Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of California Santa Cruz]On: 17 November 2014, At: 08:17Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Social Work Education: TheInternational JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cswe20
‘Placements Online’: StudentExperiences of a Website to SupportLearning in Practice SettingsAnne Quinney Senior Lecturer in Social Work EducationPublished online: 16 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: Anne Quinney Senior Lecturer in Social Work Education (2005) ‘PlacementsOnline’: Student Experiences of a Website to Support Learning in Practice Settings, Social WorkEducation: The International Journal, 24:4, 439-450, DOI: 10.1080/02615470500096951
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615470500096951
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
‘Placements Online’: StudentExperiences of a Website to SupportLearning in Practice SettingsAnne Quinney
Social work practice and education in many parts of the world are implementing an
elearning agenda. This article considers the experiences of students using a website
developed to support learning in agency settings to discover if and how it can be used to
create a ‘bridge’ between the learning environments of the university and practice. The
website contains a range of features, including downloadable practice assessment
documents, links to university based teaching units, electronic personal notification of
placement allocation, and an asynchronous discussion forum.
The action research project which informs this article employed focus groups of
students to ascertain their expectations and experiences of the website, in particular the
asynchronous discussion forum facility, prior to and on completion of the 80 day
placement, combined with analysis of the actual usage patterns and content.
Three quarters of the cohort participated in the discussion forum and findings suggest
that students used and valued the discussion forum for its ability to enable the student to
student and tutor to student relationships underpinning collaborative learning to be
maintained during the placement, and to enable resource sharing and networking.
Keywords: Elearning; Computer and Information Technology; Practice Learning;
Practice Placements
Introduction
‘Placements online’ was developed in the light of a growing global momentum in
both social work education and social work practice for engaging with computer and
information technology (C&IT). The UK scoping study undertaken by Rafferty &
Waldman (2003) highlights this as a significant challenge and reported that
‘considerable work needs to be done’ (Rafferty & Waldman, 2003, p. 3). They
emphasised that ‘the potential for elearning to provide greater coherence between
learning in academia and practice … remains the vision and goal’ (Rafferty &
Correspondence to: Anne Quinney, Senior Lecturer in Social Work Education, Bournemouth University, Institute of
Health & Community Studies, 4th Floor Heron House, Christchurch Road, Bournemouth BH1 3NA, UK. Email:
Social Work EducationVol. 24, No. 4, June 2005, pp. 439–450
ISSN 0261-5479 print/1470-1227 online # 2005 The Board of Social Work EducationDOI: 10.1080/02615470500096951
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
Waldman, 2003, p. iii). It is clear that elearning will become increasingly important
and it is hoped that the ‘Placements online’ project may offer at least a part solution
to some of the dilemmas inherent in the complexity of supporting placements, in
particular distant placements, and provide students with an additional tool for
organising the learning experience. Although this project took place in the UK, the
findings are applicable in any international setting where students undertake
placements.
Whilst being widely recognised as offering potential to support active and flexible
learning (Biggs, 2003), the development and application of elearning resources is on
many levels problematic, requiring a rationale and protocol to address a range of
significant concerns held by academics and practitioners. This includes a
consideration of the pedagogic, economic and ethical issues inherent in this area
(Hick, 1999; Sharkey, 2000; Harlow, 2003; Skehill, 2003; Webb, 2003), to ensure it
matches with social work principles and values. To demonstrate an adherence to
anti-oppressive practice it is essential that all stakeholder voices, in particular those of
students, are heard and acted upon when elearning innovations are introduced.
The placement element of social work programmes is widely recognised as
complex and demanding and the integration of theory and practice a significant
challenge (Watson et al., 2002). The periods of university-based learning are
organised through a group learning model, with students experiencing throughout
the first two years of the programme a consistent group composition. It is therefore a
significant contrast of experience when students undertake their full time placements,
often at a distance from the university, potentially isolated from this peer group, and
necessarily must adopt a more independent learning style. This is an area of student
experience that deserves further study.
‘Placements online’ offered the opportunity to create a virtual ‘bridge’ from
academia to practice by employing a facility that ‘literally dissolves the boundaries of
time and space, allowing many different kinds of interaction’ (Biggs, 2002, p. 219) by
providing access to the continued virtual presence of the collaborative and supportive
student group and to the programme leader. The cohort studied were second year
undergraduate students undertaking their final (80 day) placements.
Broader Context
There is a growing awareness of the creative and positive potential for elearning in
social work education to not only ‘replace’ but ‘enhance and transform’ aspects
of teaching and learning (Rafferty & Waldman, 2003, p. 4) and deliver a richer,
more active learning experience with a level of interactivity previously not
possible (Thomas, 2002). However, this optimism is coupled with the caution that
embracing these developments must be undertaken in a reflective, critical and
anti-oppressive framework that places the enhancement of the student learning
experience at the forefront (Laurillard, 2002; Skehill, 2003; Kear, 2004). Equally, in
both social work education and practice settings there is a concern that C&IT may be
harnessed to meet the demands for efficiency, effectiveness and economy without
440 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
fully understanding the ethical dilemmas involved (Harlow, 2003). Therefore those
intending to utilise new technologies must ensure that social work values, in
particular those concerned with anti-oppressive practice, are incorporated and that
there is ultimately a benefit to those in receipt of social work services.
At Bournemouth University a facility known as ‘Placements online’ was set
up within a purpose-built integrated virtual learning environment (VLE). This
included ‘replacement’ activity, e.g. the posting of news, information, assignment
guidelines and course documents; ‘enhancement’ activity, e.g. hyperlinks to web-
based resources and to maps to locate the placement agency and agency websites
including individualised access to placement allocation/practice teacher details; and
the potential for ‘transformation’ activity by the provision of a discussion forum
where asynchronous collaborative conversations could be facilitated. A further
discussion forum and document download area was established for agency based
staff. The potential was recognised for not simply adding the use of C&IT to the
existing course, replacing something that already existed by providing an ‘electronic
cupboard’ for materials, but as a means of enhancing and transforming the way in
which teaching and learning could be articulated and experienced.
The aim of this action research project was to explore the student experience of
using the discussion forum and their perceptions of how, if at all, this facilitated their
learning in agency settings, and for this to determine the direction and content of the
developments.
Key Issues
Despite advances in C&IT in recent years with the potential impact on pedagogic
activity and the student experience, the literature relating to information technology
in social work education in the UK is limited, including contributions by
Glastonbury (1985), Sharkey (2000), Harlow & Webb (2003), Johns (2003),
Rafferty & Waldman (2003), Cooner (2004) and Skehill (2003). However, advances
have been made in North America including the work of Hick (1999), Johnson &
Huff (2000), Schoeck (2000), Stocks & Fredolino (2000) and Caskio & Gasker (2001),
and in Hong Kong, Wong & Law (1999) have contributed to this area. In order to be
inclusive and responsive there is a need for further research that considers the
experiences of students and allows their ‘voices’ to be heard, in addition to studies
that document the range of elearning ‘objects’ or learning packages that are available
(Sharkey, 2000; Rafferty & Waldman, 2003) or consider the experiences of staff or
practitioners (Skehill, 2003).
Ethical Issues, Marketisation and Equal Opportunities
There is growing awareness that the introduction of C&IT to assist and support
learning must be undertaken with an awareness of the ethical issues in terms of
equal opportunities and anti-oppressive practice, and a firm acknowledgement
that implementation is not value-free (Hick, 1999; Sharkey, 2000). For example,
Social Work Education 441
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
in the context of ‘market driven and resource constrained’ governance (Skehill,
2003, p. 178) elearning may be misguidedly embraced and promoted as a cheaper
alternative to traditional face-to-face delivery and without the economic impact
on students being fully acknowledged. Hick (1999, p. 10) draws our attention to
dangers and reality of ‘the commercialisation of higher education and the
commodification of instruction’ and urges social work educators to be critically
aware of how and when elearning can have ‘human value’ and create a quality
learning experience. In the wider teaching and learning literature Ramsden (1998),
Laurillard (1993, 2002) and Biggs (2003) emphasise the need for a considered
approach informed by sound research from a pedagogic perspective along with clear
research governance to ensure that the needs and experiences of learners, rather than
the needs of the organisation, are at the centre in any drive to embrace elearning. In
social work education attention needs to be paid to issues of race, gender, disability,
age and class as part of this in order to address issues of power and equality.
The rapid development of media technologies has the potential to transform the
way in which university education is experienced and for learners to ‘interact with
educational resources and engage with teachers and peers in ways that have been
previously impossible’ (Kirkwood, 2003, p. 156). A recent UK pilot study by the
Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE, 2003, p. 20) of elearning found that whilst
‘computers were often regarded as mechanistic, soulless, and antithetical to the values
of social care with its emphasis on human, verbal contact’ staff found inventive uses
of elearning facilities. Equally ‘students must want to use the technology’ (Simpson,
2000, p. 86) to do exciting new things rather than C&IT being an inconvenient
method of doing something they are already doing. The findings of Hick (1999) that
social work students wanted to engage with elearning, and of Skehill (2003) that
social work educators engaged in a peer action learning approach to the
implementation of C&IT were committed to future developments in this area are
encouraging. The challenge for the social work educator is to embed elearning in an
imaginative curriculum that makes clear links with future professional practice,
whilst promoting anti-oppressive practice alongside active and reflective learning. As
social work courses frequently contain a large proportion of non-traditional students,
it is important to consider the impact that C&IT may have on them. In a research
study sympathetic to social work values, Wernet et al. (2000) found that web-
enhanced courses did not disadvantage non-traditional students but rather provided
a flexible framework to assist in the juggling of competing educational and life
demands.
Balancing Technology and Pedagogy
Johnson & Huff (2000, p. 521) remind us that ‘instructors should resist the
temptation to embrace all available technology without question’, ‘and only accept
those strategies that improve the quality of learning’. Schoeck (2000) demonstrates
innovative uses of C&IT, including guest speakers, online class parties and even an
online masked ball, challenging educators to extend the creativity that can be applied
442 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
to generating an online community. There is overwhelming evidence that the
relationships between student-to-student and student-to-teacher that support
learning can be built and sustained at a distance. Concerns about a cold and
technocratic learning environment, unsuited to anti-oppressive social work, are able
to be allayed by this strong evidence.
The Learning Domain
There is disagreement in the literature as to the potential of C&IT to enhance learning.
Thomas (2002) sees great potential for the use of an online discussion forum, claiming
that the goals of increased interactivity, collaboration and participation can be met. In
social work education Skehill (2003) reported that the use of C&IT had limitations in
relation to deeper learning, though Hick (1999) claims that it supported didactic
learning, experiential learning and reflective learning.
Clearly, with these conflicting findings there are a range of factors that need to be
considered, one of those variables being the teacher implementing and delivering the
elearning, or to use Salmon’s term, the e-moderator (Salmon, 2000).
The Role of the E-moderator
Salmon (2000, p. 55) is clear about the underpinning role of the e-moderator, and
that elearning initiatives
should include effective e-moderator support and training, otherwise its outcomesare likely to be meagre and unsuccessful.
This is supported by Goodison (2001, p. 261) who found that ‘it is the depth and
quality of the communication between teacher and student … that counts’. In view of
the complexity of the role, the researcher completed a course in e-moderating, to
enable practical and ethical issues to be explored and practised. In the ‘Placements
online’ project the e-moderator’s role was multi-dimensional (programme leader,
tutor, researcher, e-moderator), with inherent tensions as a result, and was to some
extent addressed by access to a mentor/supervisor to facilitate a reflective approach
and challenge issues of power and interviewer bias. The researcher had facilitated the
parallel face-to-face link days in the previous placement and was therefore familiar
with the culture and tone of the collaborative learning style of this cohort, and able to
engage with students in a style familiar to them. However, inevitably this resulted in
objectivity being compromised.
Methodology
Informed by findings from an earlier project (Quinney & Williams, 2003), which
highlighted the need for new developments to support placement learning in both
distant and non-traditional agency settings, an action research model was employed
(Denscombe, 2003), which was ‘interactive, participative and dynamic’ (McQueen &
Knussen, 2002, p. 203), to discover how ‘Placements online’ might benefit students
Social Work Education 443
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
and staff in agency settings. The themes of learning and support, identified in the
literature search, informed the research questions with the action research being
concerned with how ‘Placements online’ might facilitate learning in practice, through
enabling learning, providing support, or both.
By enabling the students to determine the content, influence the structure and to
recommend changes based on their experiences of the discussion forum in the
implementation of new teaching and learning developments, social work values were
facilitated. A pivotal element of the action research was the importance of the student
voices being heard and acted upon, demonstrating a firm belief that innovations
must not be imposed without student experiences being valued. In this situation
there are parallels with the emphasis in social work education and practice on service-
user involvement.
Focus groups, drawn from the cohort of 28 second-year students in the academic
year 2003–04, were used to elicit expectations and experiences of the website, along
with analysis and evaluation of the usage patterns and content of the discussion
forum. Focus groups were chosen as they offered the opportunity to engage directly
with the student group in a conversational manner, utilising the strong group
identity of the cohort. This, to some degree, mirrors the threads that are possible in
the discussion forum.
Focus groups were conducted prior to these students undertaking an 80-day full
time practice placement (commencing February 2004), with the groups being
reconvened at the end of their placement (June 2004). Information from the first
focus groups was acted upon to construct the discussion forum.
The second strand of the research methodology was analysis of the online ‘threads’
in the discussion forum and data relating to usage patterns of the forum, supported
by an evaluation of the types of messages that were being posted and read.
In the pre-placement focus group students were invited to describe their
expectations of the website and identify the pre-set themes that would be useful
[Guzdial & Turns (2000) recommend pre-set themes to ‘anchor’ the discussions].
Questions were also posed to elicit an understanding of how students linked theory to
practice, one of the concerns of the research being whether the website could support
this transfer of learning in placement.
In the post-placement focus groups these same students considered their
experiences of using, or not using, the website and made recommendations from
this experience for future cohorts of students. Issues of accessibility, in the light of
concerns about the digital divide (Gould, 2003, p. 45), perceived C&IT competence,
and the usefulness of the website were considered. The co-operation of a practice
teacher colleague in the role of focus group co-moderator was sought, to militate
against and dilute bias, with their particular expertise in the area of practice bringing
a useful dimension to the discussion. The university’s research ethics protocol was
strictly adhered to, with the project scope made explicit and students giving written
consent to their involvement.
On completion of the placement period, the nature and content of the threads
were analysed, with usage patterns established from the on-screen tracking facility.
444 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
All users of the discussion forum have access to this function on the screen and
accepted this as an open and transparent design feature of this customised VLE.
Findings
In the responses to questions concerned with how students go about relating theory
to practice in their placements a reflective approach to practice was evident. The
activity of talking to other students from the cohort, one-to-one and on link days at
the university, was frequently given as an example of how this transfer of learning in
practice was facilitated; it is in this context that a website might be utilised to support
practice learning by building on face-to-face conversations with ‘virtual’ ones.
Students suggested themes to provide a framework for the discussions and in this
way the structure and content was determined by them. From their suggestions it was
clear they approached their learning in a collaborative and supportive manner, with
an emphasis on sharing materials and experiences, a strong sense of being part of a
group and an awareness of the skills and values that underpin collaborative practice.
Participants talked about the discussion forum with warmth, and their comments
were evidence of a sense of an online community. For example, students commented
that it was useful,
to read it and know there are others out there in exactly the same position and youcan ask … especially when we don’t see one another for such a long time …,
to see other people, talk to other people, seeing their comments, it was important… and I encouraged others to join in … the more you joined in the better it was.
This seeing appeared important—the names automatically displayed on the screen
of people they had an established relationship with provided an additional level of
comfort and interaction and one student described how a classmate could be ‘pictured’
laughing. This maintenance of existing relationships was a regular feature of the
discussion forum transactions, providing a depth and quality to the transactions.
The great majority of students had ready access to computers with Internet
connections, either at home or in placements, with only two students without this
but able to access university computing facilities. Of the cohort of 28 students,
approximately three quarters (22 students) used the discussion forum during the
practice placement, either reading the messages, writing messages or both. It was
evident that a core group of regular and frequent users existed and almost half the
student group (13 out of 28) wrote messages either as responses to messages or by
initiating new ‘threads’.
It was reassuring to note that personal qualities could be conveyed through this
online medium, that warmth and humour were present and a caring approach to
others in the group was observed. Computer-mediated communication was not
experienced as cold and impersonal but as another means of making contact, with a
quality that was consistent with face-to-face transactions.
Participation in the discussion forum was voluntary, not contributing towards
assessment in either the academic or practice assignments. In these circumstances the
Social Work Education 445
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
response to it was encouraging, bearing in mind Blass & Davis’s (2003, p. 227)
statement that ‘ask most academics about their experience of trying to interact with
students during the e-learning process and they will tell you that they cannot get the
students to use the discussion boards’. Whilst not all focus group members used the
discussion forum and their views were captured generally in the research, a more
detailed consideration of the views of students who did not use the discussion forum
may, with hindsight, have provided useful insights.
Discussion Forum Themes
Initially themes were set by the tutor in accordance with the student suggestions in
the pre-placement focus groups, to provide a framework for the interactions in the
anticipated discussion. Whilst these were read and responded to, the students began
to take ownership of the facility in a way which more closely mirrored the
collaborative personal networks developed during the course. There was evidence in
the online transactions that the discussion forum was being used to nurture and
maintain these relationships at a distance.
The 72 messages posted on the discussion forum were analysed for patterns and six
requested themes and two spontaneous themes emerged as categories of messages
from this (see Table 1). The anticipated use of the forum for discussion around the
pre-set themes determined in the initial focus groups, which could be considered
‘learning’ themes, was not the case in practice. Students quickly began to express a
greater need from the discussion forum for support-related activity and it was in this
area that the website proved most frequently used, with this emphasis shaping the
nature and content of the website.
Analysis of the Messages
Messages were most frequently posted in the relationship maintenance and sharing
resources categories. The pre-set themes were read on 402 occasions and the two
themes in the spontaneous category of messages were read on 355 occasions; with
sharing resources the most frequently read theme.
Analysis of the messages indicated little evidence of discussion taking place which
might be evidence for the development of higher order skills or deep learning, or the
development of critical analysis (Laurillard, 1993, 2002). However, there was
evidence of some sustained interaction and an attempt by users to support and
develop their learning through accessing the collective pool of shared knowledge and
skills in the cohort. There was also evidence that the discussion forum activity
focussed on organising and planning in preparation for both academic assignments
and for professional practice activity.
Not unexpectedly, the discussion forum was most heavily used in the first half of
the placement period, as students report this to be a challenging time as they grapple
with agency requirements, attempt to balance these with their own learning needs
446 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
and adjust to the new learning environment whilst attempting to make relationships
with colleagues, practice teachers and service users.
Computer Skills
None of the focus group members claimed to be particularly skilled in computer use,
with one student summing it up as ‘you just click and type’, and did not consider the
lack of skills as a disincentive to use the website facilities. Anticipated inequality in
Internet access was not a barrier, with the majority of the group having access to the
Internet at home or in placement.
When asked what discouraged or prevented students from using the website,
challenges to be overcome were expressed in terms of how getting to the site was
initially unfamiliar, ‘complicated and long winded’. In this action research model
these concerns were able to be acted upon and the outcomes monitored. When asked
what encouraged participation responses were expressed with enthusiasm and
referred to the excitement of having a message responded to, the sense of a shared
experience and of reduced isolation.
Inequalities in terms of access to the Internet in practice placements was evident,
with this situation expected to improve as social work and social care agencies
embrace the possibilities of C&IT for information management, research and
communication. Recommendations from the students for the future included issuing
guidance to practice placement agencies to enable students to make more use of the
facility in placement and suggestions for synchronous as well as asynchronous use.
Overall, it appeared that the inequality issues that might inhibit the use of C&IT, for
Table 1 Categories of Messages
Requested themes Example
Placement induction It might be useful to share your experience of induction. What hasbeen most useful? Where have you visited?
Evidence sheets What are the challenges in completing evidence sheets? How are youmaking links between learning in the university-based units and thework you are undertaking with service-users?
Balancing the workload I’m having a nightmare deciding on a title for the law assignment andwas wondering if anyone could help?
Link days I’ll be putting a programme together soon and would be glad to haveyour ideas and suggestions …
Sharing resources … I have found a journal article in BJSW vol. 3, 2003, pp. 901–919 …it’s useful for the first law question as it also contains a case study …
Networking information I’m in a local authority fostering team and would be interested to hearhow the assessment process for potential foster parents is the same/different in [another] agency …
Spontaneous themes Example
Relationship maintenance Hi everyone, hope your placements are all going OK, take care and seeyou on the link day xxx
Course information Hello everyone, does anyone know anything about the mental healthand learning disability option in year 3?
Social Work Education 447
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
example time constraints, lack of IT skills, and computer availability, were
outweighed by the sense of a learning community.
Two of the regular users of the discussion forum, also participants in the focus
groups, were dyslexic, information that the group were aware of as the students were
open about their particular additional learning needs. It is important to note that this
did not inhibit their involvement, both students maintaining that the discussion
forum was an important aspect of the support available to them, rather than an
obstacle to participating in learning. Students with additional learning needs are
taken account of with the facility to change font size and background colour, and any
miss-spelt words in their contributions can be attributed to typing errors. The ability
to return to the forum and revisit themes and messages at a time and pace that is
convenient is a benefit of asynchronous transactions, a feature that benefits all
learners in general and those with additional learning needs in particular.
An enthusiasm for elearning can be tracked in both the online transactions and the
discussion in the focus group, a feature commented on by Caskio & Gasker (2001),
who discovered a contagious positive spirit in online mentoring in social work
education. The findings of this action research project provided a clear mandate for
further elearning from these particular students who appeared convinced of the
benefits to them, particularly the access to support from peers, and who valued being
able to influence the decisions that impact on them through focus group dialogue.
Conclusions
The literature search identified two themes, learning and support, linked by the key
role of the online tutor, with this research project seeking to understand how
‘Placements online’ could be constructed and experienced to facilitate either or both.
The relationship between the two themes is complex as it is difficult to extract the
learning from the social or cultural context in which it takes place. In this project,
support, in the form of maintaining collaborative learning relationships, was a
priority for students, who used other strategies to reflect on learning in terms of, for
example, theory to practice issues. A frequently recurring use of the website involved
resource sharing, with students requesting and recommending specific articles and
policy documents to inform their practice or to assist with academic assignments.
The student-led culture of the website developed with a focus on support and as a
system for bridging or merging the physical distance between the ‘academy’ and the
‘field’ rather than as a format for evidencing learning outcomes. Despite the
limitations of this small scale study, the findings support the account by Johnson &
Huff (2000, p. 519) that students used a discussion forum ‘more often for practical
reasons than for academic enrichment’ and that it was ‘a partial remedy for the real
and perceived isolation of students taking classes at distant sites’. In the ‘Placements
online’ project the ‘practical’ reasons were frequently rooted in the collaborative and
mutual help relationships the students developed prior to placement.
As time spent in practice placements in the UK has increased in the new social
work degree, from 130 days to 200 days in total (DOH, 2002), it is increasingly
448 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
important to consider the ways in which students experience and manage the long
periods away from the university. It is important that programmes consider how to
establish appropriate support structures that enable learning in these two
environments to be supported effectively, and for there to be a clear and visible
relationship between them (Rafferty & Waldman, 2003). In other countries these
parameters will be different, but the student experience of a learning environment
isolated from peers in their cohort provides the opportunity to facilitate ‘virtual’ peer
support using C&IT. This research project has enabled a clearer understanding of the
needs of students during placement to begin to be developed along with a beginning
understanding of how C&IT might be employed to nurture collaborative learning
within and outside the university and support anti-oppressive practice in its
introduction.
The caution that ‘elearning may not be the apparent panacea’ for addressing cost
effectiveness and widening participation issues in the quality of learning and teaching
is important (Blass & Davis, 2003, p. 227). However, there is a growing body of
evidence that elearning, harnessed and delivered in a flexible framework taking
account of the needs and experiences of students, can offer alternative or additional
approaches which include opportunities to replace, enhance and transform the
learning experience of students. It is important not to be dazzled and seduced by
what the technology can do but to adapt and apply the technology to what we want
students to be able to do and what students themselves report as their needs and
expectations and for the online tutor/e-moderator to be able to facilitate this. Finally,
further development must be informed by the experience of those who engage with it,
both learners and educators (Salmon, 2000; Newlin & Wang, 2002).
References
Biggs, J. (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, SRHE and Open University Press,Maidenhead.
Blass, E. & Davis, A. (2003) ‘Building on solid foundations: establishing criteria for e-learningdevelopment’, Journal of Further and Higher Education, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 227–245.
Caskio, T. & Gasker, J. (2001) ‘Everyone has a shining side: computer mediated mentoring in socialwork education’, Journal of Social Work Education, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 283–293.
Cooner, T. S. (2004) ‘Preparing for ICT enhanced practice learning opportunities in 2010—aspeculative view’, Social Work Education, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 731–744.
Denscombe, M. (2003) The Good Research Guide, Open University Press, Buckingham.Department of Health (2002) Requirement for Social Work Training, Department of Health, London.Glastonbury, B. (1985) Computers in Social Work, Macmillan/BASW, Basingstoke.Goodison, T. A. (2001) ‘The implementation of e-learning in higher education in the United
Kingdom: the road ahead’, Higher Education in Europe, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 247–262.Gould, N. (2003) ‘The caring professions and information technology’, in Information and
Communication Technologies in the Welfare Services, eds E. Harlow & S. Webb, JessicaKingsley, London.
Guzdial, M. & Turns, J. (2000) ‘Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchoredforum’, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 437–469.
Harlow, E. (2003) ‘Information and communication technologies in the welfare services. Wiredwonderland or hypertext hell?’, in Information and Communication Technologies in theWelfare Services, eds E. Harlow & S. Webb, Jessica Kingsley, London.
Social Work Education 449
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
Harlow, E. & Webb, S. (eds) (2003) Information and Communication Technologies in the WelfareServices, Jessica Kingsley, London.
Hick, S. (1999) ‘Learning to care on the Internet: evaluating an online introductory social workcourse’, New Technology in the Human Services, vol. 11, no. 4, www.chst.soton.ac.uk/nths/shick.htm, accessed 14 August 2004.
Johns, R. (2003) ‘Application of web-based learning in teaching social work law’, Social WorkEducation, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 429–444.
Johnson, M. M. & Huff, M. T. (2000) ‘Student’s use of computer-mediated communication in adistance education course’, Research in Social Work Practice, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 519–532.
Kear, K. (2004) ‘Peer learning using asynchronous discussion systems in distance education’, OpenLearning, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 151–164.
Kirkwood, A. (2003) ‘Understanding independent learners’ use of media technologies’, OpenLearning, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 155–175.
Laurillard, D. (1993) Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use ofEducational Technology, Routledge, London.
Laurillard, D. (2002) Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use ofEducational Technology, 2nd edn, Routledge, London.
McQueen, R. & Knussen, K. (2002) Research Methods for Social Science. An Introduction.Newlin, M. H. & Wang, A. Y. (2002) ‘Integrating technology and pedagogy: web instruction and
seven principles of undergraduate education’, Teaching of Technology, vol. 29, no. 4,pp. 325–330.
Quinney, A. & Williams, S. (2003) ‘Practice learning opportunities: a voluntary sector solution’,paper given at 2nd International Conference on Practice Teaching and Field Education inHealth and Social Work, Imperial College, London.
Rafferty, J. & Waldman, J. (2003) Building E-learning Capacity for the Social Work Degree,Department of Health, London.
Ramsden, P. (1998) Learning to Lead in Higher Education, Routledge, London.Salmon, G. (2000) E-moderating. The Key to Teaching and Learning Online, Kogan Page, London.Schoeck, D. (2000) ‘Teaching over the Internet: results of one doctoral course’, Research on Social
Work Practice, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 467–486.Sharkey, P. (2000) ‘Running hard to stand still; communication and information technology within
social work training’, Social Work Education, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 513–520.Simpson, O. (2000) Supporting Students in Open and Distance Learning, Kogan Page, London.Skehill, C. (2003) ‘Using a peer action learning approach in the implementation of communication
and information technology in social work education’, Social Work Education, vol. 22, no. 2,pp. 177–190.
Social Care Institute for Excellence (2003) ELearning and Best Practice, SCIE, London.Stocks, J. T. & Fredolino, P. P. (2000) ‘Enhancing computer-mediated teaching through
interactivity: the second iteration of a world wide web-based graduate social work course’,Research on Social Work Practice, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 505–518.
Thomas, M. J. (2002) ‘Learning within incoherent structures: the space of on-line discussionforums’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 18, pp. 351–366.
Watson, F., Burrows, H. & Player, C. (2002) Integrating Theory and Practice in Social WorkEducation, Jessica Kingsley, London.
Webb, S. (2003) ‘Technologies of care’, in Information and Communication Technologies in theWelfare Services, eds E. Harlow & S. Webb, Jessica Kingsley, London.
Wernet, S. P., Olliges, R. H. & Delicath, T. A. (2000) ‘Post course evaluations of WEBCT (webcourse tools) classes by social work students’, Research on Social Work Practice, vol. 10, no. 4,pp. 487–504.
Wong, Y. C. & Law, C. K. (1999) ‘Learning social work on-line. WebCT course on policy issuesamong Chinese students’, New Technology in the Human Services, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 18–24.
Accepted January 2005
450 A. Quinney
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
alif
orni
a Sa
nta
Cru
z] a
t 08:
17 1
7 N
ovem
ber
2014
