英国社会工作学生的“质量”:论述谱系2002 - 18

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Critical and Radical Social Work Pub Date : 2021-08-01 DOI:10.1332/204986019X15567132118821
J. Hanley
{"title":"英国社会工作学生的“质量”:论述谱系2002 - 18","authors":"J. Hanley","doi":"10.1332/204986019X15567132118821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Students entering university-based social work qualifying education are increasingly constructed in policy as lacking in quality. This article presents a genealogy of discourse examining major reports and policy documents in England from 2002 to 2018 in order to understand how the dominant\n discourse around these students has changed since the introduction of the social work degree as the minimum qualification for practice. Key findings from the genealogy are that the quality of students has increasingly been described in negative terms, and this is linked in the discourse to\n a lack of employer involvement and the poor public perception of the profession. Fast-track social work qualifying programmes are presented as the self-evident answer to these issues within this discursive formation. However, it is ultimately shown that the current discursive direction may\n actually be leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy that deters students from joining the social work profession through any qualifying route.","PeriodicalId":44175,"journal":{"name":"Critical and Radical Social Work","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ‘quality’ of social work students in England: a genealogy of discourse 2002‐18\",\"authors\":\"J. Hanley\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/204986019X15567132118821\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Students entering university-based social work qualifying education are increasingly constructed in policy as lacking in quality. This article presents a genealogy of discourse examining major reports and policy documents in England from 2002 to 2018 in order to understand how the dominant\\n discourse around these students has changed since the introduction of the social work degree as the minimum qualification for practice. Key findings from the genealogy are that the quality of students has increasingly been described in negative terms, and this is linked in the discourse to\\n a lack of employer involvement and the poor public perception of the profession. Fast-track social work qualifying programmes are presented as the self-evident answer to these issues within this discursive formation. However, it is ultimately shown that the current discursive direction may\\n actually be leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy that deters students from joining the social work profession through any qualifying route.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical and Radical Social Work\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical and Radical Social Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/204986019X15567132118821\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical and Radical Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204986019X15567132118821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

大学生进入高校社会工作资格教育,越来越被政策建构为素质缺失。本文介绍了2002年至2018年英国主要报告和政策文件的话语谱系,以了解自引入社会工作学位作为实践的最低资格以来,围绕这些学生的主导话语是如何变化的。谱系研究的主要发现是,越来越多的人用负面词汇来描述学生的质量,这与缺乏雇主参与和公众对该专业的不良看法有关。快速通道社会工作资格课程是在这种话语形成中对这些问题的不言而喻的答案。然而,它最终表明,目前的话语方向实际上可能导致一种自我实现的预言,阻止学生通过任何合格的途径加入社会工作专业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The ‘quality’ of social work students in England: a genealogy of discourse 2002‐18
Students entering university-based social work qualifying education are increasingly constructed in policy as lacking in quality. This article presents a genealogy of discourse examining major reports and policy documents in England from 2002 to 2018 in order to understand how the dominant discourse around these students has changed since the introduction of the social work degree as the minimum qualification for practice. Key findings from the genealogy are that the quality of students has increasingly been described in negative terms, and this is linked in the discourse to a lack of employer involvement and the poor public perception of the profession. Fast-track social work qualifying programmes are presented as the self-evident answer to these issues within this discursive formation. However, it is ultimately shown that the current discursive direction may actually be leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy that deters students from joining the social work profession through any qualifying route.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
52
期刊最新文献
Talking about needs and rights in inter-agency meetings: interpretive contests in Swedish welfare provision Maybe you can be too resilient: a sociological investigation into how student social workers perceive resilience in their practice Critique and Critical Social Work: a meta-theoretical perspective Who’s right? What rights? How? Rights debates in Irish social work: a call for nuance Lordship and bondage in the dialectics of social work: regulation and professional autonomy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1