8/3/2019 Msw Report

1/30

P E R I Y A R I N S T I T U T E O F D I S T A N C E

E D U C A T I O N

M A S T E R O F S O C I A L W O R K

N a m e :

C o u r s e :

T i t l e :

8/3/2019 Msw Report

2/30

2

E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

Social processes such as increased poverty and the movements of large population

groups in search of economic opportunities have contributed to the fragmentation of

social solidarity and the social safety-net in the past decades.

Innovative programs or ideas in curricula or fieldwork practice have been

developed by social work educators as a way to meet these profound challenges.

An email survey was carried out based on Schools of Social Work who are

IASSW members to map innovations introduced in social work education and analyzed

using qualitative methods.

This survey, with 31 respondents, revealed three major types of innovation: 1)

new theories, practice models or methods that are incorporated into the curriculum, 2) the

establishment of new programs, sometimes inter-disciplinary ones, that meet the needs of

new populations or better serve the diverse student body; 3) collaborations between

community agencies or coalitions to involve students, faculty or both in social change or

social activism.

Three additional types of innovation were also reported: 1) programs that helped

with the personal growth or social development of the students 2) administrative changesand 3) technological changes. In keeping with the academic mission of the schools, the

most common beneficiary of the innovation was students, and faculty or other staff was

also frequently mentioned.

To a much lesser extent, the beneficiaries were mentioned as being clients, the

community or society at large. The implications of these findings for the future of social

work education are discussed.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

3/30

3

Introduction

Several social processes have developed around the world in the past decade:

increased poverty and social distress, regression in social rights and government support

for social services, growing disparities between different groups of the population, the

movements of large population groups away from traditional homelands and regional

territories in search of economic opportunities and the fragmentation of social solidarity.

The impact of globalization, pluralization, social exclusion and other macro

developments that affect the practice of the social work have been reviewed by several

authors (e.g. Dominelli, 1996; Powell, 1998; Penna, Paylor & Washington, 2000). These

processes pose a challenge not only to social welfare agencies and social service

providers but also to educational systems, which prepare and train social work

professionals. Innovative programs or ideas in curricula or fieldwork practice have been

developed by social work educators as a way to meet these profound challenges. This

literature review examines the nature of these innovations in schools of social work.

Conceptual Framework for Understanding Innovation

Rogers (1983) defines innovation as an idea, practice, or object that is perceived

as new to an individual or another unit of adoption . Diffusion is defined by Rogers

(1983) as the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels

over time among the members of a social system . According to Rogers the messages

being diffused in the system are concerned with new ideas and this newness gives the

diffusion its special character. This process entails a certain degree of uncertainty and is

primarily a process of social change.

Wejnert (2002) provides a conceptual framework, for integrating the numerous

models of diffusion of innovations found in the literature. The suggested framework

groups the array of variables defined in diffusion research into three major categories

including the characteristics of the innovation, the characteristics of the innovators and

the environmental context.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

4/30

4

The current study is concerned with innovation in higher educational

organizations, specifically schools of social work and academic departments of social

work. Zaltman (1973) defines an organization as a social system created for attaining

some specific goals through the collective efforts of its members. The organizational

environment consists of all the physical and social factors that are taken directly into

account in the decision-making behavior of individuals in the organization. Wright

(2003) states the fact that institutes of higher education, and specifically schools of social

work, have parallel sub-cultural systems present in typical organizations: faculty

members who educate the students; support staff who work to enhance the operations of

the school; and dean or director, who holds the executive function in the organization.

Innovation in Schools of Social Work

The types of change common in educational institutions are policy, curricular and

structural. In part, these are in response to patterns of globalization and within-countries

migration that have changed the demographic structure of the student body in institutions

of higher education. This is reflected in an increasing diversity of ethnic, cultural and

educational backgrounds among the students, who in turn represent the shift in

demographics of the client populations served by the social work profession. Innovations

can affect these systems in various ways. These include changes in the level of resource

use and mix, instructional processes, management and organizational structure (Zaltman,

1977).

Much has been said about the importance of innovation to organizational survival.

According to this view, organizations must find their environmental niche in order to

compete successfully for customers and improve their financial relations with their

external environment (Stensaker & Norgard, 2001). Similar to other organizations,

proper external adaptation is crucial to the survival of educational systems. In other

words, the educational organization has to change as the environment changes (Wright,

2003). Considering the rapidly changing society around the world, that is not a simple

task. In some areas around the world, indigenous populations are also undergoing rapid

social change and those students who originate in these areas must accommodate to the

changing profile of their home communities. For example in Aotearoa/New Zealand one

8/3/2019 Msw Report

5/30

5

of the challenges is to respond to the needs of indigenous students in ways that reflect the

renaissance of indigenous groups in the wider society (Nash, Munford and Hay, 2001).

The same developments can be expected in other countries. Migrant populations will also

create new demands in social work programs as the needs of diverse populations need to

be met through social work practice.

Numerous factors such as financial pressure, growth in technology, changing

faculty roles, public scrutiny, changing demographics, competing values, and the rapid

rate of change in the world both within and beyond national borders, characterize the

challenges educational systems have to face (Kezar & Eckel, 2002). According to

Savelev (2002), the rapidly changing conditions of life make it necessary to employ

updated methods of understanding which are oriented towards a transition away from the

typical (model) approach and abstracted generalization and toward an integral synthesis

of the elements of actual situations. . According to the author, higher education will

need to be better connected to reality. He defines innovative education as based on new

kinds of knowledge and innovative dynamics , consisting of three aims: a. to foster the

students high level of intellectual, personal, and spiritual development; b. to create the

conditions needed for the student to master skills of scientific research; and c. to ensure

the mastery of the methodology of innovations in social, economic and professional

spheres. Students world-wide are required, not only to understand the local contexts of

the society in which they live but to also understand the global influences on this context.

This is one of the major challenges in social work education in the last decade. Programs

that may assist in meeting these challenges include: learning new skills such as in the use

of computers and the internet, program development and fund-raising, handling conflict

and emergency situations, dealing successfully with the mass media and with political

bodies.

However, the pressure universities face is double-sided: in addition to the need to

be innovative, higher-educational institutes have to conform to certain structures and

standards to attain legitimacy and ensure survival (Stensaker & Norgard, 2001). This

double-sided pressure is reflected in Markwards (1999) discussion about accreditation

requirements in social work education. The author agrees that curriculum innovation is

needed to reflect the changing nature of social work practice in the post-industrial era.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

6/30

6

However, after reviewing Council on Social Work Education curriculum policy and

accreditation standards, she concludes that standards that currently regulate MSW

education deter curriculum innovation within the context of contemporary thinking about

curriculum

Organizational change and diffusion of innovation in higher education has been

the subject of numerous analyses in recent years. Some of these studies are theoretical in

nature (Stensaker & Norgard, 2001; Kezar & Eckel, 2002; Lueddeke, 1999), suggesting

approaches and change strategies helpful in diffusing innovation in higher educational

systems. Some of the work focuses on curriculum reform and the implementation of

updated teaching paradigms (Building conditions, 2002; Curriculum reforms, 2002),

while others are concerned with the actual participation of students in educational

organizations (Visser et al., 1998). A current literature search in the field of social work

education revealed a different picture.

The importance of innovation in social work education is demonstrated in a

National Seminar on Standards for Assessment of Quality in Social Work Education,

organized by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, and sponsored by the National

Assessment and Accreditation Council of India in 2003. The seminar aimed to develop

minimum and quality standards in social work education, for the NAAC criteria of

assessment and accreditation of social work education programs. The article provided

details on the outcome of the seminar and the minimum and quality standards for Social

Work Education (Tata Institute of Social Sciences, 2003). Innovation appears in the

article as a quality standard of various educational areas such as fieldwork practicum and

instruction and program staff management, where staff innovations and creativity are

expected to be encouraged. In addition, the article provides standards of recommended

practices in social work education, including the introduction of interventions in new

areas such as working with voluntary organizations or developing new programs in the

absence of effective NGOs or government agencies, preparation of students for new jobs,

identification of new placements, response to emerging community concerns and

initiatives undertaken for peace, human rights, social justice, sustainable development

and projects aimed at influencing social policy and laws in various levels.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

7/30

7

Developing a Classification of Innovation in Schools of Social Work

We conducted a targeted literature review on innovation focusing on material

particularly relevant to our research questions (see questionnaire below). In a thorough

review of the literature, Hardcastle & Bisman (2003) identified five major areas of

innovation in teaching social work research: a) innovations produced by the evidenced-

based practice approach, which requires the integration of practice methods with research

methods. The purpose of such innovations is to make practitioners competent in

measurement and to make research skills practice tools; b) instructional programs

introducing more explicit ideology into research learning. Based on the conclusion that

research is basically ideological and value laden, this position argues that students must

learn the importance of social context in any research activity. The authors list several

teaching approaches rooted in various ideological perspectives such as the feminist, the

heuristic post-modernism heuristic and the social justice perspectives; c) instructional

innovations integrating multiple curriculum areas such as: field practicum, practice class,

research and policy, the basic assumption being that practice involves a range of skills

and that so should the curriculum; d) technology driven innovations, which according to

the authors account for much of the innovation in research instruction; and e) group-based research that focuses on creative ways to enhance student learning. For example,

educators are developing innovative strategies for teaching research and for bringing the

real context into the classroom (see for instance Munford and Sanders, 2003).

A similar typology of innovation areas was identified in general social work

education according to studies retrieved from current social work literature. The largest

proportion of studies consisted of reports of technological innovations introduced in

various ways to social work educational programs. Distance education helped by

computer assisted classroom, interactive television and the Internet encourage innovative

teaching approaches (Hick, 2002; Freddolino, 2002; Sandell & Hays, 2002; Faria &

Perry-Burney, 2002; Sarnoff, 2003; Abell & Galinsky, 2002) and new multidisciplinary

collaborations in training program development (Cuable & Dinkel, 2002). Among its

many advantages, Web delivery makes educational programs more accessible to remote

8/3/2019 Msw Report

8/30

8

communities, disabled people and students with special needs. It can create online

multicultural and cross-national learning communities, provide course materials and class

notes online and encourage the use of web links to state, federal and professional

websites containing updated information relevant to various courses (Sarnoff, 2003).

However, technology assisted training is not challenge free. First, computer

accessibility, knowledge and skills are required of both faculty and students. Advanced

hardware needed to implement a wide range of teaching strategies can be costly and limit

the number of users who can access them. Second, the virtual learning environment

might displace the real learning context and has the potential of being demanding on

faculty (Hardcastle & Bisman, 2003).

A second cluster of articles contains descriptions of social work educational

projects which developed innovative teachings methods. Schuster et al.s (2003)

description of the development and implementation of an undergraduate life course

theory is an example of an educational endeavor aimed at creating an interdisciplinary,

team-taught course. According to the authors, such teaching models, in addition to

providing multiple disciplinary perspectives on the life course, actually reflect the world

that students enter after graduation, thereby providing an important working model. The

authors experience included innovative teaching methods such as having each member

of the team sharing her life story, while applying life course theory together with the use

of music, food and other artifacts in order to approach the learning experience through

multiple senses.

Another example of an effort to model intervention methods in the teaching

program is described by Nuttman-Schwartz and Hantman (2003). This paper describes an

innovative teaching model aimed at promoting greater awareness among students of the

social workers social role. The purpose of the teaching model, based on the community

participation and role modeling approaches, was to teach the students to assess and

intervene while considering the social dimension of the clients problems. Essentially,

small student task force groups planned and implemented community interventions in

their classes, modeling macro intervention methods learned from their practice methods

teachers.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

9/30

9

Another trend in teaching social change intervention strategies to social work

students involves university-community projects aimed at promoting social justice in the

community (Kaufman, 2004). The Ben-Gurion University Department of Social Work, in

Israel, has initiated such a project in collaboration with local community human services

and national social advocacy organizations. The purpose of the project was to promote

the right to food security in Israel, while at the same time instilling values and skills

associated with social change in the university community. Through the project, the

undergraduate students experienced methods of social activism including the definition of

a social problem, framing solutions based on the principle of social entitlement,

collecting data from affected communities to support their position and mobilizing the

community for policy change (Kaufman, 2004).

At Massey University in Aotearoa/New Zealand social and community work

students introduced new approaches to teaching community development. They became

involved in community scenarios using a structural analysis framework which informed

their practice from locating themselves in communities, to analysis and action to critical

reflection (Munford & Tapiata, 2000).

Approaching the issue of social problems and public policy from a different

angle, Lens (2002) described the construction of an innovative classroom exercise for

analyzing public discourse using basic content analysis of media text. Based on the

knowledge that the media plays a crucial role in policy making, Lens (2002) suggested

that social work students need a better grasp of the medias role in shaping public policy.

The reported exercise was aimed at teaching students how to read news critically and

assist them in identifying the different ideologies that underlie social problems.

Altshuler and Bosch, (2003) described the implementation and evaluation of a

Problem-Based Learning (PBL) model in two graduate level social work courses.

Borrowed from medical education, PBL encourages students to take a more active role in

their learning, by creating real life situations where practitioners often lack the

necessary information for solving clinical problems, and for which no clear-cut solutions

can be reached. The main purpose of the model is turn students into effective problem-

solvers.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

10/30

10

Finally, in response to the external force on social work education of the rapid

growth of the aged population and increasing demand for social services for older adults,

and to expose students to a wide range of social work practice existing in the field of

gerontology, Ivry and Haden (2002) developed and implemented a new field practicum

rotation model. Essentially, students were placed in two agencies, receiving supervision

from a field instructor in the primary site and from a task supervisor in the associate site,

instead of spending three days in one field site for the entire academic year. This model

ensured that students receive complementary and contrasting field experiences.

According to the authors, despite practical difficulties during the implementation phase,

the field rotation model was found valuable and was evaluated positively by the majority

of students and field instructors.

The third group of articles focused on the introduction of new curriculum areas.

This rather smaller group of reports included such endeavors as integrating womens

knowledge into social work curriculum (Nichols-Casebolt, Figurea-McDonough &

Netting, 2000), the internalization of social work educational programs (Healy, 2002;

Johnson, 2004) and the numerous curricular innovations, including assignments, projects,

workshops and courses, in the field of Gerontology, fostered by GeroRich Projects

throughout the USA (as reported by the Hartford Geriatric Enrichment in Social Work

Education website 2004). The rights of disabled people and their families are also

becoming central to some social work programs (see Nash, Munford and Hay, 2001).

The smallest group of papers concentrated on new methods of curriculum

development, based on learning skills identified by the learners (Biegel, 2002;

Pointdexter, Lane & Boyer, 2002). This participatory method of program development is

based on the assumption that success is maximized by having potential learners shape the

content of the learning process and using focus groups to achieve their educational goals

(Pointdexter, Lane & Boyer, 2002).

Interestingly enough, very few studies report on educational programs initiated as

a result of the need to face the current challenges of increased poverty, social distress and

reduced government social spending. One of them is a project developed at the Bob

Shapell School of Social Work at Tel Aviv University, aimed at training and assisting

professionals working within the government social service system to be social

8/3/2019 Msw Report

11/30

11

entrepreneurs. This project was designed to improve the capacity of these professionals

to initiate, plan and implement innovative social programs within their agencies. The

project was conceived as a kind of "social incubator," on the model of a business

incubator, in which the university would provide the knowledge and personal support that

would enable practitioners to bring their ideas to fruition. The idea was to take

practitioners with rudimentary ideas for innovative social programs and to help them

develop and implement the programs within the agencies in which they worked (Savaya,

Namir, Stange & Packer, 2003).

Other examples are reported anecdotally from the field in Aoteroa/New Zealand

(personal communication, Robyn Munford, 2006). Often, community work programs are

the first to try to meet the needs of particularly impoverished or disadvantaged groups.

Once these programs become established or have proven their efficacy, they become part

of the mainstream social work education programs. Another variation of these types of

innovations comes from social agencies serving these populations that introduce new

programs to meet their needs and then try to partner with universities to have them

incorporate these programs into their mainstream curriculum.

It should be noted that the current literature search has come up with very few

empirical investigations concerned with innovation in social work educational systems.

Those that describe innovations are mainly case studies that take place in a small number

of institutions. It is possible that innovations may not be reported by educators who don't

see them as such, due to a lack of comprehensive perspective on social work education.

Another issue is that innovations may not be documented or evaluated, since to do so

require additional resources and skills.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

12/30

12

Study Aims

As senior faculty members of Schools of Social Work, we are interested in the

question of how social work educators approach the concept of innovation as a way to

meet the profound challenges outlined above. Specifically, we want to map innovations

in training and education that have been introduced in programs of social work education

in all regions of the world. We believe that these innovations may provide a potent

method and theory for addressing these global trends and to enable students to be well

prepared to work in diverse contexts.

Table 1.Countries of Respondents in the Survey

CountryNumber of

responses

USA 6

Australia 4

New Zealand 4

South Africa 4Israel 4

Canada 3

India 2

Denmark 1

England 1

Hong Kong 1

Turkey 1

Total 31

8/3/2019 Msw Report

13/30

13

The questionnaire

The short questionnaire (see appendix 1) included closed and open-ended

questions. Participants were asked to describe innovations that have been introduced in

their social work training program in the past five years, and to explain why they consider

the initiative as innovative. In addition they were asked to specify:

y In what program (e.g., BA, MA, PhD, Continuation Education) or target population (e.g., academic staff, administrative staff) the innovation was

introduced;

y Expected benefited and outcomes of the innovation;y Whether or not the innovation met with resistance or negative reactions from any

of the groups involved;

y Whether or not any formal evaluation accompanied the innovation; andy Information about the school and program in which the innovation was

introduced.

Results

The results are presented in the order of the questions as presented in the questionnaire.

When we report the specific answers of the respondents, we presented them verbatim (in

italics).

Typology of Innovations

The first question asked the respondents to describe any innovations that were

introduced in their social work training program in the past five years, who initiated

the innovation and for what purpose. Respondents could describe more than one

innovation and could include changes such as structural innovations, resource use,

and/or policy and management. The results show that there are three major clusters

of innovations described and three minor ones.

Major Innovations

The three major ones are: 1) innovations in theories, practice or methods that are

incorporated in some way in new courses, programs or field practices, 2) the

establishment of new programs and centers within the university or academic arena,

8/3/2019 Msw Report

14/30

14

sometimes with changes in the structure of the school or department or through

adding new degree programs 3) the development of collaborations and coalitions that

involve the teaching staff and students in some type of social activism or community

project for social change.

Minor Innovations

Three smaller types in the typology include: 4) programs for the social development

of the students which may be with community or coalition involvement, 5), the

introduction of technological innovations and 6) administrative changes.

Examples of each of these types of innovations are shown in Table 2. Some of the

innovations were listed in more than one category according to the thematic analysis.

Table 2. Typology and examples of innovations

Category

Major Innovations

Number

Reporting

Examples Quotation

Practice

development, adding

new theoreticalapproaches or

professional

directions

5 The College of Social Work felt the need to train

social workers to develop their skills in this area of

disaster mitigation and management. It hasintroduced a new course on Disaster Management:

Social Work Perspectives and Interventions as a

continuous education programme for professional

social workers.

Our School established an International Social Work

Program in 1999. The objective of the 3 year

International Social Work Program is to qualify

Social Workers to carry out social work both in

Denmark and in international contexts, based upon

an understanding of local impacts of globalisation.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

15/30

15

Innovative or new

teaching methods

3 Integrating new theory and techniques into my

teaching courses, especially in the area of

constructivism and evidence-based therapy in the

first and second degreerather than giving a

theoretical course I involved students in direct

assessment, intervention and evaluation methods and

taught all of these through practicing.

Specific new

academic courses

4 New course on Disaster Management: Social Work

Perspectives and Interventions as a continuous

education programme for professional social

workers

This innovation resulted in a new course we offer

("Practicing and managing social work in religious

contexts") and a series of articles and books on the

topic.

I introduced two new courses to our Graduate

program: Social Work with Diverse Families and

Qualitative Research Methods Both the issue of

family diversity and an explicit feminist framework

are not common in our school.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

16/30

16

Table 2. Typology and examples of innovations (cont')

New learning

techniques/programs

problem-based

learning and

practice

3 An integrated problem-based learning has been

initiated in the MSW program and course-based PBL

in the BSW. This teaching innovation is aimed at

fostering life-long learning and student-centered

learning.

New academic

programs, new way

of getting qualified,

curricular changes

or enrichment.

15 We have initiated two new specializations at the

BSW level: The First Nations Specialization and the

First Nations Child Welfare Specialization were

initiated to respond to the particular needs of First

Nations social work practitioners

A part-time program of study for the BSW degree,

known as the Alternate Stream, was initiated. This

stream allows experienced human services workerswith a Bachelors degree to complete their BSW

degree taking courses at accessible times on a part-

time basis over the course of three years while

continuing their current employment.

We have implemented bicultural tutorials so that

indigenous students and non-indigenous students

have opportunities to work through their issues

separately and then they come together to work

together to develop skills, theory and knowledge for

working bi and multiculturally.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

17/30

17

New Programs with

a Focus on New

Student Populations

5 We have implemented bicultural tutorials so that

indigenous students and non-indigenous students

have opportunities to work through their issues

separately and then they come together to work

together to develop skills, theory and knowledge for

working bi and multi-culturally.

A joint part-time 3-year MSW program that drew

students from the Navajo and Hopi Nations as well as

from the Flagstaff area.

Field work

development /

changes

2 Problem focused field practice is another innovation

where the College organizes field action projects in

which students get freedom and opportunity to

experiment with new approaches of problem solving

process.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

18/30

18

Table 2. Typology and examples of innovations (cont')

New at the local or

national levels

4 MA-structured program in advanced social work

practice

MA-in forensic social work (being developed at

present)

These programs are unique because they are offered

by no other university in this country on this level,

and is a departure from the nature of programs

offered elsewhere in the country.

We are studying under the Health Sciences Faculty.

We are taking the social part of the health. We have

only two Schools of Social Work in Turkey. It is new

to take social work as an health subject

As far as our knowledge goes, with the exception of

quite a few NGOs, no department of social work in

India has attempted promotion and strengthening ofSHGs as a means of empowerment of women among

lower income groups.

New academic

units/institutes

5 The Qualitative Research Center is a novel

organization at my University.

Establishment of a social development research

centre titled: Centre for Social Development in

Africa.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

19/30

19

Developing

collaborations and

coalitions (between

school and

organizations in the

community, between

schools)

11 The innovation is the delivery of a program to

educate and prepare social work practitioners to

become excellent field educators /supervisors. This

was developed in partnership with a major statutory

child protection agency.

Working with womens Self-Help Groups (SHGs) in

the area of micro-credit to enable them to reach

economic self-reliance and social empowerment

This program is run with the collaboration of

Peoples Action for Rural Development (PARD), an

NGO working in the urban poor neighborhoods of

Visakhapatnam city.

The establishment of the The Joint Forum of Faculty

and Students for Social Justice The Forum initiated

a number of community action activities on issues of

social justice, providing practical experience incommunity mobilization for social change at both the

local and national level in the area of introducing

legislation to establish hot lunch programs in the

schools.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

20/30

20

Table 2. Typology and examples of innovations (cont')

This comprises of networking with some of the

industrial groups/houses in the city to develop some

of the infrastructural facilities like library, computer

centre and faculty board room. The classrooms have

been renovated through a collaboration with alumni.

Category

Minor Innovations

Social activism,

personal growth,

mentoring, social

involvement of

students, extra-

curricular activities

3 Our first year students are involved in a project (Big

Brother Big Sister). It gives them the opportunity to

be a friend or mentor for a young child/mentee. The

organization Partners for Children reached out to our

university and we first did a pilot project. Because of

the success of the project we at the University

requested that all our first year students be involved

in this project.

We run locating ourselves workshops for all

students - these give the students an opportunity to

work through their cultural, class, gender etc

frameworks and the ways in which these influence

their practice and their world views.

Technological

innovations

4 The integration of information technology into

teaching has been initiated. A number of web-CT

courses and web-based course materials are provided

to stimulate an interactive and informative learning

environment.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

21/30

21

Administrative

changes

2 In 2004 the Council of the School of Social Work

implemented a blueprint that envisages the School

no longer along the old hierarchical lines but as a

community in which students and staff are all

stakeholders. In other words, students and

supervisors are involved in all matters of the Schools

administration, its various committees and projects,

including community projects outside the School.

Why is this an innovation?

The second question asked why the respondent considered what they reported an

innovation?

The responses are not surprising given the types of innovations that were

reported. The most common response (8 out of 31) about why what they did or reported

on was innovative, was that it was a unique or new program or course that was not beingdone elsewhere.

The innovation was also apparent at the course level where seven respondents felt

that they introduced new methods, theories or approaches to established courses, such as

the greater infusion of gerontology or international social work to the curricula. Another

seven mentioned that their innovation reflected a larger theoretical model (e.g. social

development or eclectic social work or viewing social work as a profession that includes

health) in the social work profession that allowed the curriculum to give a better

educational response to students' needs.

Another set of responses suggested that the program or method had been adapted

to meet the needs of a population or group that had special educational needs and

therefore this adaptation was an innovation (6). An additional cluster of answers gave a

practical, utilitarian rationale for their innovation that somehow it benefited some

8/3/2019 Msw Report

22/30

22

group, either students, the community, by recruiting new students or providing better job

opportunities for students and graduates (6). The last cluster of answers articulated that

the innovation was a new organizational approach that brought in collaborative partners

and formed coalitions between groups that had not worked together before, either

between academic units or universities or across community groups (5).

Some stated directly that an innovation had to be "new" and not done before,

others were specific about the innovation as a reflection of either personal or social work

values. Some felt that the innovation had proved itself not by its content and approach,

but by its end-result it brought some benefit to some party involved. A small minority

wasn't really sure about why it was an innovation or felt that their first answer made it

obvious and thus did not answer this question. However, one respondent answered this

question at length in the following way:

"For me innovation, at the dawn of the 21st century, is often seeing and

identifying a reality that most people ignore or do not see. Specifically, I refer to my

introduction of the role of religion in social work/social services. Not reading about

religious social services in the literature, I was puzzled and thought to venture into a new

area of research; one that was tabooed by the social science community."

The level at which the innovation was introduced

Since respondents could check more than one category, the answers reveal the

following picture: the most common level was in the BA program (20), the second most

common the MA program (12), followed by the Ph.D. program (7), and then variously at

the continuing education level (6), the S.W. certificate level (4) and then for the academic

staff (3).

One project was introduced for administrative staff and four others mentioned

other departments including field action projects, research support program, at a research

centre affiliated with the School of Social Work. This distribution seems to reflect the

distribution of academic resources in Universities the most common at the BA,

following by MA and Ph.D. level studies which other academic units mentioned

sporadically.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

23/30

23

Who benefited and in what ways from this innovation?

Most of the respondents named or implied several beneficiaries of their

innovations with, roughly, three major categories of beneficiaries named. The largest set

consisted of persons and bodies affiliated with the academic framework in social work

education. Of these, the most frequently named beneficiaries were students, named by 25

of the 31 respondents.

The other beneficiaries in this category included faculty (11), field instructors (3),

and the university in general or the social work program in particular (2). The students,

faculty, and field instructors were viewed as benefiting from training programs that

enhanced their skills, expanded their knowledge, introduced them to new modes and

approaches, as well as from research and the publication of a textbook on a subject

hitherto not written about.

One respondent stated that the program benefited the faculty by enhancing

international cooperation. The benefits to the universities and to the social work

programs were that the innovation provided publicity that improved their image and

visibility. One respondent mentioned improved enrollment for the benefit of the

university.

The next category consisted of the service providers: namely community agencies

(7) and practitioners (5). Practitioners were viewed as benefiting through much the same

processes as were deemed beneficial to the students, faculty, and field instructors. The

agencies were said to benefit from the knowledge and skills gained by practitioners, by

the fact that their skills had been up-graded. The sense was that the agencies benefited by

being able to employ better qualified practitioners and thus provide better services.

The third category consisted of the recipients of the services: the clients or target

population (7), the community (7) and society at large (2). In all but a few instances

these are described as the indirect beneficiaries of improved training for students and

practitioners and the enhancement of their knowledge and skills.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

24/30

24

Only in a few of the programs, where groups or interventions had been conducted

in the community (e.g. a long distance learning program, a national policy change and a

program directed towards increasing the number of minority social workers) specific

client groups or populations were mentioned as benefiting from the innovation.

What difficulties were encountered in trying to implement the innovation?

Surprisingly enough, a significant number of respondents (12) reported no

resistance or difficulties in implementing the innovation in their program. However,

these may be in part due to investment of time and energy to prepare for the introduction

of the innovation. One respondent reported, for example: "We spent several years

gathering data, laying the ground work, planning and implementing this change".

Another respondent remarked "It was welcomed and approved by the schools

committees, the standing committee of the university and community organizations."

One respondent gave kudos to the professionalism of staff for easing the introduction of

change. This was expressed as "No, there was no resistance, although the workload of

staff increased during the development time and when designing new assessments etc. A

high level of professionalism of the staff assisted in coping with extra work."

However, the bulk of respondents reported some kind of resistance to the new

program or innovation; the most common from faculty (13), then students (5), from the

administration or university (6) and from the clients themselves (1). However, some of

the respondents expected or were not surprised by the resistance and difficulties they

encountered. One respondent expressed it in this way "Both teachers and students

expressed resistance and anxiety in adopting new teaching and learning initiatives" and

another "Like every other new program there was resistance from most participants."

One source of resistance came from senior faculty who were concerned that the

new curriculum changes would render their knowledge obsolete and no longer needed in

academia. They reported: "At first we had to convince the lecturers that we are not

going to damage them and their professional integrity by exposing them to new model."

8/3/2019 Msw Report

25/30

25

"Some colleagues were concerned that their courses were being abolished.

Colleagues who had expertise in certain fields which were no longer the only core

training areas were also concerned."

At times, the larger university administration was the source of resistance or

difficulties. One respondent explained "Although there was support from the social work

staff (even if not very active support), the wider school environment was not at all

supportive and saw it as an added burden to the school (both financially and in human

resources).

This meant that there was no help financially... Further, there was no recognition

of the work-load impact of this programme on the lecturers, and no encouragement of the

students to take part in the programme. It was for these reasons that the programme was

discontinued at the end of 2003."

This is an example, among the few reported, of an innovation that did not

ultimately gain acceptance and was discontinued. This innovation consisted of two

modules of seven sessions each of experiential personal growth sessions with a focus on

values, problems solving, self-awareness and building self-esteem and applied skills (in

computer literacy and oral presentations).

However, the program was voluntary, non-fee carrying and non-mark bearing for

both social work and speech pathology students. This lack of organizational backing may

have contributed to the difficulties in maintaining this innovation.

One example was given of resistance to the intervention module from the target

population itself developing economic self-help groups for women living in poor, urban

neighborhoods. "Initial resistance came from the women to form into groups and later to

enter into economic activity. Mostly it was because of lack of self-confidence and

poverty, which has limited their initiative and ability to take decisions."

Another type of resistance was felt when the innovation meant addressing new

populations that the program had not yet addressed. Two mentioned this type:

"There was some concern that we restrict admission to the specializations to First

Nations students. However, the concern was less than expected and we have had the

support of the university to do so, given that that was what the First Nations community

had asked us to do. "

8/3/2019 Msw Report

26/30

26

"Little resistance, although not all faculty seem to have understand the need for

resources for the program for staff of agencies meeting the needs of a large Hispanic

clientele. "

The same researcher who reported venturing into a new area of social work

research gave a final type of wider societal resistance the changes that resulted.

"Many people were afraid that the findings and new content will enhance the

power of religion in society and will erode the balance of church and state. As such, most

secular and left wing groups in the school, profession, and wider society felt threatened."

Other difficulties in implementing the innovations

Other difficulties were named by 17 of the 30 respondents, most of whom

mentioned more than one difficulty. Two respondents didn't reply to the question; 11

stated there were no additional difficulties. The most frequently mentioned difficulty,

stated by 13 respondents, was insufficiency of resources.

Eight respondents referred to insufficient funding provision; three wrote of

insufficient time to develop, implement and evaluate the program; and two mentioned not

having enough appropriate faculty members to implement the program. These resource

shortages run across programs of different types. Two other resource shortages that were

mentioned, an insufficiency of public spaces and inadequate library facilities, which were

more program specific.

Difficulties pertaining to the faculty, students, and/or target population were

mentioned by six respondents. Two named the additional workload for the staff; three

wrote of objections, discomfort, or resistance by students; and two mentioned that the

target population did not take full advantage of the program.

One named competition with other projects as a difficulty. Two named

difficulties specifically related to their programs: one, a lack of sensitivity on the part of

third parties whose cooperation was crucial to the implementation of the program; the

other, the lack of a user-unfriendly on-line environment.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

27/30

27

Solutions for Easing Resistance to the Innovation

For the most part, the solutions suggested by the respondents included addressing

the concerns of participants, whether they were students or staff and easing anxieties

through this process. Seven persons suggested this type of approach, such as:

" Normal concerns about potential negative consequences of the new streamwere expressed and addressed prior to its introduction."

"Capacity building of staff was undertaken over a twelve month period,compromises were made and sufficient consensus achieved."

"I involved them in the process from the very beginning, by setting objectives thatcould be achieved and by sharing the "benefits" of success."

By contrast with this pro-active approach, others suggest that resistance eased

over time and suggested that "laissez-faire" was the best method to cope with it.

Variations on this theme were mentioned by four respondents. For example "Once

through the first year and into the second year of the programme, they realized the

benefits of this kind of delivery and its contribution to enhancing their learning and their

ability to work in multicultural environments. "Another recounted that " Some

students expressed anxiety about the on-line quizzes, but after some experience with the

quizzes, they described them as an effective means to ensure and recognize advance

reading in preparation for classes."

How does your institute encourage innovation?

This question was answered positively by 27 respondents, three of whom stated

that the support was only partial by younger faculty but not older or for teaching

projects but not others. One replied in the negative and three did not reply at all.

This type of partial support was expressed as a conflict between younger and

older academic staff. "I think my institute is very traditional in the willingness to apply

change. There is a discrepancy between the young, senior staff who are much more open

to change, and the older junior staff who are not interested in change". This suggests that

both academic training (we assume that this means Ph.D. level) and young tenure on the

faculty as two factors that encourage innovation in what is termed a fairly traditional

academic setting.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

28/30

28

Four respondents cited verbal support in the form of presidential mandate or the

university mission statement, with one of these respondents noting that the verbal support

was not backed up by funding or other tangible evidence of support. One respondent

mentioned that the mission statement was a significant aid in promoting innovation.

This was stated, for example, thus:

"Yes, our mission of the college is to educate professional social workers, develop

knowledge, and provide leadership in the development and implementation of policies

and services on behalf of the poor, the oppressed, racial and ethnic minorities, and other

at-risk populations. With this as our mission statement we have many programs that are

innovative."

Twelve cited various forms of instrumental support: Of these, four mentioned the

provision of funding; six mentioned administrative support in the form of the provision

of staff training, technology, physical space, and other, unnamed provisions; and two

mentioned that the innovators were rewarded with money, recognition and prestige.

Most of the description about how innovation was encouraged had to do with

organizational culture. Four mentioned generally that the introduction of structural and

managerial changes that had encouraged innovation. Two cited the frequent revision of

curriculum, mission statement, and governing committees. Eight respondents gave

specifics of how their institution had encouraged innovation (and some mentioned more

than one type of encouragement).

Of these, three mentioned that their institution encouraged faculty collaboration,

five that it encouraged proposals and ideas, and one that it encouraged student

involvement and supported their activities. Another respondent wrote that the institution

encouraged innovation by allowing freedom of decision to the local departments, and yet

another that it was fostered by the department's adoption of the innovation that was

produced.

8/3/2019 Msw Report

29/30

29

Personal Involvement and Evaluation of the Innovation

The vast majority of the respondents was directly involved in the innovation and

answered the questionnaire using their own insider information (27/31). One person who

was not directly involved was in a major supporting role as a head of school.

We also asked about whether the innovation was formally evaluated. Findings

show that the majority of innovations was accompanied by some type of evaluation

process (23/29 and two did not respond). However, what type of formal evaluation the

respondents were referring to is hard to assess from the information given (yes/no).

Eight respondents gave details of the evaluation process which ranged from very

informal and not very detailed (e.g. feedback from the students) to more systematic

evaluations (mid-range and final reports). One respondent, who reported self-evaluation

by staff quarterly and annually, presented plans for a more formal evaluation in the

future.

One respondent reported a formal process, by saying:

"The Alternate Stream was evaluated internally and a first report produced six months

after its introduction. Use of technology in the classroom is evaluated through the two

evaluations of teaching completed by students one for the university as a whole and one

designed specifically for the BSW program."

One more respondent was able to give the end result of the evaluation:

"Yes, evaluations are ongoing as part of our quality management system. It is difficult for

students to compare as they are not enrolled in both programmes. However we have

reduced attrition which is a positive measure of success."

Another respondent, whose program had not yet been evaluated, was cognizant

of the importance of the evaluation process and detailed the plans for the future:

"Unfortunately I have to say no here. However a current MSW student is carrying out

her research with former students to ascertain the efficacy of the model for preparing

students for practiceso one type of evaluation is in the pipeline but certainly this has

not been systematically addressed, except through the process of usual course

evaluations. The pedagogy as a whole for the program has not undergone in-depth

scrutiny."

8/3/2019 Msw Report

30/30

Discussion

This email survey has revealed that some schools of social work are actively

engaged in introducing innovation in social work educational programs. Three majortypes of innovation were reported: 1) new theories, practice models or methods that are

incorporated into the curriculum, 2) the establishment of new programs, sometimes inter-

disciplinary ones, that meet the needs of new populations or better serve the diverse

student body; 3) collaborations between community agencies or coalitions to involve

students, faculty or both in social change or social activism. Three additional types of

innovation were also reported: 1) programs that helped with the personal growth or social

development of the students 2) administrative changes and 3) technological changes. In

keeping with the academic mission of the schools, the most common beneficiary of the

innovation were students, with faculty or other staff also frequently mentioned. To a

much lesser extent, the beneficiaries were mentioned as being clients, the community or

society at large.

These findings are congruent to some degree with the types of innovations

mentioned in the current social work literature, with new models and theories

incorporated into curricula particularly common, both in the literature and in our findings.

We did find that a significant proportion of the innovations reported in the survey related

to adapting programs to meet the needs of new populations, particularly ethnic minorities

or groups of students who had had relatively poor access to academic frameworks. These

were not commonly reported in the social work literature, although work done in New

Zealand within a bi-cultural framework is one notable exception (Munford & Tapiata,

2000). It is possible that technological innovations are more commonly reported in the

literature than were reported in this survey, perhaps because the technological

innovations are easier to publish than theoretical or population-focused innovations.Innovations that relate to the personal growth needs of students were only found in our

survey and not commonly reported. The emphasis on social justice, social activism or

social change was reported both in the literature and in this survey.