Ethical dilemmas in field placements: The experiences of social work students in Norway and possible implications for social work education

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Oct 26, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2020.322
Keywords:
Social work education supervision field placement thematic analysis ethical dilemmas

Main Article Content

Heidi Lie Eriksen
University of Stavanger
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9072-8078
Mikhail Gradovski
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3098-1447

Abstract

The study reported in this paper focuses on social work students’ experiences of ethical challenges, including dilemmas, during their field placements. Moreover, drawing on dialogical approach and the results of the thematic analysis, the authors discuss what ethical dilemmas the students experience during their in-field practice, and what implications the handling of these ethical dilemmas can have for the organization of social work education. The findings that are reported in this article are the results of the analysis of six sets of data collected with the help of interviews. The interpretive framework used in this study is a dialogical approach. The research strategy has been a qualitative approach, and the data collection has taken place in semi-natural settings. The thematic analysis of the data lead to four major themes of ethical challenges that the students experienced in their field placements. The first theme concerns structural conditions on a macro level that the students were confronted with when in practice. The second theme is about ethical challenges due to the students´ lack of knowledge and experience in the field. The third theme presents challenges in direct work with service users related to the students´ awareness of values and perspectives. The fourth theme concerns ethical challenges that occurred when students interacted with others in the organizations where the field placements took place. We argue that due to the fact that the authorial agency of any learner consists of personal attitudes, goals, values, knowledge, competences, and skills, it is important to organize supervision activities in a way that allows discussions in free and fearless environments so that the student could learn and unlearn knowledge and skills. This means that in-field placements should be viewed as learning arenas for various types of knowledge and skills, including knowledge on themselves, and not just places where the students can gain only strictly professional practical knowledge and try out their theoretical knowledge.

Article Details

How to Cite
Eriksen, H. L., & Gradovski, M. (2020). Ethical dilemmas in field placements: The experiences of social work students in Norway and possible implications for social work education. Dialogic Pedagogy: A Journal for Studies of Dialogic Education, 8, SA85 - SA111. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2020.322
Issue
Vol. 8 (2020)
Section
Special Issue: Supervision and Advisement

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link. 

Author Biographies

Heidi Lie Eriksen, University of Stavanger

Heidi Lie Eriksen is born in Lørenskog, Norway, but grew up in Bergen. She graduated as a social worker from Bergen University College in 2002 and finished a masters´ degree in social work at the University of Stavanger in 2017. As a social worker Eriksen was employed by The County Governor of Rogaland in connection to legal guardianship and implementation of the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child. In addition, she has working experience as a social worker at the municipality level of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare administration and Social Services. This experience includes supervising social work students during their in-filed practice periods. As a researcher Eriksen is interested in the supervisory relationship that develops between social work students and field instructors. In April 2018 Eriksen started her PhD project that focuses on various aspects of supervisory relationship between supervisors and supervisees.

Mikhail Gradovski

Dr. Mikhail Gradovski is born in Minsk, Belarus. After graduation from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim as doctor rerum politicarum in 2008 with the thesis devoted to the Norwegian Dialogue Pedagogy, Gradovski has participated in both national and international research projects on doctoral supervision, professional supervision, use of dialogue in education, and mental skill development. Currently he is a main coordinator of an international EU Horizon2020 project that focuses on the development of PhD candidates’ skills. He has supervised both postgraduate, graduate and undergraduate students. As a teaching practitioner he is using a dialogical approach based on an understanding both teacher and learner as partners with equal rights to make judgements on what is relevant, important and true.

References

References

Arbeidsmiljøloven (2005). Lov om arbeidsmiljø, arbeidstid og stillingsvern m.v. (LOV-2005-06-17-62). Retrieved from https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2005-06-17-62#KAPITTEL_3

Banks, S. (2005). The Ethical Practitioner in Formation: Issues of Courage, Competence and Commitment. Social Work Education, 24(7), 737-753. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470500238652

Beddoe, L. (2011). External supervision in social work: Power, space, risk, and the search for safety. Australian Social Work, 65(2), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2011.591187

Blaikie, N. & Priest, J. (2019). Designing social research. Third edition. Croydon: Polity Press.

Bogo, M. (2008). Field instruction in social work. The Clinical Supervisor, 24(1–2), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.1300/J001v24n01_09

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

CSWE. (2015). Commission and accreditation. Commission on Educational policy. Retrieved from https://www.cswe.org/getattachment/Accreditation/Accreditation-Process/2015-EPAS/2015EPAS_Web_FINAL.pdf.aspx

Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design. Choosing among five approaches. Fourth edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Douglas, H. (2014). Values in social science. In N. Cartwright and E. Montuschi (Ed.), Philosophy of social science – A new introduction (p. 162–182). Oxford University Press.

Eide, S.B. (2008). Profesjonsetikkens basis. Fontene forskning, 1(08), 38–48. Retrieved from: https://fonteneforskning.no/forskningsartikler/profesjonsetikkens-basis-6.19.265333.7cfd418400?

Fellesorganisasjonen. (2014). Veileder om varsling. Retrieved from: https://www.fo.no/getfile.php/138127-1547744215/Dokumenter/07%20L%C3%B8nn%20og%20arbeidsvilk%C3%A5r/Aktuelle%20publikasjoner/13764%20FO%20Veileder%20om%20varsling.pdf

Fellesorganisasjonen. (2019). Yrkesetisk grunnlagsdokument for barnevernspedagoger, sosionomer, vernepleiere og velferdsvitere. Retrieved from https://www.fo.no/getfile.php/1324847-1580893260/Bilder/FO%20mener/Brosjyrer/Yrkesetisk%20grunnlagsdokument.pdf

Gradovski, M. (2012). The use of the dialogue concepts from the arsenal of the Norwegian Dialogue Pedagogy in the time of postmodernism. Ethics and Education, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2012.733607

Gradovski, M., & Løkken, I.M. (2015). Chronotopic thresholds, reflection, and transformation of supervision experiences for preschool assistants in Norwegian preschools. International Journal of Early Childhood, 47, 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-015-0137-x

Grønningsæter, A.B. (2013). Tid og makt – om etiske utfordringer i sosialtjenesten. Fontene forskning 2/2013, 43–54. Retrieved from https://fonteneforskning.no/pdf-15.19390.0.3.4f4b4bdf02

Hardy, T. (2019). Then and now: The history and development of social work ethics. In S.M. Marson & R.E. McKinney (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of social work ethics and values (p. 22–27). London & New York: Routledge.

IFSW. (2018). Global social work statement of ethical principles. Retrieved from https://www.ifsw.org/global-social-work-statement-of-ethical-principles/

Kadushin, A. & Harkins, D. (2003). Supervision in social work. Fourth edition. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kunnskapsdepartementet (2011). Utdanning for velferd (Meld.St. nr. 13 2011–2012). Retrieved from: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/ac91ff2dedee43e1be825fb097d9aa22/no/pdfs/stm201120120013000dddpdfs.pdf

Lingås, L.G. (1993). Etikk i sosialt arbeid fra regler til diskurs. Avhandling til dr. fil. graden. Universitet i Gøteborg, Sweden.

Matusov, E. (2011). Authorial teaching and learning. In E. J. White & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Bakhtinian pedagogy: Opportunities and challenges for research, policy and practice in education across the globe (p.21-46). Peter Lang Publishing.

Matusov, E., von Duyke, K. & Kayumova, S. (2016). Mapping Concepts of Agency in Educational Contexts. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50, 420–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-015-9336-0

Matusov, E., Marjanovic-Shane, A., & Gradovski, M. (2019). Dialogic Pedagogy and Polyphonic Research Art. Palgrave Macmillan.

Moorhead, B. & Johnson, S. (2010). An ethical practice dilemma involving a new social work graduate: Implications for social work practice. Practice: Social Work in Action, 22(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/09503150903521744

Nordstrand, M. (2017). Practice supervisors’ perceptions of social work students and their placements – an exploratory study in the Norwegian context. Social Work Education, 36(5), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2017.1279137

Nordstrand, M. & Skjefstad, N. S. (2019). Veileder: Et kjærlig og trofast reisefølge? Om parallellveiledning av bachelorstudenter i praksis. Fontene forskning, 12(2), 46–58. Retrieved from https://fonteneforskning.no/forskningsartikler/veileder-et-kjarlig-og-trofast-reisefolge-6.19.706350.76f12eb89b

O´Donoghue, K. & Tsui, M.-S. (2015). Social work supervision research (1970–2010): The way we were and the way ahead. British Journal of Social Work, 45, 616–633. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct115

O´Donoghue, K. (2015). Issues and challenges facing social work supervision in the twenty first century. China Journal of Social Work, 8(2), 136-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/17525098.2015.1039172

Proctor, E. K., Morrow-Howell, N., & Lott, C. L. (1993). Classification and correlates of ethical dilemmas in hospital social work. Social Work, 38(2), 166–177. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article-abstract/38/2/166/1888375

Reamer, F.G. (2019). Essential ethics knowledge in social work. In S.M. Marson & R.E. McKinney (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of social work ethics and values (p. 315-322). London & New York: Routledge.

Sasson, S. DSW, CSW (2000). Beneficence versus respect for autonomy. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 33(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1300/J083v33n01_02

Swift, K.J., Gingrich, L.G. & Brown, M. (2016). Social work education: The challenge of neoliberalism. In I. Taylor, M. Bogo, M. Lefevre, & B. Teater (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of social work education (p. 382-393). Oxford & New York: Routledge.

Søndenå, K., og Gradovski, M. (2017). Pre-tekst sin rolle i rettleiing av nyutdanna profesjonsutøvarar – ei kronotopisk analyse. UNIPED, 4/2017. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2017-04-08

Tallant, S.H., & Ryberg, R. A. (2000). Social work in the military: Ethical dilemmas and training implications. In J.G. Daley (Ed.), Social work practice in the military (p. 179-204), New York: Haworth Press.

The Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2012). Utdanning for velferd. Samspill i praksis (Meld. St. 13 (2011-2012)). Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld-st-13-20112012/id672836/

The University of Stavanger. (2013). Internt reglement for praksis. Institutt for sosialfag. Retrieved from https://www.uis.no/getfile.php/1391248/SV/Gjeldende%20praksisreglement%20ved%20IS.pdf

Urdang, E. (2010). Awareness of Self – A Critical Tool. Social Work Education, 29(5), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470903164950

Vassos, S., Harms, L. and Rose, D. (2019). The value of mixing it up: Student experiences of a multi-modal approach to supervision on placement. The British Journal of Social Work, 49(5), 1274–1295. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcy105

Weinberg, M. & Banks, S. (2019). Practising ethically in unethical times: Everyday resistance in social work. Ethics and Social Welfare, 13(4), 361–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2019.1597141

Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research. California, USA: Sage.

Ødegård, A.M., Trygstad, S.C. & Steen, J.R. (2016). Varsling og ytring blant medlemmer i sju fagforbund: Rapportserie om varsling og ytring. Oslo: FAFO.