Content uploaded by Paul McCafferty
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Paul McCafferty on Dec 15, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
55 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Group supervision for social
work students on placement:
An international comparison
Paul McCafferty
1
Summary:
Partnership Care West is a voluntary organisation that contracts with the
Northern Ireland Social Care Council (NISCC) to provide ten placements for social
work students. NISCC is a statutory organisation, with responsibility for registering
and regulating social care/work, improving standards in education and training and
standardising practice in Northern Ireland NISCC (2003).
The students attend the practice learning centre and are then given placements
in voluntary sector sites established by the centre. Traditionally, the students were
supervised on a one to one basis using the long arm approach. In recent years how-
ever, the centre has developed a model for supervising these students in groups.
Building on my positive experience of conducting group supervision and to
further my knowledge, skills and values in this area, I recently undertook an
international comparison with the School of Social Work in Haifa Israel. This School
has an already well established model for supervising students in groups and I hoped
that I could learn something to help me develop my model further. I would like to
thank Nava Arkin at the University of Haifa for her willingness to take part in this
comparison and for her encouragement throughout. This article aims to outline
my fi ndings of the comparison and outline the theoretical constructs that make
international comparisons in social work possible.
Key words: international, group supervision
1. Manager, Practice Learning Centre.
Address for Correspondence: Partnership Care West, 92 Spencer Road, Derry,
BT47 6AG. Pmccafferty67@hotmail.com.
Paul McCafferty
56 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Introduction
The following comparison aims to advance ideas about the nature of
international social work and to provide theoretical and illustrative
material as a basis for developing my own practice in group supervision
for social work students whilst on practice placement. I will compare the
model that I have developed within my own agency (Partnership Care
West, Practice Learning Centre) with a model that has been developed
at the University of Haifa in Israel. I will argue that even an activity
apparently so intimately linked to the socio-economic characteristics and
culture of a given nation, must recognise the impact of the international
arena, through a process known as internationalisation. I will discuss
the usefulness and diffi culties of an international comparison in social
work. I will outline my own model, placing it in the local context of
Northern Ireland. I will then outline the Israeli experience, discussing
the local issues that effect practice in that country. I shall then provide
a theoretical structure for comparing internationally and outline the
similarities and differences at the mezzo, macro and micro level.
Discussion
While leaders in this fi eld have historically been aware of developments
elsewhere and have often been active at international level, recent rapid
internationalisation has impacted on social welfare as much as other
aspects of daily life, and now requires all social workers to place their
local activities in a wider frame Lyons (2000). Social work has tradition-
ally been seen as a local culture bound activity, specifi c to a given time
and place; clearly there is an essential relationship between much social
work practice and the nature, needs and requirements of the society in
which the activity takes place (Lorenz 1994 in Lyons 2000). However
in the concluding decades of the twentieth century, even countries that
had previously been regarded as isolated or independent have been
subject to the pressures of internationalisation.
Before continuing, I feel it is important to defi ne what I mean by
international and internationalisation? The Collins dictionary defi nes
international as ‘of, concerning, or involving two or more nations or
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
57 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
nationalities’. Guzzetta (1990) defi nes internationalisation as ‘neither
exclusive importation of ideas nor exclusive exportation of ideas, but a
clear understanding that the inter in international means reciprocal’.
Since the 1980s however, the term internationalisation has evolved
and been replaced by the term globalisation. Dominelli and Hoogvelt
(1996) argue that globalisation has three main features:
• The emergence of a global market principle.
• Flexible accumulation, and
• The internationalisation of the state.
A common feature of globalisation is a worldwide interconnected-
ness and interdependence that both characterises and is driving
social change, Pinkerton (2002). Robertson (1992, p.8) calls this ‘the
compression of the world and the intensifi cation of consciousness of the
world as a whole’. All this has been made possible by the development
of the communication media, the information superhighway and travel,
making contact between different cultures more frequent and some
would argue, more benefi cial.
Usefulness and diffi culties in comparative study
Pursuing the idea that this sense of interconnectedness is benefi cial,
Watts (1995) emphasises that learning from other countries ‘is mutual,
on-going and dynamic and can help us to advance the human condition’.
Additionally, an international perspective can contribute to the shared
understandings necessary to respond effectively to social problems, in-
cluding alleviating poverty and combating racism, cultural imperialism
and violence. Shared learning may help to fi nd solutions and responses
to what have thus far proved to be intractable human problems. An
international social work perspective will be critical in documenting and
recording human and social suffering and consequently new ideas to
help alleviate distress and disadvantage might be found Watts (1995).
Healy (1990) supports this view, adding that social workers have
added increasingly to what we know about issues such as mental illness,
poverty, ageing, crime, child welfare, health care, substance abuse and
community development and that this knowledge could inform the
Paul McCafferty
58 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
debate on these issues in the global market.
Furthermore, Healy (1990) argues that there are four main reasons
for an understanding of globalisation vis-à-vis social work. Firstly, Healy
argues that social work can provide an educated dynamic to resolving
problems created by disadvantage and discrimination. Secondly, there is
an increasing level of global interdependence and this has a direct impact
on local social work practice. Thirdly, it is useful to have an international
knowledge in order to practice locally. Finally, social work can take its
place in the international arena alongside psychiatry, sociology and law
etc., when it comes to resolving problems of a local nature.
In addition to this, Hokenstad (1992) suggests that social work has
much to learn from the developing world’s approach to tackling issues
such as poverty and the increasingly despondent under class that
western societies face. Hokenstad further argues that the responses to
these problems need to be ‘global in outlook and local in action’, (1992,
p.191). Hokenstad also claims that an international component in the
social workers repertoire of skills helps social work liberate itself from
cultural myopia.
Finally, having an international perspective might, in addition to the
possibilities discussed above, be seen to refl ect the very values inherent
in social work practice - mutuality, respect and shared knowledge.
However, there are inherent dangers associated with globalisation.
Firstly, there is a danger of ethnocentrism and racism. The danger lies
in the fact that our analysis of others is based on our own worldview as
opposed to looking at issues from the host culture. Secondly, using what
we would defi ne as our own normative framework implies superiority.
This is especially so if globalisation is viewed as westernisation, and the
export of capitalism. Thirdly, language, culture and social context can
make shared understanding diffi cult. Finally, with globalisation, there
is a danger of the reverse of more productive and helpful relationships
emerging. The net result could end as polarisation, where we recognise
one culture or group as totally different, or irrelevant Payne (1996).
Recognising these dangers and in an attempt to avoid them, Payne
(1996) recommends that we develop what he terms a discursive forma-
tion strategy when it comes to exploring issues internationally. Payne
advocates seeing the nature of social work as a collection of competing
sets of ideas, presented as actions and concepts. The discourse about
them forms social work. In this approach, we do not seek wholeness
through one perspective. Instead, we value the discourse between
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
59 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
perspectives as constructing a whole while exploring and valuing
difference.
Issue for comparison
The issue that I wish to address, through a global comparison with
another country, is group supervision with students at qualifying level
whilst they are on placement.
I became interested in this particular issue in June 2002. When my
colleague and I refl ected back over the previous year’s students and the
quality and effectiveness of our individual supervision with them, we
discovered several main themes in our thinking that we felt related to
individual supervision; (for a fuller account of refl ection see (Schon,
1983).
Firstly, it was diffi cult to equalise the power imbalance that existed
between the student and us. This power imbalance existed on several
levels,
• Teacher/student
• Perceived expert / non-expert
• Male / female
• Assessor / assessed.
Secondly, the students learning experience was being restricted by the
one to one approach. There was limited room for alternative perspectives
that could have enhanced the student’s knowledge.
Thirdly, the student would feel isolated and unsupported without
peer contact. This could also lead to a block in learning and a feeling
of being alone.
In addition to this, I also became interested in-group supervision due
to the new challenges that practice teachers will face under the new
degree in social work in Northern Ireland. From 2005, practice teaching
will change dramatically. The role of the practice teacher looks likely
to change and practice teachers/assessors will be required to provide
practice teaching/learning in an innovative and effective way. NISCC
are keen to develop new models for practice learning that are dynamic,
progressive and that can meet the needs of students studying for the
Paul McCafferty
60 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
new Bachelor of Social Work.
Taking cognisance of this, I set about developing a model of group
supervision that would begin to meet the changing needs of students
and meet the challenges of the new degree. My model, outlined below,
was developed by exploring and applying the theories of group work,
supervision, adult learning and anti-oppressive practice theory, which
I have outlined elsewhere McCafferty (2004).
The model
The model consisted of seven group sessions and seven individual
sessions. These sessions alternated each week, so one week the students
came together in a group and the next week the students were seen
individually. Each facilitator retained the overall assessment responsibil-
ity for a designated student but the co-facilitator was able to add their
assessment based on observations during the group.
Before the group started, we as facilitators met to prepare for the
forthcoming session, feeling that this stage was crucial to the success
of the group Douglas (1970). We checked in with one another on a
cognitive and emotional level, ensuring we were fully prepared for the
forthcoming session. We also ensured that we had divided the tasks
equally between ourselves, thus ensuring we were modeling good
partnership relationships for the students.
The group sessions themselves had a set agenda for each week and
examined particular social work topics; these included contracting,
evaluating process records, the theory and practice of social work, values
in social work, self assessment and evaluation of skills, the importance
of refl ection in social work and portfolio construction.
The content of each session was purposely generic as each of the
students was placed in different placement sites, with a different
service-user group. Clearly, the content of the sessions does not have
to stay the same and can be changed with the mutual consent of the
facilitators and students. The point is however, that there was a main
theme each week.
The group sessions all worked to a set format which meant that each
week we began with an ice-breaker, which the students choose. This
worked to get the members loosened up and created a relaxed and
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
61 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
supportive environment. We then had a check-in, during which time
individuals were given the space to discuss with the group, the interven-
tions that they experienced with service users that week. Hillerbrand
(1989) found that intervention skills are enhanced by the verbalization
of the cognitive processes of students in peer groups. Conceptualization
is more effective within peer groups than under the guidance of an
instructor (Arkin, 1999).
We then took a break and the facilitators left the students by
themselves. This was important as it gave the students a period of time
together without being assessed and lead to a greater sense of solidarity
and cohesion. When the group fi nished at the end of placement, the
students themselves commented that this was one of the most valuable
parts of being in a group.
We then spent time on the main topic for that week and explored
this issue in depth. This process of exploration was completed by using
role plays, presentations, group exercises, vignettes, group discussions
and homework exercises.
At the end of each session, we set the students some work to do for the
next session, which could also be used as evidence in their portfolios. All
sessions lasted three hours. The entire process of group supervision was
assessed and the students were made aware of this at the beginning of
placement when they signed the supervision contract. When the group
sessions fi nished, the facilitators met to debrief. We used a simple format
to give some structure to this process and each week we looked at our
thoughts regarding how well the session went, the actual facts of what
took place and how the content could be improved and what we were
experiencing on an emotional level, as a means of evaluation.
Context of the issue
This model of supervising students in groups, which has been developed
at the local level, is of course set in the wider global and national arena.
It is therefore important to consider these issues fi rst, if one is to develop
a sense of context. This too, provides the basis for comparison with the
chosen international country.
It would be impossible to fully understand how my project functions
in Northern Ireland without fi rst considering the nature of the state in a
Paul McCafferty
62 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
society once described as the most violent in Western Europe, Campbell
and McColgan (2002). Political and constitutional arrangements in
Northern Ireland have always marked it out as a place apart within
the United Kingdom. The Government of Ireland Act 1920 partitioned
Ireland and left the northeastern counties a contested geopolitical space
between catholic/nationalists and protestant/unionists. This resulted in
a long and well-documented period of violence commonly known as
the troubles.
Despite the complexity of the social structures put in place after this
period, constitutional arrangements between Northern Ireland, the rest of
the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland tend to be preoccupied
with problems raised by the national question. In 1972 full legislative
powers were removed from Stormont, which was the local parliament,
and placed in the hands of Westminster in London. Described as Direct
Rule this mechanism has meant that Northern Ireland was administered
through a newly created Northern Ireland Offi ce, headed by the
Secretary of State and a small number of ministers.
Some attempts have been made to progress these arrangements,
culminating in the creation of a devolved Assembly through the Belfast
Agreement in 1998, which was preceded by a somewhat successful
peace process, Campbell and McColgan (2002). This agreement has to a
greater or lesser extent, addressed a range of issues, suggesting openness
to progressive reform and an emerging culture of human rights.
Unfortunately, at the time of writing, the Assembly is currently
suspended and Direct Rule re-imposed. However, before the Assembly
was suspended, it did make some major contributions to the way in
which Northern Ireland manages its own affairs
One major contribution with relevance to social work was the creation
of NISCC. Previously, the Central Council for the Education and Training of
Social Work (CCETSW) was responsible for ensuring the standardisation of
social work education. However, with the creation of the devolved Assembly
with the power to make decisions effecting health and social welfare, NISCC
was created to take over the role of CCETSW.
NISCC is a statutory body established by the Health and Personal
Social Services Act (Northern Ireland) 2001. The aims of NISCC are to
provide protection to those who use services, promote high standards
of conduct and practice among social care/workers, strengthen and
support the professionalism of the workforce and promote confi dence
in the sector NISCC (2003).
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
63 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Relevant to this discussion, is the fact that NISCC has been provided
by government departments with funds for the improvement of social
work education. One of the areas for which these funds are available is
to increase the number and improve the quality of practice placements.
More specifi cally, NISCC contract directly with the Practice Learning
Centre here at Partnership Care West to provide practice placements
and contribute to the development of practice learning.
It is interesting to note in the context of my discussion about the effects
of globalisation on local issues, that the very concept of a contract and
contracting in social welfare appears to have been infl uenced at global
level, not at local or national level as it would seem.
The globalisation of the economy has had an enormous impact on
the British welfare state. Like other parts of the national economy, the
welfare state has had to respond to the pressures for greater international
competitiveness. It has done so by becoming a site that could provide
capital for accumulation purposes and restructuring to allow the private
commercial sector a greater role in welfare provision. Thus, globalisation
has affected the structural framework and organisational culture of
social work.
One consequence of these changes is that British statutory social work
has become more fully integrated into the market economy. Statutory
Social Services now contract work out and have had to cede their role as
service providers to the voluntary and commercial sectors and become
primarily purchasers of care. This shift has drawn both the statutory and
voluntary sector into the business world via the medium of contracts
Dominelli and Hoogvelt (1996).
The emergence of a global market principle involves the imposition
of a new categorical imperative, namely global market effi ciency, upon
the domestic supply of goods and services. This sets the parameters for
the privatisation of the welfare state and creates the conditions for a new
relationship to be established between state and providers of welfare.
This became known as contract government, which has been crucial
in facilitating the welfare state’s move from being a resource provider
to a purchaser of services from provider units. The provider unit in
this instance is Partnership Care West, whose actions are contractually
defi ned and who are accountable for their behaviour.
Thus, one can see a direct link that the global emphasis on effi ciency
has on the welfare state at national level and the delivery of services
at local level. In a drive for greater effi ciency and innovation the state,
Paul McCafferty
64 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
represented here by NISCC, has purchased the services of Partnership
Care West’s Practice Learning Centre and secured that relationship with
a contract. This contract has in turn, been infl uenced by global market
effi ciency principles.
Relevant practice from the other country
This section outlines a similar project of group supervision in another
country. The comparison is with group supervision of social work
students in their second and third years in the Undergraduate Social
Work Programme at the University Of Haifa School Of Social Work in
Israel
In terms of context, Israel, like Northern Ireland, is a relatively new
state. It was established mainly by European and Russian Jews who, hav-
ing suffered persecution and exile from their own countries, fi nally had
their dreams of establishing a political and geographical entity realised
in 1948 when they established a home land in Israel Milton Edwards
and Hinchliffe (2004). Over the next decades, Israel would overcome
a variety of political and economic obstacles and survive several wars.
The Jewish population would swell from about 500,000 in 1948 to
over 5,243,000 in 2001, which was the result of natural growth and
in-migration from many nations.
While Zionists asserted that all Jews share a common nationality,
the practical challenge of uniting an incredibly diverse and often trau-
matised population in a new state was enormous Chomsky (2003). A
consciously created culture, education, military experience and language
were devoted to the task. Despite this, Israeli society continues to be
stratifi ed along the lines of ethnicity, class, religion and ideology Harris
(1998). Further distinctions, having evolved within the particular social,
political, religious and economic context of the Jewish state, continue
to challenge national unity and consequently, the ideological basis of
Israeli society Gold (2002).
With regards to social work, according to Israeli Social Work law
1996, if one wishes to practice as a social worker in Israel, it is necessary
to fi rst gain professional certifi cation. One must then register in the
social workers register (Pinkas Haovdim Hasotzialim) (Publications
Department, English Section, Ministry of Immigrant Absorption).
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
65 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
To become a social worker, one must undertake a Bachelor of Social Work
or Master of Social Work degree. All of Israel’s major universities offer social
work degrees at both the Bachelor and Masters level. The licensing and
accrediting authority for these degrees is the Council for Higher Education,
which is a statutory body, responsible for accrediting and authorising
institutions of higher education to award degrees Hagshama (1998).
Regarding the University of Haifa programme, students graduate after
three years of Social Work study, reaching the Bachelor of Social Work
(BSW) degree, which serves as a licence to practice. The curriculum
includes thirty-two hours of class work per semester and nineteen and
a half hours of fi eldwork per week during the second and third years.
During this time all students in the programme undergo group supervi-
sion in addition to individual supervision. In the second year, group
supervision is devoted to individual intervention and in the third year
to group and/or community intervention. Group supervision addresses
issues related to the particular method that the student is being asked
to deal with in practice but it also involves using groups and group
processes as a medium of teaching and learning Arkin et al (1999).
According to the overall model, the second and third year is divided
into three phases in which three distinct supervision methods are
applied. The three phases are to consist of:
1. The formative phase,
2. The working phase, and
3. The ending phase.
Within each phase there is a set content that the student must learn,
as well as the use of different processes to enable the student to learn.
Each phase also requires the supervisor to undertake different roles. For
a fuller outline of this model see Arkin (1999).
Comparative analysis
It has been argued that a tentative framework for comparing social
work in different countries can be developed using the notion of social
domains Huston and Campbell (2001). This entails adopting the view
that the interplay of distinct domains or spheres of activity can explain
Paul McCafferty
66 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
social life. Domains can be thought of as a distinct layering of experience
that determines action, Layder (1997). Although these are interlocking
and mutually exclusive, no particular domain is the prime mover in
terms of infl uence.
Three types of social domain are helpful in explaining and comparing
social work practices globally. These are the macro, messo and the
micro domains. The macro domain refers to large-scale international
processes directly effecting nation states and indirectly effecting local
social work practices within them. The messo domain can be viewed
as the site where relationships between nation state, welfare regimes
and social professionals are played out. The micro domain alludes to
the specifi c activity of everyday social work practice, where academic
discourses become transformed into practice wisdom, Huston and
Campbell (2001). I have outlined the similarities and differences in
each domain below.
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
67 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Macro
Similarities
Both countries have at some point in their history been affected by the
policies of Britain and America.
Britain maintained a presence in the Middle East up to 1948 and
continues to have a presence in Northern Ireland.
The USA has had a political interest in both countries and has helped
negotiate peace settlements in both countries i.e. the Good Friday
Agreement in Northern Ireland and the Road Map for Peace in the
middle east.
Both countries are relatively newly developed nation-states. Israel was
founded in 1948 and Northern Ireland in 1921.
Both countries occupy contested geopolitical spaces.
Both countries exercise disproportionate power over world affairs
compared with their geographical size and population.
Both countries experience high levels of violence.
Differences
Northern Ireland has managed to establish cease-fi res from most of the
groups who endorse violence to achieve political gain.
Another major world power, Russia was involved in the political life of
the Middle East through its support of the Palestinians.
Northern Ireland is only beginning to be effected by the immigration
of Central European peoples.
Paul McCafferty
68 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Meso
Similarities
Social work education is state sponsored, accredited and standardised
All social work education in Israel is university based. Northern Ireland
is moving towards this system.
Social work practice is focused on the socioeconomically derived,
physically and mentally disabled people, children, victims of political
violence, and older people
Differences
Northern Ireland is only just moving to the BSW. Northern Ireland is
doing away with the Masters programme.
Israel has a more culturally diverse population.
Northern Ireland is only recently beginning to have members of ethnic
minorities move here.
Social work education in Northern Ireland is undergoing dramatic
change.
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
69 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Micro
Similarities
Fieldwork experience is seen as a vital component in social work education.
All students are supervised whilst on placement.
Group supervision is available to students.
Differences
Supervisors in Israel are University linked and accredited by the University.
Supervisors in Northern Ireland are known as Practice Teachers and are agency
based.
All students in Israel undergo Group Supervision as well as individual supervi-
sion.
Students in Northern Ireland only get Group Supervision if the practice teacher
chooses to work in this way.
The model in Haifa endorses weekly group supervision as well as individual
supervision.
The model in my project has group supervision one week and individual
supervision the following week.
The model in Haifa has three distinct phases (1) the formative phase (2) the
working phase (3) the ending phase.
The model in my project sees each session as a separate entity unrelated to the
next session.
The Haifa model places an emphasis on personal growth and development
through an experiential process.
The model in my project places an emphasis on learning skills, acquiring
knowledge and identifying values.
The model in Haifa has a pass or fail attached to the group supervision
process.
My project sees the group as one part in the assessment process and does not
have a pass or fail to the group section.
Paul McCafferty
70 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Implications
It is evident that the Haifa model of group supervision is more established
and refi ned than my own. There is a long history of group supervision in
Haifa, which has been tried and tested over a long period of time. Finding
this model through a global comparison has been of excellent benefi t to me
and I intend to transform my own model in several areas.
To begin with, I intend to view the sessions as a continuum, with the
formative, working and ending phases as outlined in the Haifa model, and not
as single entities with a separate focus. Traditionally, each of my sessions began
with a check-in about individual placement issues. Despite the fact that this did
provide some useful insight into social work issues, I have recently begun to view
this section as a placement management section, which could be completed at a
different time. Discussions often focused on the practicalities of the placement
or placement specifi c issues and the other members appeared excluded.
Additionally, the group did not have a sense of beginning, middle or end
or experience the different feelings associated with each of these stages.
This would have been useful because having experienced these feelings, the
students could have tuned-in more effectively to the feelings their service-users
may have at each stage of the professional relationship. In turn the students
would have a better skill, knowledge and value base with which to practice
empathetically.
I also feel our roles as facilitators need to develop. Historically, I think we
have been overly concerned with the intellectual development of the students
as opposed to their emotional or personal development. Looking at the Haifa
model, the reader can see that the supervisor’s role is to enhance the emotional
world of the student and provide a model for good practice, as well as ensuring
they have the necessary knowledge, skills and values to practice.
Additionally, I need to consider whether or not to make it explicit to the
students that the group is assessed. At present it is stated at the learning
agreement that supervision is one means of assessment but this seems to get
lost somewhere in the process. For example, some students are very quiet
in the group and add little to exercises, discussions and role-plays. Until
now, I have tended to let this pass, arguing that we have other methods of
completing a more holistic assessment. However, if an aspect of social work
is about communicating and engaging, surely students need to be able to do
this in a variety of settings, including groups and that their ability to do this
needs to be assessed.
Group supervision for social work students on placement: An international comparison
71 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Finally, I feel that with the new BSW being introduced in Northern Ireland
with an 85 day placement in the second year and a 100 day placement in the
third year that our model will lend itself more easily to developing the experi-
ential type of group endorsed by the Haifa model. At present there is enormous
pressure with placements being so short and an almost manic emphasis on the
portfolio, leaving very little room for a more experiential group. With longer
placements, more time can be spent on personal growth and developing a
professional identity. I therefore intend to do more sessions.
Conclusion
This has been an exceptionally rewarding comparison to do. For the past few
years I have been supervising students in groups. I always felt this was an excel-
lent way to supervise students and that they gained a lot from the experience.
Recently however, I have wanted to develop this model by looking at how other
professionals have approached the issue. I therefore decided to undertake a
global comparison and I feel that this has been of great benefi t to me.
As a result of the global comparison, I have been able to formulate new ideas,
gain greater insight into other models and at the same time, learn something
new about our fellow social work colleagues in another country. Additionally
I feel our model has become more organic and dynamic. My comparison has
also increased my confi dence in the professional rigour of my model and given
me the assurance to present this model as an alternative to the more traditional
one to one supervision approach usually favoured in the British Isles.
References
Arkin, N. (1999) A Group Supervision Model For Broadening Multiple-method Skills
Of Social Work Students. Social Work Education, 18, 1
Campbell, J. and McColgan, M. (2002) Social Work in the British Isles. London: Jessica
Kingsley
Collins Dictionary 21st Edition
Chomsky, N. (2003) Middle East Illusions. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefi eld
Dominelli, L. and Hoogvelt, A. (1996) Critical Social Policy, 16.
Paul McCafferty
72 Journal of Practice Teaching 5(3) 2004, pp.55-72 © 2004. Whiting and Birch
Douglas, T. (1970) A Decade of Small Group Theory 1960/70. London: Bookstall
Publications
Gold, S. (2002) The Israeli Diaspora. London: Routledge
Hagshama (1998) Department of the World Zionist Organisation. http:/www.wzo.org.
il/en/resources/view/.asp?id=392.
Harris, N. (1998) Israel and the Arab Nations in Confl ict. Hove: Wayland
Healy, L. (1990) International curriculum content. The challenge of relevance for Social
Work. in K. Kendall Ed.) The International in American Education. New York.
Hillerbrand, E. (2000) Cognitive differences between experts and novices: Implications
for group supervision. Journal of Counselling and Development, 69, 5, 293-296.
Hokenstad, C. et al, (1992) Social work today and tomorrow. An international
perspective. in L, Carageta and M, Sanchez (2002) Globalisation and Global Need.
London: Sage
Huston, S. and Campbell, J. (2001) Using critical social theory to develop a conceptual
framework for comparative social Work. International Journal of Social Work, 10,
66-73
Layer, D. (1997) Modern social theory: Key debates and new directions. London:
UCL Press [in Huston, S. and Campbell, J. (2001) Using critical theory to develop
a conceptual framework for comparative social work. International Journal of Social
Work, 10, 66-73]
Lorenz, W. (1994) Social work in a changing Europe, London: Routledge in Lyons, K.
(2000) International Social Work: Themes and perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate
Lyons, K. (2000) International Social Work: Themes and perspectives. Ashgate Publishing
Ltd, England.
Milton-Edwards, B. and Hinchcliffe, P. (2004) Confl icts in the Middle East since 1945.
(2nd Edn) London: Routledge
NISCC (2003) The Reform of Social Work Training. The Degree in Social Work in Northern
Ireland. Belfast: NISCC
Payne, M. (1996) What is Professional Social Work? Birmingham: Venture Press.
Pinkerton, J. (2002) The RHP Companion to Leaving Care. Lyme Regis: Russell House
Publishing.
Publications Department, English Section, Ministry of Immigrant Absorption 15 Rehov
Hillel, Jerusalem.
Robertson, R. Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.
Schon, D. (1983) The Refl ective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action.
New York, Basic Books
Watts, T. (1995) An introduction to the world of social work education. in L, Carageta
and M. Sanchez (2002) Globalisation and Global Need. London: Sage
