(Re)presenting the creative potential of learning plans
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1921/jpts.v12i2.287Keywords:
field education, learning plan, qualitative research, social workAbstract
Field education is central to social work education as it is here that students bring alive their classroom-based learning through supervised professional practice. An important part of structuring students’ learning on placement is the development of their learning plan. A learning plan links professional activities to be undertaken with learning outcomes to be achieved along with how these are to be assessed within a specific time frame. Whilst the benefits of a well articulated learning plan (sometimes referred to as a learning contract or learning agreement), for structuring teaching and learning on placement (practicum) are generally acknowledged, there is a paucity of research evidence of such benefits in the literature. This article reports on a small qualitative study undertaken with a cohort of fourth year social work students from a Western Australian university, who had completed their final placement. Utilizing a mixed method of textual analysis of student learning plans and focus interviews we sought to understand how students construct and utilise their learning plan in developing their knowledge, skills and values in and for professional practice. Drawing on the findings we conclude with ways to make learning plans a more effective tool for field education placements.
References
AASW (2010) Australian Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics. Canberra, AustralianAASW (2008) Australian Social Work Education and Accreditation Standards. March, Canberra, AustralianAnderson, L.W. (Ed.), Krathwohl, D.R. (Ed.), Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., and Wittrock, M.C. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of education objectives. New York: LongmannBloom, B.S (Ed) (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook 1, Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKaynBogo, M. (2006) Field Instruction in Social Work: A review of the research literature. The Clinical Supervisor, 24, 1, 163–193nCleak, H. and Wilson, J. (2007) Making the Most of Field Placement. (2nd ed.) Southbank, Victoria: ThomsonnCollingwood, P., Emond, R. and Woodward, R. (2007) The theory circle: A tool for learning and for practice. Social Work Education, 21, 1, 70-83nCooper, L. and Briggs, L. (2000) Fieldwork In The Human Service: Theory practice for field educators, practice teachers and supervisors. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & UnwinnDepartment of Social Work & Social Policy (2007) Field Education Manual. Bentley, Western Australia: Curtin University of TechnologynFook, J. (1999) Critical reflectivity in education and practice. in B. Pease and J. Fook (Eds.) Transforming Social Work Practice: Postmodern critical perspectives. London: Routledge, (pp.195-208)nFook, J. and Askeland, G.A. (2006) The `Critical? in Critical Reflection. in S. White, J. Fook and F. Gardner (eds) Critical Reflection in Health and Social Care. New York: Open University Press (pp.26-38)nFriedman, B. D. and Neuman, K. M. (2001) Learning plans. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 21, 3, 123–138nGhaye, T. and Lillyman, S. (2000) Reflection: Principles and practice for healthcare professionals. Dinton: Quay BooksnGiddings, M.M., Vodde, R., and Cleveland, P. (2004) Examining student-field instructor problems in practicum: Beyond student satisfaction measures. The Clinical Supervisor, 22, 2, 191-214nHodder, I. (2000) The interpretation of documents and material culture. in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SagenHodgson, D. and Walford, H. (2006/07) Planning for learning and learning about planning in social work fieldwork. Journal of Practice and Learning, 7, 1, 50-66nKemmis, S. and Carr, W. (1986) Becoming Critical: Education, knowledge, and action research. London: FalmernKolb, D. A. (1976) The Learning Style Inventory: Technical manual. Boston, Ma.: McBernKrathwohl, D.R. (2002) A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 4, 212-218nO’Connor, I., Wilson, J. and Setterlund, D. (2003) Social Work and Welfare Practice, (4th ed.) South Melbourne: Addison Wesley Longman AustralianRoberts, A.E.K. (2002) Advancing practice through continuing professional education: The case for reflection. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 5, 2, 37-41nRogers, G. and Langevin, P. (2000) Negotiated learning contracts. in L. Cooper and L. Briggs (Eds) Fieldwork in the Human Services. St Leonards: Allen & UnwinnSpencer, A. and McDonald, C. (1998) Omissions and commissions: An analysis of professional field education literature. Australian Social Work, 51, 4, 9–18nTaylor, C. and White, S. (2000) Practicing Reflectivity in Health and Welfare. Buckingham: Open University PressnWhite, S., Fook, J. and Gardner, F. (2006) Critical Reflection in Health and Social Care. New York: Open University PressnWilcox, J.S. and Watson, S. (2000) Reading for understanding: Methods for reflecting on practice. Reflective Practice, 1, 1, 57-68n