首页> 外文OA文献 >Scottish first-line managers' views of newly qualified social workers' preparedness for practice : findings from an online Delphi study
【2h】

Scottish first-line managers' views of newly qualified social workers' preparedness for practice : findings from an online Delphi study

机译:苏格兰一线管理者对新合格社工的实践准备的看法:在线德尔菲研究的发现

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Social work is a broad profession with a number of different practice areas. The work performed by social workers is often highly complex, involving technical elements (knowledge of legal and other processes), relational elements (engaging with clients and their families) and elements requiring professional judgement and skill (such as assessing needs and delivering interventions). During 2013 a collaborative group was formed by researchers from the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC), Glasgow Caledonian University (GCU) and CELCIS at the University of Strathclyde. This group wished to explore the preparedness for practice of newly qualified social workers (NQSWs) in Scotland and to consider the roles of qualifying training, and employer support during the first years of practice. A central aim was to provide timely information to contribute to the review of social work education, post-qualifying learning and to the development of a national learning strategy led by SSSC. However, the research outputs may also be of particular interest to higher education providers, employers of social workers and to the wider social work profession in Scotland. The group took forward two complementary studies; one a mixed methods study conducted by GCU, focused on identifying the perspectives of NQSWs. These were gathered through a survey and follow- up focus groups. The other study, conducted by CELCIS, complemented the first by conducting a three-round online Delphi study exploring the perspectives of first-line managers who held responsibility for supervision of NQSWs. In this report we outline the methods of the online Delphi study and the main findings obtained from it. Where possible the studies used consistent conceptual frameworks, for example, by asking participants to frame their responses against National Occupational Standards. Our intention was to facilitate a further comparative synthesis to identify areas of concordance and contrast. We hope to provide additional utility and impact by allowing concurrent consideration of the findings from both studies, therefore our dissemination activities will include joint activities and signposting to or co-hosting of reports. The GCU study also usefully incorporates a review of relevant literatures which was beyond the scope of this study. Our study used an online Delphi approach, involving iterative contacts with 26 individual managers who had current or recent responsibility for NQSWs. These people formed a virtual panel. They responded to initial questions and to further questions based on our emerging analyses of the data. This produced a rich data set containing information which was analyses qualitatively and quantitatively. We describe the methods used in this study in detail in Appendix 1; and discuss the strengths and limitations of the study.
机译:社会工作是一个广泛的专业,具有许多不同的实践领域。社会工作者所做的工作通常非常复杂,涉及技术要素(对法律和其他程序的了解),关系要素(与客户及其家人互动)和需要专业判断和技能的要素(例如评估需求和提供干预措施)。 2013年,苏格兰社会服务委员会(SSSC),格拉斯哥苏格兰大学(GCU)和斯特拉斯克莱德大学的CELCIS的研究人员组成了一个合作小组。该小组希望探讨在苏格兰实践新合格社会工作者(NQSW)的准备情况,并考虑在实践的头几年中进行合格培训的作用以及雇主的支持。一个中心目标是提供及时的信息,以促进社会工作教育的审查,资格后学习和制定由SSSC领导的国家学习策略。但是,研究成果可能也受到高等教育提供者,社会工作者的雇主以及苏格兰更广泛的社会工作专业的关注。该小组提出了两项​​补充研究;由GCU进行的一项混合方法研究,重点是确定NQSW的观点。这些是通过调查和后续焦点小组收集的。由CELCIS进行的另一项研究是对第一项研究的补充,该研究进行了三轮在线Delphi研究,探讨了负责NQSW监督的一线管理者的观点。在本报告中,我们概述了在线Delphi研究的方法以及从中获得的主要发现。在可能的情况下,研究使用一致的概念框架,例如,要求参与者根据国家职业标准来制定自己的回答。我们的意图是促进进一步的比较综合,以查明一致和对比的领域。我们希望通过同时考虑两项研究的结果来提供更多的效用和影响,因此我们的传播活动将包括联合活动以及路标或共同主持报告。 GCU研究还有益地纳入了有关文献的综述,这超出了本研究的范围。我们的研究使用了在线Delphi方法,涉及与目前或最近对NQSW负责的26位个人经理进行反复联系。这些人组成了一个虚拟小组。他们根据我们对数据的新兴分析回答了最初的问题和其他问题。这产生了一个丰富的数据集,其中包含了定性和定量分析的信息。我们在附录1中详细描述了本研究中使用的方法;并讨论这项研究的优势和局限性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号