Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grading Individual Observations of Practice in Child Welfare Contexts: A New Assessment Approach in Social Work Education

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clinical Social Work Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Students in the Frontline social work qualifying program undertake seven graded observations of practice in child welfare contexts during their qualifying studies. Before the Frontline program, educators had not attempted to implement graded observations of practice in a qualifying program in the United Kingdom. In this paper, we seek to show how graded practice observations have been undertaken in the Frontline program and provide information about the research base informing its development. A summary of findings from three preliminary research studies are presented. We suggest it is possible to grade practice consistently in child-welfare social work. However, we found considerable variation in marks awarded and evidence of grade inflation in all three studies. Using an interpretive lens, we argue that differences between graders should be anticipated because this is a complex assessment task requiring context-dependent judgment. We recommend developing a “consensus discussion” approach to moderation to improve reliability of grading practices, in which graders are encouraged to make the reasoning behind their grading decisions explicit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adie, L. (2013). The development of shared understandings of assessment policy: Traveling between global and local contexts. Journal of Education Policy, 29(4), 532–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beddoe, L., Ackroyd, J., Chinnery, S., & Appleton, C. (2011). Live supervision of students in field placement: More than just watching. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 30(5), 512–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellinger, A. (2010). Talking about (re)generation: Practice learning as a site of renewal for social work. British Journal of Social Work, 40(8), 2450–2466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloxham, S. (2009). Marking and moderation in the UK: False assumptions and wasted resources. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloxham, S., den Outer, B., Hudson, J., & Price, M. (2016). Let’s stop the pretence of consistent marking: Exploring the multiple limitations of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 466–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloxham, S., Hughes, C., & Adie, L. (2016). What’s the point of moderation? A discussion of the purposes achieved through contemporary moderation practices. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(4), 638–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M. (2006). Field instruction in social work: A review of the research literature. The Clinical Supervisor, 24(1/2), 163–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M. (2015). Field education for clinical social work practice: Best practices and contemporary challenges. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(3), 317–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Lee, B., McKee, E., Baird, S. L., & Ramjattan, R. (2016). Field instructors’ perceptions of foundation year students’ readiness to engage in field education. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 35(2), 204–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Lee, B., McKee, E., Ramjattan, R., & Baird, S. L. (2017). Bridging class and field: Field instructors’ and liaisons’ reactions to information about students’ baseline performance derived from simulated interviews. Journal of Social Work Education, 5(4), 580–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Katz, E., Logie, C., Tufford, L., & Litvack, A. (2012). Evaluating an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) adapted for social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(4), 428–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Power, R., & Regehr, G. (2007). When values collide: Field instructors’ experiences of providing feedback and evaluating competence. The Clinical Supervisor, 26(1/2), 99–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Woodford, C., Hughes, J., Power, R., & Regehr, G. (2006). Beyond competences: Field instructors’ descriptions of student performance. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(3), 579–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boitel, C. R., & Fromm, L. R. (2014). Defining signature pedagogy in social work education: Learning theory and the learning contract. Journal of Social Work Education, 50(4), 608–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostock, L., Forrester, D., Partrizo, L., Godfrey, T., Zonousi, M., Bird, H., & Tinarwo, M. (2017). Scaling and deepening the reclaiming Social work model evaluation report. Department of Education (HMSO). Retrieved February 27, 2018, from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/29570/1/Scaling_and_deepening_the_Reclaiming_Social_Work_model.pdf.

  • Brodie, I., & Williams, V. (2013). Lifting the lid: Perspectives on and activity within student supervision. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 32(4), 506–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck, P. W., Fletcher, P., & Bradley, J. (2016). Decision-making in social work field education: A “good enough” framework. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 35(4), 402–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleak, A., Hawkins, L., Laughton, J., & Williams, B. (2015). Creating a standardised teaching and learning framework for social work field placements. Australian Social Work, 68(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, B. R., & Hosken, N. (2016). A fundamental rethink of practice learning in social work education. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 35(5), 506–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croisdale-Appleby, D. (2014). Revisioning social work education: An independent review. London: Department of Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, S., Hubbard, A., & Munro, E. (2010). Reclaiming social work: London Borough of Hackney Children and Young People’s Services. London: Human Reliability Associates and London School of Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domakin, A. (2015). The importance of practice learning in social work: Do we practice what we preach? Social Work Education: The International Journal, 34(4), 399–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domakin, A., & Curry, L. (2017). Partners in practice: Developing integrated learning opportunities on the Frontline child and family social work qualifying programme. Child and Family Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12396.

  • Domakin, A., & Forrester, D. (2018). Putting practice at the heart of social work education: Can practice skills be reliably graded by different markers in child and family social work contexts? Social Work Education: The International Journal, 37(1), 66–77.

  • Domakin, A., Forrester, D., & Killian, M. (forthcoming) Marking practice skills in social work qualifying education: A study of consistency in grading seven hundred observations of practice.

  • Domakin, A., & Williams, J. (forthcoming) Learning how to grade practice reliably-developing a new pedagogy for marking practice in social work education.

  • Finch, J. (2010). Can’t fail, won’t fail—Why practice assessors find it difficult to fail social work students: A qualitative study of practice assessors experience of assessing marginal or failing social work students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved February 27, 2018, from http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/2370/.

  • Finch, J., Schaub, J., & Dalyrmple, R. (2014). Projective identification and the fear of failing: Making sense of practice educators’ experiences of failing social work students in practice learning settings. Journal of Social Work Practice, 28(2), 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, D., Kershaw, S., Moss, H., & Hughes, L. (2008). Communication skills in child protection: How do social workers talk to parents? Child and Family Social Work, 13(1), 41–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, D., Westlake, D., McCann, M., Thurnham, A., Shefer, G., Glynn, G., & Killian, M. (2013). Reclaiming social work? An evaluation of systemic units as an approach to delivering children’s services. Luton: Tilda Goldberg Centre, University of Bedfordshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederico, M., Long, M., McPherson, L., McNamara, P., & Cameron, N. (2016). A consortium approach for child and family practice education. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 35(7), 780–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S., & Trowler, I. (Eds.). (2012). Social work reclaimed. London: Jessica Kingsley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R., & Mackay, G. (2017). The practice pyramid: A model for integrating social work values, theory and practice. Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning, 14(3), 52–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, G., Barker, K., Rosenberg, G., Kuppens, S., & Ferrell, L. W. (2011). The signature pedagogy of social work: An investigation of the evidence. Research on Social Work Practice, 38, 115–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., & Fortune, A. E. (2013). Do we need more “doing” activities or “thinking” activities in the field practicum? Journal of Social Work Education, 49(4), 646–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litvack, A., Bogo, M., & Mishna, F. (2010). Emotional reactions of students in field education: An exploratory study. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(2), 227–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maidment, J. (2000). Methods used to teach social work students in the field: A research report from New Zealand. Social Work Education, 19(2), 145–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, N., Scourfield, J., Le, M., de Villiers, Z., Hadfield, T., Kinnersley, M., Tayyaba, P. (2016). Independent evaluation of the frontline pilot research report. London: Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, M., & Billington, L. (2005). A review of the literature on marking reliability. London: National Assessment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B., & Rollnick, S. (2012). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyers, T. B., Martin, T., Manuel, J. K., Hendrickson, S. M., & Miller, W. R. (2005). Assessing competence in the use of motivational interviewing. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 28(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2004.11.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Munro, E. (2011). The Munro review of child protection (Final report: A child-centred system). London: Department for Education. Retrieved February 27, 2018, from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175391/Munro-Review.pdf.

  • Muskat, B., Bogo, M., & Perlman, I. (2012). Making rotational field placements work: Review of a successful pilot of rotational field placements in hospital settings. Journal of Practice Teaching & Learning, 11(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plenty, J., & Gower, D. (2013). The reform of social work practice education and training and supporting practice educators. Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning, 12(2), 48–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regehr, C., Bogo, M., Donovan, K., Anstice, S., & Kim, A. (2012). Identifying student competencies in macro practice: Articulating the practice wisdom of field instructors. Journal of Social Work Education, 48(2), 307–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruch, G. (2015) Evidence scope regarding the use of practice observation methods as part of the assessment of social work practice. Dartington: Research in Practice. https://www.rip.org.uk/resources/publications/evidence-scopes/regarding-the-use-of-practice-observation-methods-as-part-of-the-assessment-of-social-work-practice-evidence-scope-2015/.

  • Scourfield, J., Maxwell, N., Le Zhang, M., De Villiers, T., Pithouse, A., Kinnersley, P., & Tayyaba, S. (2017). Evaluation of a fast-track postgraduate social work program in England using simulations. Research on Social Work Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731517735575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shay, S. B. (2004). The assessment of complex performance: A socially situated interpretive act. Harvard Educational Review, 74(3), 307–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 134(3), 52–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silman, J. (2016). One in four new children’s social workers will train on fast-track schemes by 2018. Retrieved February 27, 2018, from http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2016/01/15/one-four-new-childrens-social-workers-will-train-fast-track-schemes-2018/.

  • Singh, T., Kundra, S., & Gupta, P. L. (2014). Direct observation and focused feedback for clinical skills training. Indian Pediatrics, 51(9), 713–717.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., Cleak, H., & Vreugdenhila, A. (2015). “What are they really doing?” An exploration of student learning activities in field placement. Australian Social Work, 68(4), 515–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapp, K., Macke, C., & McLendon, T. (2012). Assessing student performance in field education. Field Scholar, 2(2), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinton, L., & Wilke, D. J. (2011). Leniency bias in evaluating clinical social work student interns. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39(3), 288–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, J., Bogo, M., & Raskin, M. (2006). Field notes: The need for radical change in field education. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(1), 161–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, J., Bogo, M., & Raskin, M. (2010). Field education as the signature pedagogy of social work education: Congruence and disparity. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(3), 327–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, C. E., Forrester, D., Killian, M., & Jones, R. K. (2017). Can we reliably measure social work communication skills? Development of a scale to measure child and family social work direct practice. International Journal of Child & Family Welfare, 17(1/2), 47–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeira, A., & Schiff, M. (2014). Field education: A comparison of students’ and novice social workers’ perspectives. British Journal of Social Work, 44(7), 1950–1966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

With thanks to Professor Donald Forrester for his original research in this area, which has provided the foundation on which the grading of individual observations in child welfare contexts is built.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Frontline, 1 Rosebery Ave, London, EC1R 4SR, UK

    Alison Domakin

Authors
  1. Alison Domakin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison Domakin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Domakin, A. Grading Individual Observations of Practice in Child Welfare Contexts: A New Assessment Approach in Social Work Education. Clin Soc Work J 47, 103–112 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0691-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0691-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation