4.5 Challenges and needs of supervisors in supervising social work students
4.5.2 Students, agency, and professional challenges
106 Supervision is a specialized function, and this is recognized by the SACSSP, however the implementation of a policy in this respect remains unresolved.
107 opportunities to do more at the agencies that could add value to their growth and development in the profession, students were content to do less and merely meet their minimal requirements.
As mentioned previously the awarding of bursaries appears to be meeting the Department of Social Developments retention strategies; however the initial screening and selection of students into the academic programme appears to be very relaxed, which is seen to be a challenge in terms of the caliber of professionals being churned out. Supervisors revealed that several students did not appear to meet the basic criteria of being a social worker. Whilst skills and knowledge can be taught and learnt, the basic attitude for this profession has to echo commitment and passion for the improvement of the quality of lives of the people. Seeing the profession as a job with an earning potential is insufficient to sustain the values demanded by this profession.
A significant number of participants indicated that the issue of the bursary has resulted in animosity amongst qualified staff whose entry into the profession was not an easy one. Their comparison revealed that current students benefit in many ways, including their earning potential as qualified social workers. Participants claimed that social work students were being employed without a valid driver’s license (a previous pre-requisite for employment) and the cost incurred to obtain the license is covered by the organization. Due to the automatic absorption of newly qualified social workers into the Department, students were not employed on merit or through an interview process and many senior workers loose opportunities in moving from an NGO to the Government sector, which is regarded as more lucrative in terms of salaries and benefits.
Animosity is bound to influence supervisors’ attitudes towards students. The views of many participants are reflected in the statement by Participant 17:
“It is amazing that all the newly appointed social workers, are the ones who received the scholarships, are in the profession only because of what the Government has done for them, but they are so careless”
The participants declared their passion for the profession and welcomed any improvement that would benefit the profession; however it is the caliber of students who are entering the profession that they appear to be discontented with.
108 4.5.2.2 Agency and professional challenges
Whilst agencies do offer field placement opportunities, several factors impact on the supervisor’s role posing as challenges for them. According to several of the participants student supervision is an additional responsibility that is assumed by a few social workers in an agency. Participants however assert that this additional role is not recognized in terms of the performance management of social workers, who are rated no differently to their counterparts who do not supervise. The additional workload places a lot of strain on them as student supervisors, a sentiment expressed by Participant 15, who stated that:
“Too caught up and difficult to follow up with the student and spend the time as expected”
The results of the studies by Peleg-Oren et al (2007) reveal that the more rewarded field instructors feel, the greater their investment, commitment and job satisfaction. Research has found that field instructors’ satisfaction from their job greatly affected the way they imparted knowledge to their students and facilitated its internalization. (Bennett & Coe (1998) and Itzhaky
& Lazar (1997).
In addition to the lack of reward and recognition, the time constraints do not allow for consistent and effective supervision, resulting in one of the reasons social workers refuse to take on the additional responsibility. The majority of the participants particularly from the NGOs reported that their agencies are constantly in a dilemma regarding scarcity of resources. Limited access to transport, stationery, photocopying, telephones, computers and office space were cited by most supervisors as impacting on their supervision of the field practice placement. The situation is exacerbated for supervisors who lack human resources and are the only professional staff at the agency. Participant 12, stated that, “There is a lack of understanding from management on the demands on one social worker”
Furthermore participants indicated that students placed at agencies that specialize in child and youth care need to be flexible in terms of their hours at the agency, since spending an entire day from 8h00 to 16h00 is not productive because the children are at school until at least 14h00 and
109 then have their set routines to follow thereafter. This highlights the need for a more flexible approach to field practice placement and the need to work closely with the academic sector to determine a way forward. As stated by Sewpaul (2011), establishing of minimum standards and recommendations to field practice training is as much an academic issue as it is a practice based one.
A few supervisors indicated that their roles were exacerbated by the red tape involved in decision-making. Participant 7 elaborated on this by stating that:
“…too much red tape – very restrictive – rigid communication channels…from student to supervisor – to manager (several levels of management) before a decision can be taken…many lines of communication tend to hold up the timelines. Students have a set programme with time frames to meet, management meetings are held once a month, delays are encountered in making decisions regarding the student or their work.”
This quote highlights the bureaucracy and rigid lines of communication that supervisors have to endure, that impact on their ability to render effective and efficient supervision, especially considering the constraints of the time factor that they face.
In addition to the rigid lines of communications, several supervisors stated that they were not awarded autonomy in their role and they experienced constant interference from their management. For four of the supervisors the decisions to accept students at their organizations are made via their Regional and Head offices. Supervisors felt coerced into the role due to their organizations’ commitment to student development, particularly due to awarding of the bursaries. The impact on these organizations and supervisors are heightened by the fact that many organizations (NGOs) are not willing to accept students who are awarded bursaries since they will inevitably be absorbed into the Department of Social Development. They do not see the need to train and invest in students who may never be in their employ.
This situation appears to impact gravely on the profession since there could soon be a situation where only one sector is benefiting whilst the many other organizations struggle with human
110 resources thus impacting on service delivery and eventually perhaps the loss of specialised services to the extent it is practiced currently.
4.6 Supervisors’ experience of partnerships with universities in advancing student