Review of Practice Learning Dr Lorna Montgomery Director of Practice Learning

Presentation Overview The Big Picture: Student numbers and degree classification PAP: feedback from panel and external examiner Student Feedback Organisational Change

The Big Picture. 2016-2017 1st: 11 2.1: 87 2.2: 9 Jan- June 2017 August 2016 - Jan 2017 Number on Placement UGR2 67: 3 failed PLO PTR1 3 PTR Final Year 7 Total 77 Jan- June 2017 Number on Placement RGR2 42: 1 failed PLO RGR3 39 UGR3 66: 3 failed PLO: 1 failed RPA Total 147 Degree Classification: 1st: 11 2.1: 87 2.2: 9

PAP: feedback RPA marking: High standard of feedback and consistency among markers. Detailed student feedback PT reports: Generally comprehensive, detailed and developmental. Developmental Points: Student contribution to PT reports variable. Encourage a more standardised student input Needs to be continuity between the first and second placement and an awareness of learning needs. Continuity is primarily the tutor’s responsibility. Practice teacher responsibility in signing off evidence

Comments: External Examiner Dr Jo Warner RPA: excellent pieces of work evidencing a good grasp of relevant theoretical issues and capacity to apply these in an appropriate way. Good pointers given to students about how they might incorporate feedback in specific ways as they progress to Level 3 Crucial stage in the student’s professional development with the potential to create radical shifts in their outlook. A nice balance between positive comments, to support confidence, and constructive comments about weaker areas. Standardisation seems to be working

Student Feedback: How would you rate the pre-PLO preparation? Level 2 Level 3

Student Comments Everything was well organised I was given sufficient time to contact and visit PLO site prior to start date. This time also allowed me to research service and service user group. I felt completely overwhelmed at the sheer difference of university to placement. I think that we should have been provided with a brief job description to allow insight into the role before making contact with the PT

How would you rate the quality of this PLO?

Quality of the PLO PLO either excellent or very good. Absolutely loved it, very welcoming and supportive team, PT very approachable and keen to help improve learning opportunities, wide range of service user groups and situations encountered A fantastic team who are patient and understanding. A very welcoming environment. PLO either average or below average If I did not ask to have a 2 days out in the community I would not have been able to meet the SW standards just within the day centre. It was only out in the community that I was able to see the whole SW process.

Access to Learning Opportunities: Level 2

QUALITY OF SUPERVISION

OPPORTUNITIES FOR REFLECTION

To what extent has your understanding of the social work role developed?

What advice would you give to a Student going on this PLO ‘Do reading around service user group ask lots of questions’ ‘Even if your first choice is not a Day Centre, go with an open mind. This proved to be such a positive experience for me and I enjoyed every minute of it’. ‘To engage in all experiences provided. Some of it may seem a little pointless at the time but it will help in the long run. Try not to become overwhelmed!’ ‘Go into the placement with a willingness and enthusiasm to engage with a range of opportunities, try and be as confident as you can with SU whilst being honest with your practice teacher and reflect’.

Student feedback summary Strong consensus across groups: feedback from UGR and RGR, and at levels 2 and 3 very similar Largely positive experiences: relationships and work opportunities appeared to be the key defining features. Positive supportive Practice teacher relationships central to the learning process. Day centres critiqued as difficult to find the Social Work role

Practice Learning and Organisational Change Developments within BSW: Integrated teaching: Interdisciplinary education: Focus on Lifecourse Structural changes Organisational change: agencies PLO positive learning environment.