Social Work Education in the United States, New
York: Columbia University Press.
Holme, A. and Maizels, J. (1978), Social Workers and Volunteers, London: George
Allen and Unwin.
Home, A.M. (1997), ‘Enhancing Research Usefulness with Adapted Focus Groups’,
Groupwork, 9(2): 128–38.
Hopkins, G. (2003), Plain English for Social Services: a guide to better communication,
London: Russell House Publishing.
Horn, C. (2002), Blowing the Whistle, retrieved 21 December 2004 from: http://
www.personneltoday.com/Articles/12/03/16508/Blowingþtheþwhistle.htm.
Horwath, J. (ed.) (2001), The Child’s World: assessing children in need, London: Jessica
Kingsley.
Horwath, J. and Shardlow, S.M. (eds) (2003a), Making Links Across Specialisms,
London: Russell House Publishing.
Horwath, J. and Shardlow, S.M. (2003b), ‘Specialism: A Force for Change’, in J.
Horwath and S.M. Shardlow (eds), Making Links Across Specialisms: understanding
modern social work practice, Lyme Regis: Russell House, pp. 1–21.
Houston-Vega, M.K., Neuhring, E.M. and Daguio, E.R. (1996), Prudent Practice,
Annapolis, MD: NASW Press.
Howe, D. (1996), Social Workers and their Practice in Welfare Bureaucracies, Aldershot:
Gower.
Howe, D. (2003), An Introduction to Social Work Theory, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hudson, B.L. and Macdonald, G.M. (1986), Behavioural Social Work, Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
Hugman, R. (1991), Power in Caring Professions, Basingstoke: Macmillan/BASW.
Hull, C. and Redfern, L. (1996), Profiles and Portfolios: a guide for nurses and midwives,
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Humphries, B. (2003), ‘What Else Counts as Evidence in Evidence-based Practice?’,
Social Work Education, 22(1): 81–91.
Humphrys, J. (2003), ‘Not I. It’s Me’, The Guardian, 21 October.
Hunt, G. (ed.) (1995), Whistleblowing in the Health Service, London: Edward Arnold.
Hunt, G. (ed.) (1998), Whistleblowing in the Social Services: public accountability and
professional practice, London: Arnold.
284 Bibliography

IFSW (1994), The Ethics of Social Work: principles and standards, at: http://
www.ifsw.org/Publications/4.4.pub.html.
Jayaratne, S., Croxton, T. and Mattison, D. (1997), ‘Social Work Professional
Standards: an exploratory study’. Social Work, 42(2): 187–98.
Johns, R. (2003), Using the Law in Social Work, Exeter: Learning Matters.
Jones, C. (2001), ‘Voices from the Front Line: state social workers and New Labour’,
British Journal of Social Work, 31: 547–62.
Jones, R. (2003), Mental Health Act Manual (8th edn), London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Jordan, B. (2003), ‘Tough Love: social work practice in UK society’, in P. Stepney
and D. Ford (eds) (2003), Social Work Models, Methods and Theories, London: Russell
House Publishing.
Jovelin, E. (2001), ‘Social Work as a Career: Choice or Accident? The French
Example’, in A. Adams, P. Erath and S.M. Shardlow (eds), Key Themes in European
Social Work, Lyme Regis: Russell House, pp. 95–102.
JRF (2005), ‘Young Turks and Kurds: a set of ‘‘invisible’’ disadvantaged groups’,
Joseph Rowntree Findings (Feb 2005 – ref 0075) at www.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/
findings/.
Kadushin, A.E. (1992), Supervision in Social Work, New York: Columbia University
Press.
Kant, I. (1785), Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, in I. Kant, The Moral Law, ed.
and trans. H.J. Paton, London: Routledge, pp. 53–123.
Katz, J. (1978), White Awareness: handbook for anti-racist training, Norman, OK:
University of Oklahoma Press.
Kearney, P. (2003), A Framework for Supporting and Assessing Practice Learning, SCIE
Position Paper No.2, London: SCIE.
Kemshall, H. (1996), ‘Offender Risk and Probation Practice’, in H. Kemshall and J.
Pritchard (eds), Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management, London:
Jessica Kingsley, pp. 133–45.
Kemshall, H. and Pritchard, J. (eds) (1996), Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk
Management, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Khan, S. (1992), ‘Culture Clash’, Young People Now, March: 19–21.
King, C. (2003), ‘A Case to Answer’, Care and Health Magazine, (42): 10–11.
Kitwood, T. and Bredin, K. (1992), Person to Person, Essex: Gale Centre.
Knight, C. (1997), ‘A Study of MSW and BSW Students’ Involvement with Group
Work in the Field Practicum’, Social Work with Groups, 20(2): 31–49.
Knight, T. and Worsley, A. (1998), ‘Creativity and Competence: reconstructing
social work for the millennium’, Practice Teaching in Health and Social Work, 1(2):
13–22.
Kronenberg, F., Algado, S.S. and Pollard, N. (2004), Occupational Therapy Without
Borders, Elsevier: Oxford.
Kurland, R. and Salmon, R. (1993), ‘Groupwork versus Casework in a Group’,
Groupwork, 6(1): 5–16.
Laming, H. (2003), The Victoria Climbié Inquiry Report, Cm. 5730, London: The
Stationery Office.
Langan, M. and Day, L. (1992), Women, Oppression and Social Work, London:
Routledge.
 Bibliography 285

Lebacq, M. and Shah, Z. (1989), ‘A Group for Black and White Sexually Abused
Children’, Groupwork, 2(2): 123–33.
Lefevre, M. (1998), ‘Recognising and Addressing Imbalances of Power in the
Practice Teacher/Student Dialectic: an anti-discriminatory approach’, in H.
Lawson (ed.) Practice Teaching Changing Social Work, London: Jessica Kingsley,
pp. 15–31.
Levinsky, N.G. (1998), ‘Can We Afford Medical Care for Alice C?’, The Lancet, 352:
1849–51.
Lindow, V. and Morris, J. (1995), Service User Involvement, York: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Lishman, J. (1994), Communication in Social Work, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Lishman, J. (2002), ‘Personal and Professional Development’, in R. Adams, L.
Dominelli and M. Payne (eds), Social Work: themes, issues and critical debates,
Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 95–108.
Littlechild, B. (1996), ‘The Risk of Violence and Aggression to Social Work and
Social Care Staff’, in H. Kemshall and J. Pritchard (eds), Good Practice in Risk
Assessment and Risk Management, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 159–75.
Loewenberg, F.M. and Dolgoff, R. (2000), Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice
(6th edn), Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Lordan, N. (1996), ‘The Use of Sculpts in Social Groupwork Education’, Groupwork,
9(1): 62–79.
Lorenz, W. (1994), Social Work in a Changing Europe, London: Routledge.
Lymbery, M. (1998), ‘Care Management and Professional Autonomy: the impact of
community care legislation on social work with older people’, British Journal of
Social Work, 28(6): 863–78.
Lymbery, M. (2000), ‘The Retreat from Professionalism: from social worker to care
manager’, in N. Malin (ed.), Professionalism, Boundaries and the Workplace, London:
Routledge.
Lymbery, M. (2001), ‘Social Work at the Crossroads’, British Journal of Social Work,
31(3): 369–84.
Lyons, K. (1999), International Social Work: themes and perspectives, Aldershot:
Ashgate.
McDonald, A. (1999), Understanding Community Care: a guide for social workers,
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Macdonald, G. and Sheldon, B. with Gillespie J. (1992), ‘Contemporary Studies of
the Effectiveness of Social Work’, British Journal of Social Work, 22(6): 615–43.
Macpherson, W. (1999), Report on the Inquiry into the Stephen Lawrence Murder,
London: Home Office.
Malekoff, A. (1999), ‘Expressing Our Anger: hindrance or help in groupwork with
adolescents?’, Groupwork, 11(1): 71–82.
Malks, B., Schmidt, C. and Austin, M. (2002), ‘Elder Abuse Prevention: a case study
of the Santa Clara County Financial Abuse Specialist Team (FAST) program’,
Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 39(3): 23–39.
Manor, O. (1988), ‘Preparing the Client for Social Groupwork: an illustrated
framework’, Groupwork, 1(2): 100–14.
286 Bibliography

Manor, O. (1996), ‘Storming as Transformation: a case study of group relationships’,

Groupwork, 9(3): 128–38.
Manor, O. (1999), ‘Technical Errors or Missed Alternatives: an interview with
Catherine Papell’, Groupwork, 11(1): 83–93.
Manthorpe, J. (2000), ‘Risk Assessment’, The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Social Work,
ed. M. Davies, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 298–99.
Maram, M. and Rice, S. (2002), ‘To Share or Not to Share: dilemmas of facilitators
who share the problem of group members’, Groupwork, 3(2): 6–33.
Mark, R. (1996), Research Made Simple: a handbook for social workers, London: Sage.
Marsh, P. and Doel, M. (2005), The Task-Centred Book, London: Routledge/
Community Care.
Martin, B. (1999), The Whistleblower’s Handbook: How to be an Effective Resister,
Charlebury: John Carpenter.
Metro (2003), ‘Amos was ‘‘promoted on merit’’ ’, Metro, 13 May.
Middleton, L. (1997), The Art of Assessment, Birmingham: Venture Press.
Midgley, J. (2001), ‘Issues in International Social Work’, Journal of Social Work, 1(1):
21–35.
Milgram, S. (1974), Obedience to Authority, London: Tavistock.
Miller, C., Ross, N. and Freeman, M. (1999), Shared Learning and Clinical Teamwork:
new directions in education for multiprofessional practice, London: English National
Board for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting.
Milner, J. (1986), The Child Abuse Potential Inventory: Manual (2nd edn), Webster, NC:
Psytec.
Milner, J. and O’Byrne, P. (2002), Assessment in Social Work (2nd edn), Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
Minuchin, S. and Fishman, C. (1981), Family Therapy Techniques, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Mullen, E.J. and Dumpson, J.R. (1972), The Evaluation of Social Intervention, San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mullender, A. (1995), ‘Groups for Children Who Have Lived With Domestic
Violence: learning from North America’, Groupwork, 8(1): 79–98.
Mullender, A. and Ward, D. (1991), Self-Directed Groupwork: users take action for
empowerment, London: Whiting and Birch.
Munro, E. (2001), Understanding Social Work: an empirical approach. London: Athlone
Press.
Murphy, E. (2000), ‘Priorities in Dementia Services: the interaction of purchasers
and providers’, International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 15(8): 746–50.
Muzumdar, K. and Atthar, R. (2002), ‘Social Work Placements in Police Stations: a
force for change’, in S.M. Shardlow and M. Doel (eds), Learning to Practise Social
Work: international approaches, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 43–58.
NASW (1996), Code of Ethics, Silver Spring, MD: National Association of Social
Workers.
New Internationalist (1989), ‘Do You Need Treatment?’, November: 10.
NOPT (1999), Code of Practice, London: National Organisation for Practice Teaching.
NOPT (2000), Code of Practice, at: www.nopt.org
 Bibliography 287

Northen, H. and Kurland, R. (2001), Social Work with Groups (3rd edn), New York:
Columbia University Press.
O’Connor, I. (1992), ‘Bereaved by Suicide: setting up an ‘‘ideal’’ therapy group in a
real world’, Groupwork, 5(3): 74–86.
Oliver, M. (1990), The Politics of Disablement, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Orme, J. (2002), ‘Feminist Social Work’, in R. Adams, L. Dominelli and M. Payne
(eds), Social Work: themes, issues and critical debates, Basingstoke: Palgrave, p. 218–
26.
O’Sullivan, T. (1999), Decision Making in Social Work, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Øvretveit, J., Mathias, P. and Thompson, T. (eds) (1997), Interprofessional Working for
Health and Social Care, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Papell, C.P. (1996), ‘Reflections on Issues in Social Work Education’, in N. Gould
and I. Taylor (eds), Reflective Learning for Social Work, Aldershot: Arena.
Parker, J. and Bradley, J. (2003), Assessment, Planning, Intervention and Review, Exeter:
Learning Matters.
Parker, J. and Merrylees, S. (2002), ‘Why Become a Professional? Experiences of
care-giving and the decision to enter social work or nursing education’, Learning
in Health and Social Care, 1(2): 105–14.
Parsloe, P. (ed.) (1999), Risk Assessment in Social Care, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Parton, N. (2000), ‘Some Thoughts on the Relationship between Theory and Practice
in and for Social Work’, British Journal of Social Work, 30(4): 449–63.
Payne, M. (1995), Social Work and Community Care, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Payne, M. (1996), What is Professional Social Work ?, Birmingham: Venture Press.
Payne, M. (2002), ‘Social Work Theories and Reflective Practice’, in R. Adams, L.
Dominelli and M. Payne (eds), Social Work: themes, issues and critical debates,
Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 123–38.
Payne, M. and Shardlow, S.M. (eds) (2002), Social Work in the British Isles, London:
Jessica Kingsley.
Pearson, G. (1973), ‘Social Work as the Privatised Solution of Public Ills’, British
Journal of Social Work, 3(2): 209–27.
Pelosi, A. and Birchwood, M. (2003), ‘Is Early Intervention for Psychosis a Waste of
Valuable Resources?’, British Journal of Psychiatry, 182(3): 196–98.
Phillipson, J. (2002), ‘Creativity and Practice Teaching’, in Practice Teaching in Health
and Social Work, 4(1): 8–26.
Pincus, A. and Minahan, A. (1973), Social Work Practice: model and method, Itasca, IL:
F.E. Peacock.
Pithouse, A. (1998), Social Work: the social organisation of an invisible trade (2nd edn),
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Popper, K. (1959), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London: Hutchinson.
Preston-Shoot, M. (1992), ‘On Empowerment, Partnership and Authority in
Groupwork Practice: a training contribution’, Groupwork, 5(2): 5–30.
Preston-Shoot, M. (1993), ‘Whither Social Work Law? Future questions on the
teaching and assessment of law to social workers’, Social Work Education, 8(1): 65–
77.
288 Bibliography

Preston-Shoot, M. (2001), ‘A Triumph of Hope over Experience? On modernising

accountability in social services – the case of complaints procedures in
community care’, Social Policy and Administration, 35(6): 701–715.
Pugh, R. (2000), Rural Social Work, Lyme Regis: Russell House.
QAA (2002), ‘Benchmark Statement for Social Work’, Quality Assurance Agency, at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/crntwork/benchmark/socialwork.pdf.
Quinny, A. (2004), ‘Supporting Practice Learning: the placements on-line project’,
unpublished paper, Joint Social Work Education Conference, Glasgow.
Randall, H. and Csikai, C.E. (2003), ‘Issues Affecting Utilization of Hospice Services
by Rural Hispanics’, Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 12(2):
74–94.
Rashid, S. P., Ball, C. and McDonald, A. (2002), Mental Health Law (3rd edn),
Norwich: University of East Anglia.
Reamer, F.G. (1994), Social Work Practice and Liability, New York: Columbia
University Press.
Redl, F. (1966), How Good or Bad is it to Get Angry When We Deal with Children ?, New
York: Free Press.
Reed, M. (2002), ‘The Practitioner’s Perspective: practice focus’, Professional Social
Work, April: 16–17.
Reid, K. (1988), ‘But I Don’t Want to Lead a Group! Some common problems of
social workers leading groups’, Groupwork, 1(2): 124–34.
Reid, W.J. (1992), Task Strategies: an empirical approach to clinical social work, New
York: Columbia University Press.
Reid, W.J. (2000), The Task Planner: an intervention resource for human service planners,
New York: Columbia University Press.
Reid, W.J. (2001), ‘The Role of Science in Social Work’, Journal of Social Work, 1(3):
273–94.
Reid, W.J. and Hanrahan, P. (1980), ‘The Effectiveness of Social Work: recent
evidence’, in E. M. Goldberg and N. Connelly (eds), The Effectiveness of Social Care
for the Elderly, London: Heinemann.
Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Care and Supervision Provided in Relation to
Maria Colwell (1974), London: HMSO.
Roberts, H., Smith, S.J. and Bryce, C. (1995), Children at Risk, Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Sacco, T. (1996), ‘Towards an Inclusive Paradigm for Social Work’, in M. Doel and
S.M. Shardlow (eds), Social Work in a Changing World, Aldershot: Arena, pp. 31–42.
Sackett, D.L., Richardson, W., Rosenberg, W. and Haynes, R.B. (1997), Evidence-based
Medicine. How to practice and teach evidence-based medicine, New York: Churchill
Livingstone.
Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Gray, J.A.M., Haynes, R.B. and Richardson, W.S.
(1996), ‘Evidence-based Medicine – what it is and what it isn’t’, British Medical
Journal, 312(7023): 71–72.
Salmon, D., Hook, G. and Hayward, M. (2003), ‘The Specialist Health Visitor Post: a
parental perspective’, Community Practitioner, 76(9): 334–38.
Schön, D.A. (1987), Educating the Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 Bibliography 289

Schwartz, W. (1976), ‘Between Client and System: the mediating function’, in R.W.
Roberts and H. Northen (eds), Theories of Social Work with Groups, New York:
Columbia University Press.
Seebohm, F.C. (1968), Report of the Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal
Social Services (Seebohm Report), Cmnd 3703, London: HMSO.
Seebohm, F.C. (1989), Seebohm Twenty Years On: three stages in the development of the
personal social services, London: PSI.
Senge, P.M. (1990), The Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization,
New York: Doubleday.
Shannon, G. (1998), ‘Are We Asking the Experts? Practice teachers’ use of client
views in assessing student competence’, Social Work Education 17(4): 407–18.
Shardlow, S.M. (1988), ‘The Economics of Student Help’, Insight, 3(23): 24–25.
Shardlow, S.M. (ed.) (1989), The Values of Change in Social Work, London: Routledge.
Shardlow, S.M. (1995), ‘Confidentiality, Accountability and the Boundaries of
Client–Worker Relationships’, in R. Hugman and D. Smith (eds), Ethical Issues in
Social Work, London: Routledge, pp. 65–83.
Shardlow, S.M. (2000), ‘Legal Responsibility and Liability in Fieldwork’, in L.
Cooper and L. Briggs (eds), Fieldwork in the Human Services, Sydney: Allen &
Unwin, pp. 117–30.
Shardlow, S.M. and Doel, M. (eds) (2002), Learning to Practise Social Work:
international approaches. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Shardlow, S.M. and Doel, M. (forthcoming), Practice Learning and Teaching (2nd edn),
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Shardlow, S.M., Nixon, S. and Rogers, J. (2002), ‘The Motivation of Practice
Teachers: decisions relating to involvement in practice learning provision’,
Learning in Health and Social Care, 1(2): 67–74.
Shardlow, S.M., Davis, C., Johnson, M., Murphy, M., Long, T. and Race, D. (2004),
Standards and Inter-professional Education in Child Protection, Salford: Salford Centre
for Social Work Research.
Sharkey, P. (2000), The Essentials of Community Care: a guide for practitioners,
Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Sharry, J. (1999), ‘Building Solutions in Groupwork with Parents’, Groupwork, 11(2):
68–89.
Sharry, J. (2001), Solution-Focused Groupwork, London: Sage.
Shaw, I. and Shaw, A. (1997), ‘Game Plans, Buzzes and Sheer Luck’, Social Work
Research, 21(2): 69–79.
Sheldon, B. (1998), ‘Evidence based Social Services: prospects and problems’,
Research Policy and Planning, 16(2):16–18.
Sheldon, B. and Chilvers, R. (2000), Evidence-Based Social Care: a study of the prospects
and problems, Lyme Regis: Russell House.
Sheldon, B. and Macdonald, G. (1999), Research and Practice in Social Care: mind the
gap, Exeter: Centre for Evidence-Based Social Services.
Shepherd, J. (2001), ‘Where Do You Go When It’s 40 Below? Domestic violence
among rural Alaska native women’, AFFILIA – Journal of Women and Social Work,
16(4): 488–510.
290 Bibliography

Sheppard, M. (1995a), Care Management and the New Social Work: a critical analysis,
London: Whiting and Birch.
Sheppard, M. (1995b), ‘Social Work, Social Science and Practice Wisdom’, British
Journal of Social Work, 25(3): 265–93.
Shulman, L. (1999), The Skills of Helping Individuals, Families, Groups and Communities
(4th edn), Itasca, IL: Peacock Publishers.
Singleton, W.T. and Holden, J. (eds) (1994), Risk and Decisions, London: John Wiley
and Sons.
Skinner, B.F. (1969), Contingencies of Reinforcement, New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Smale, G., Tuson, G., Ahmad, B., Davill, G., Domoney, L. and Sainsbury, E. (1994),
Negotiating Care in the Community: the implications of research findings on community
based practice for the implementation of Community Care and Children Acts, London:
HMSO.
Social Services Inspectorate (1999), Care in the Community – inspection of Community
Care services in rural areas, London: Department of Health.
Solas, J. (1994), ‘Why Enter Social Work? Why on earth do they want to do it?
Recruits’ ulterior motives for entering social work’, Issues in Social Work Education,
14(2): 51–63.
SSI (1991a), Care Management and Assessment: Practitioner’s Guide, London: HMSO.
SSI (1991b), Care Management and Assessment: Manager’s Guide, London: HMSO.
Stalker, K. (2003), ‘Managing Risk and Uncertainty in Social Work’, Journal of Social
Work, 3(3): 211–33.
Stepney, P. and Ford, D. (eds) (2003), Social Work Models, Methods and Theories,
London: Russell House Publishing.
Stevenson, O. (1988), ‘Law and Social Work Education: a commentary on The Law
Report’, Issues in Social Work Education, 8(1): 37–45.
Stevenson, O. and Parsloe, P. (1993), Community Care and Empowerment, York:
Rowntree Foundation with Community Care.
Sullivan, H. (2003), ‘New Forms of Local Accountability: coming to terms with
‘‘many hands’’?’, Policy and Politics, 31(3): 353–69.
Szymkiewicz-Kowalska, B. (1999), ‘Working with Polarities, Roles and Timespirits:
a process oriented approach to emotions in the group’, Groupwork, 11(1): 24–40.
Tajfel, H. (1981), Human Groups and Social Categories, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tan, N-T. (ed.) (2004) Social Work Around the World III. Berne: International
Federation of Social Workers.
Tan, N-T. and Dodds, I. (eds) (2002), Social Work Around the World II, Berne:
International Federation of Social Workers.
Tan, N-T. and Envall, E. (eds) (2000), Social Work Around the World, Berne:
International Federation of Social Workers.
Taylor, A. (1998), ‘Hostages to Fortune: the abuse of children in care’, in G. Hunt
(ed.), Whistleblowing in the Social Services, London: Arnold, pp. 41–64.
Taylor, P. (1994), ‘The Linguistic and Cultural Barriers to Cross-national Group-
work’, Groupwork, 7(1): 7–22.
 Bibliography 291

Thomlison, B. and Collins, D. (1995), ‘Use of Structured Consultation for Learning

Issues in Field Education’, in G. Rogers (ed.), Social Work Field Education: views and
visions, Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt, pp. 233–38.
Thompson, N. (2000a) Understanding Social Work: preparing for practice, Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
Thompson, N. (2000b) Tackling Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace, Birming-
ham: Pepar Publications.
Thompson, N. (2002), ‘Developing Anti-discriminatory Practice’, in D. Tomlinson
and W. Threw (eds), Equalising Opportunities, Minimising Oppression, London:
Routledge.
Thompson, N. (2003), Promoting Equality, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Thompson, N., Murphy, M., Straddling, S. with O’Neill, P. (2003), Meeting the Stress
Challenge, London: Russell House Publishing.
Tidd, J., Bessant, J. and Pavitt, K. (2001), Managing Innovation: integrating
technological, market and organisational change, Chichester: Wiley.
Tisdal, K., Lavery, R. and McCrystal, P. (1997), Child Care Law: a comparative review of
new legislation in Northern Ireland and Scotland; the Children (Northern Ireland) Order
1995 and the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, Belfast: Queens University Belfast,
Centre for Child Care Research.
Tolson, E.R., Reid, W. and Garvin, C.D. (1994), Generalist Practice: a task-centred
approach, New York: Columbia University Press.
TOPSS (2002), National Occupational Standards for Social Work, London: Training
Organisation for Personal Social Services.
Toren, N. (1969), ‘Semi-Professions and Social Work’, in A. Etzioni (ed.), The Semi-
Professions and Their Organisation, New York: Free Press, pp. 141–96.
Trevithick, P. (1995), ‘ ‘‘Cycling over Everest’’: groupwork with depressed women’,
Groupwork, 8(1): 15–33.
Trevithick, P. (2005), Social Work Skills (3rd edn), Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Trinder, L. (ed.) (2000), Evidence-based Practice: a critical appraisal, Oxford: Blackwell.
Trotter, C. (1999), Working with Involuntary Clients: a guide to practice, London: Sage.
Tuckman, B. (1965), ‘Developmental Sequences in Small Groups’, Psychological
Bulletin, 6(3): 384–99.
Turkie, A. (1995), ‘Dialogue and Reparation in the Large, Whole Group’, Groupwork,
8(2): 152–65.
Underhill, D. with Betteridge, C., Harvey, B. and Patient, K. (2002), ‘Learning
Opportunities and Placements with Asylum Seekers’, in S.M. Shardlow and M.
Doel (eds), Learning to Practise Social Work: international approaches, London: Jessica
Kingsley, pp. 77–90.
Uttley, S. (1981), ‘Why Social Work? A comparison of British and New Zealand
studies’, British Journal of Social Work, 11(3): 329–40.
Vernon, S. (1998), ‘Legal Aspects of Whistleblowing in the Social Services’, in G.
Hunt (ed.), Whistleblowing in the Social Services, London: Arnold, pp. 222–39.
Ward, D. (2000), ‘Totem Not Token: groupwork as a vehicle for user participation’,
in H. Kemshall and R. Littlechild (eds), User Involvement and Participation in Social
Care, London: Jessica Kingsley.
292 Bibliography

Ward, D. (2002), ‘Groupwork’, in R. Adams, L. Dominelli and M. Payne (eds), Social

Work: themes, issues and critical debates, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Wayne, J. and Cohen, C.S. (2001), Group Work Education in the Field, Alexandria, VA:
Council on Social Work Education.
Webb, S. (2002), ‘Evidence-based Practice and Decision Analysis’, Journal of Social
Work, 2(1): 45–63.
Weinstein, J. (1997), ‘The Development of Shared Learning: Conspiracy or
Constructive Development?’, in J. Øvretveit, P. Mathias and T. Thompson (eds)
(1997), Interprofessional Working for Health and Social Care, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Weinstein, J., Whittington, C. and Leiba, T. (2003), Collaboration in Social Work
Practice, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Wenger, N.S. et al. (1999), ‘Reporting Unethical Research Behaviour’, Evaluation
Review, 23(5): 553–70.
West, J. and Watson, D. (2002), ‘Preparing for Practice: the use of personal learning
audits in social work education’, Practice, 14(4): 43–52.
Whitaker, D. and Archer, J.L. (1989), Research by Social Workers: capitalizing on
experience. London: Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work.
White, I.A. and Hart, K. (1995), Report of the Inquiry into the Management of Child Care
in the London Borough of Islington, London: London Borough of Islington.
Whittington, C. (2003), Learning for Collaborative Practice, London: Department of
Health.
Wilcox, R., Smith, D., Moore, J., Hewitt, A., Allan, G., Walker, H., Ropata, M., Monu,
L. and Featherstone, T. (1991), Family Decision Making, Family Group Conferences,
available from Practitioners’ Publishing, PO Box 30–430, Lower Hutt, New
Zealand.
Williams, A. (1997), ‘The Rationing Debate: rationing health care by age: the case
for’, British Medical Journal 314 (7038): 820–822.
Younghusband, E. (1981), The Newest Profession: a short history of social work, Sutton:
Community Care/IPC Business Press.