Does Social Work Have a Signature Pedagogy?

Abstract

This article contributes to discourse on signature pedagogy by reconceptualizing how our pedagogies are understood and defined for social work education. We critique the view that field education is social work's signature pedagogy and consider what pedagogies are distinct about the teaching and learning of social work. Using Shulman's work on professional education, we offer a conceptualization that rests on the belief about the necessary outcome of our pedagogy-it must enable students to think and perform like social workers through the development of the professional self. We present a framework that focuses on three integrating features: thinking and performing like a social worker, development of the professional self, and characteristic forms of teaching and learning.The purpose of this article is to offer a conceptualization of social work's signature pedagogy that rests on a belief about the necessary outcome of the pedagogy-it must enable students to think and perform like social workers. The article intends to add to the emerging dialogue about signature pedagogy in social work (Wayne, Bogo, & Raskin, 2010). We argue that field education does not meet the criteria for signature pedagogy as understood by Shulman (2005 b) and interpreted in the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) 2008 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS).Our thinking draws on the long history within the profession about the educational and practice frameworks necessary for social work competency and emphasizes the person of the practitioner as an integral component of the thinking and performing of the work. We present an enhanced conceptualization about how signature pedagogy may be understood and defined for social work education. Using Shulman's work on professional education (1999,2004,2005a, 2005b) to frame our understanding, we suggest that the signature pedagogies in social work involve the integration of practitioner knowledge, performative action, and awareness that emphasizes the development of the professional self.In presenting our conceptual framework, we briefly look at some earlier writings related to the history and evolution of social work practice and education (Brieland, 1987;Lee & Kenworthy, 1929;Reynolds, 1942) to help situate the profession's current pedagogical perspectives and to explore how these viewpoints intersect with our thinking about what it means to educate the developing social work practitioner. Our discussion focuses on three integrating components:

Competencies

“…I tend to support Larrison & Korr's (2013) argument that students must think and perform like social workers throughout their professional development, and not just in the field education component of their education. Competency for practice shouldn't be separated from learning outcomes, but rather it should be seen as the result of applying complex learning.…”

“…"Field education is a highly valued component of social work education" (Bogo, 2010, p. ix), is considered by many students and graduates as the most crucial component in practice preparation (Bogo, 2010), and is sometimes referred to as the "signature pedagogy" of social work education (Shulman, 2005;Wayne, Bogo, & Raskin, 2010). While Larrison & Korr (2013) dispute the characterization that field education is the signature pedagogy, and rather argue that the signature pedagogy of social work emerges in the classroom and is then further applied in field education, it is indisputable that field education is the site of applied practice learning, and the beginning of competency preparation and professional accountability. The integration of the shift from learning objectives/outcomes to competency is evidenced through the language of competency rubrics used by many universities to evaluate field education performance.…”

Social Work Field Education in and with Congregations and Religiously-Affiliated Organizations in a Christian Context

“…Larrison and Korr [10] stated that the requirement for a signature pedagogy is that it prepares students to both think like and behave like a member of the profession. That suggests that field placement sites would consistently provide a context for the development of professional competencies and demonstrate a pattern of hiring social work graduates.…”

“…The signature pedagogy literature relies heavily on work by Lee Shulman in studying signature pedagogy in five professions: medicine, law, nursing, engineering, and clergy [10,11]. Shulman asserted that emotional investment in the field experience, even when it includes anxiety, is necessary to learning.…”

The role of practice educators in initial and post qualifying social worker education

“…The first incarnation of a practice educator (then called a practice teacher) was introduced to social work education by The Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work (CCETSW, 1989) and despite the critical role they have played in social work education for almost three decades 'those supervising students in [social work placements] have generally been ignored in the research' (Gibson, 2012:54). Even with workplace learning and practice learning being considered to be the 'signature pedagogy' of social work (Larrison & Korr, 2013) this element of social work education 'in general appears a relatively underdeveloped area of research' (Finch, 2009:24). Although the practice educator is situated as important in the gatekeeping for the social work profession and for ongoing continuous professional development their voices are rarely represented within empirical research.…”