Upload
ariel-martin
View
219
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Speaking of Justice: Assessing justly
With Gavin Rennie and Craig Tunnicliffe
A capstone for the Degree:◦ uniting and reweaving the threads of the Bachelor
of Social Practice
◦ Counselling, Social Work, Community Development.
Developed in 2001 by David Epston, Ksenija Napan and Gavin Rennie
experience and intuition (practice wisdom) as much as theory
Meaning
Published article after the two years of teaching
In researching this discovered Finn and Jacobson’s Just Practice paradigm (2004).
Praxis
Critical Reflection
ContextPower
History
Possibility Meaning
Adapted from Finn & Jacobson, 2008
The three strands of social practice all operate within the “social” domain
social work
International definition promulgated by IASSW and IFSW, “the social work profession promotes social change, problem solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well being”
It is therefore social (justice) work
“….each of us has an idea of an image of social justice. For some of us, social justice relates to notions of equality, tolerance, and human rights. Others of us know social justice through its absence, for example, through personal experience of injustice, degradation, exclusion and violence (Finn & Jacobson,2008,p.14)
Interestingly many of our student cohort have experienced these oppressions
Meaning: Social work as social Justice work
Demographics
2nd chance learners? Non-linear path to education (life rich)
ContextAge Gender Ethnicity
21-56 M=10F=61Fafefine=1
Maori =11Pakeha (nz)=28Samoan=9Tongan=4Fijian=2Tokeleau=1Cook Is Maori=1Chinese=7Korean= 1African=3Other=7
We both have backgrounds in sociology
Both undertook social work education after studying sociology
The traditions of academic sociology that resonated with us were that social change is both possible and desirable
Provides tools of social analysis to identify sites of resistance.
Our context
Paper has been taught since 2001 The cohort size has increased from 23 to 72.
Initial assessment required both an essay and a group presentation.
With the growth in numbers this method of assessment proved unsustainable
History
Re designing the assessment A number of factors needed consideration
◦ Cohort size◦ The course is taught within 6 week (students go
on placement immediately after)◦ Placement is full time (45 credits) and needs full
engagement. Thus completing outstanding assessment is not an option (hitherto this had occurred)
◦ The assessment reflected just practice principles
History
Central was the question how do you assess justly; reflection, professional development, personal stories of change/empowerment…
and still assign a grade?
Power
Assessment (can be defined) “as a process of documenting, usually in measurable terms, knowledge, attitudes and skills”
power and assessment: the elephant in the room
Or does it become the panoptic gaze of assessment.
Does this reflect just practice?
Transparent Relevant Appropriate Inclusive Meaning Equity
From power over to power with
Toward just assessment
Recognise the centrality of process
A return to origins Collaboration
◦ Two of the three original designers of the course David Epston (co-designer) Gavin Rennie (co-designer & co-lecturer) Catherine Hughes (Programme Leader) Craig Tunnicliffe (co-lecturer, & recent graduate)
Building on the current strengths ◦ as highlighted by student feedback
So how did we do this?
Assessment is twofold:
1. 80% attendance requirement
2. Group work leading to an individual presentation
The assessment
“Tell a story about how you have come to your commitment to making a stand for Social Justice”
◦ What has been your inspiration and who stands behind you?
◦ What does this mean for your future practice?
Questioning-an invitation
Is there a clear articulation of what social justice means to the student
20%
The context of the student in briefly acknowledged, including socio/cultural history
10%
Power is recognised and identified 20%
Has the student clearly demonstrated, with examples area(s) of social justice that will be their focus and explained how this commitment will be made achievable (Possibility)
40%
Creative engagement and demonstration of benefit from the group process (Critical reflection)
10%
Guest speakers:◦ providing both narratives of just practice in action
and providing exemplars of the assessment. Reflection (whole cohort, individual, small group)
Group process: ◦ de-individuating the assessment process.
safety agreement, sharing knowledge(s), respectful dialogue, linking of similarities and the recognition of difference.
Mentoring:◦ A “with journey” of assessment
Academically strong in groups with those who are not.
Lecturers as “floating” resources. Question posers.
Utilised a process of “with”
Manifest in the invitation to tell their story of social justice and where and with whom they will stand◦ Linking the personal and the political (the micro and the macro)
and vice versa
Residing within the group process◦ Finding strength in similarity and diversity
Within the class context◦ Dialogical exchange(s)◦ Exploring opportunities for mutual learning/teaching
Possibility
Student feedback…
Empowerment?
Epston, D., Rennie, G., Napan, K. (2004) On becoming a just practitioner: Experimenting with the final paper of an undergraduate programme as a rite of passage. Social Work Review, Jubilee Edition, 16, (4). pp 38-49.
Finn, J., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Just Practice: A social justice approach to social work (2nd Ed). Peosta, Iowa: Eddie Bowers Publishing.
References
Possibility