A Meta-Analysis of Approaches to Engage Social Work Students Online

Impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on field instruction and remote teaching alternatives: Results from a survey of instructors

“…The suggested activities and related resources are general rather than specific and may be applicable to a variety of synchronous or asynchronous remote courses that teach such learning outcomes. I assumed that more active and student‐centered activities are generally more engaging to students and likely to produce positive outcomes in both face‐to‐face (Freeman et al., 2014) and remote environments (Farrel et al., 2018). I do not discuss virtual field trips as a substitute for field activities, because virtual field trips do not appear to represent a single pedagogical approach, but rather a wide variety of remote or even face‐to‐face activities that are meant to substitute for the traditional field trip.…”

Blueprint for Social Work Blended Learning Curriculum in the Chinese Context

“…Some argue that the proliferation of online learning has deteriorated the culture of intellectual thought usually facilitated through traditional classroom settings (Brabazon, 2002). Social work educators have also emphasized on the difficulties involved when delivering feedback on clinical skills, interpreting nonverbal gestures, and appreciating cultural differences (Farrel et al, 2018). General concerns that regard online social work classrooms range from quality of the course, academic honesty, gatekeeping, student access, surveillance, and privacy (Reamer, 2013) to technical or logistic issues, loss of student satisfaction, and difficulty in peer engagement (Hirschheim, 2005) as well as reduced peer interaction, possible miscommunication, inconsistent participation (Rovai, 2007), and cultural differences (Maidment, 2005).…”

“…General concerns that regard online social work classrooms range from quality of the course, academic honesty, gatekeeping, student access, surveillance, and privacy (Reamer, 2013) to technical or logistic issues, loss of student satisfaction, and difficulty in peer engagement (Hirschheim, 2005) as well as reduced peer interaction, possible miscommunication, inconsistent participation (Rovai, 2007), and cultural differences (Maidment, 2005). When it comes to practice courses, some argue that they are ineffective if students fail to interact physically (Farrel et al, 2018;Jacobs, 2014) Moore and Signor (2014) observed that perhaps the greatest challenge found with the adoption of blended learning approaches is the engagement of students. Bass and Ballard (2012) also suggested that student engagement is related to student retention.…”

Teaching Mental Health and Well-Being Online in a Crisis: Fostering Love and Self-compassion in Clinical Social Work Education

“…Further, expensive online education by private universities can contribute to economic disadvantage for social workers who enter a highly competitive, over-saturated market, with substantial debt and the certainty of low starting salaries (NASW 2015 ). Proponents of online SWE often point out that educational outcomes of online learning are similar for distance and place-bound students while widening access to people who may be non-traditional students, especially single parents who may be economically disadvantaged and unable to attend place-bound classes (Cummings et al 2013 , 2019 ; Farrel et al 2018 ; Pardasani et al 2012 ). SWEs must be proactive and create substantial opportunities for engagement, sustained educator-student relationships, and the use of technologies such as simulation and virtual avatars to allow students to develop their clinical skills (Hitchcock et al 2019 ; Carter et al 2018 ; Jones, 2015 ).…”