Improving outcomes for ‘failing’ students through the use of presentations

Jenny Peddar; Cher Brazier

doi:10.1921/jpts.v11i1.259

Authors

Jenny Peddar
Cher Brazier

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1921/jpts.v11i1.259

Keywords:

failing students, practice placements, presentations, outcomes

Abstract

Over recent years there has been an increasing use of presentations for students who are struggling in, or have failed a practice placement on the qualifying social work programmes. This has often been set up following the student having attended a practice consultation panel at the request of member of the students’ placement team. The presentations are aimed at improving the students’ understanding of the issues that have led to their difficulties on placement and are therefore specific to that student. Some students have been asked to prepare just one presentation whilst others have been given up to 4 titles. The experience of the university placement team, and the practice agencies that offer a repeat placement is that it has led to an improvement in the outcome for many students as this has led to greater understanding of issues and therefore preparation for the repeat placement. Some of the students concerned have chosen at the end of the process of undertaking presentations that they will not complete the professional award and this decision has been clearer and based on better quality evidence and thinking. This paper considers the process, outcomes and potential gains of this system.

References

Bird, A. and Ambler, S. (2005) Creative Tools for Practice Teaching: Issues with a failing student? Course material\nBarron, C. (2004) Do we need a second opinion here? Journal of Practice Teaching in Health and Social Work, 5, 2 22-38\nCCETSW. (1989) Paper 30. Rules and requirements for the Diploma in Social Work. London: CCETSW\nGSCC. (2002) Code of Practice for Social Care Workers. London: GSCC\nHussein, S., Moriarty, J., Manthorpe, J., and Huxley, P. (2008) Diversity and progression among students starting social work qualifying programmes in England between 1995 and 1998: a quantitative study. British Journal of Social Work,. 38, 8, 1588–1609\nJones, K. (2006) Valuing diversity and widening participation: The experience of access to social work students in further and higher education. Social Work Education, 25, 5, 485-500\nLam, C,. M. Wong, H., and Leung, T.T.F. (2007) An unfinished reflexive journey: social work students’ reflection on their placement experiences. British Journal of Social Work. 37, 1, 91-105\nLomax, R., Jones, K., Leigh, S., and Gay, C. (2010) Surviving your Social Work Placement. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan\nMcColgan, M. and Douglas, H. (1995) The demise of the second opinion practice teacher: For better or for worse? Social Work Education, 14, 3, 94-8\nMoriarty, J., Macintyre, G., Manthorpe, J., Crisp, B.R., Orme, J., Green Lister, P., Cavanagh, K., Stevens, M., Hussein, S., and Sharpe, E. (2010) ‘My expectations remain the same. The student has to be competent to practise’: Practice assessor perspectives on the new social work degree qualification in England. British Journal of Social Work. 40, 2, 583-601\nParker, J. (2010) When things go wrong! Placement disruption and termination: Power and student perspectives. British Journal of Social Work, 40, 3, 983-999\nTopss England, (2002) The National Occupational Standards for Social Work. <a target="_blank" href='www.topssengland.net'>www.topssengland.net.</a>\n