social work education: curriculum, pedagogy, and...
TRANSCRIPT
Chapter 2
Social Work Education: Curriculum, Pedagogy, and Evaluation
Currently, Social Work is taught in nearly two hundred institutions of Social Work in the
country. Most of these institutions function as a part of the university system. They impart
theoretical knowledge necessary for developing a perspective on social work and provide
training in methods of social work practice. Besides, they are looked upon as places where
theory building/refinement in relation to social work practice takes place. As such, they
constitute the primary stage for understanding the nature of relationship between theory and
practice in social work. This chapter is devoted to gaining such an understanding.
Firstly, it examines the Social Work curriculum of the institutions covered by the study to
glean insights on the nature of relationship between theory and practice with respect to the
discipline. Secondly, it examines the pedagogy of Social Work education and its relationship
with the curriculum to highlight the variance between what is recommended for teaching and
what is taught in the classroom to the students. This gives us an insight into what meanings
are attached to theory and practice in Social Work. Lastly, it looks at the evaluation
procedures that are followed in different Social Work institutions and the implications it has
on the theory–practice relationship.
As a discipline Social Work is taught at different levels of higher education. Of the
eleven institutions of Social Work covered by the study, five impart education in Social Work
at the bachelor’s level, all of them impart it at the master’s level, six at the MPhil level, and
all of them offer doctorates in Social Work (see Table 2.1).
Although Social Work is taught at the bachelor’s level in a few institutions, mostly it is
offered only at the master’s level. There are three reasons for this. Firstly, Social Work is
multi-disciplinary in nature and majority of the students who take up Social Work education
at the master’s level come from different disciplinary backgrounds such as natural sciences,
social sciences and commerce. Secondly, the fields of social work practice, where students
are involved as trainees, initially, and later as practitioners, are not limited to professional
social workers. People from different backgrounds are involved in activities that are
considered as the realms of social work practice. Finally, there is an administrative reason as
has been highlighted by Dr Armaity Desai in her interview on social work education: It is easier for the universities to start the master’s programmes than bachelor’s programmes because, in the former, the Vice Chancellor can take the decision as the UGC gives them funds for the first five years to open a new department. Thereafter, it has to be taken over by the State Government. In the latter, the college management has to find the funds and then the university sets up a Board of Studies to develop the curriculum (Desai, Pimple, and Jaswal 2000: 319).
26
Table 2.1: Social Work Programmes
Name of the Institute
Programmes
Bachelor’s Master’s MPhil PhD
1. College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai Yes Yes No Yes
2. Department of Social Work, Assam University, Silchar
Yes Yes* No Yes
3. Department of Social Work, Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi Yes Yes No Yes
4. Department of Social Work, University of Delhi
No Yes Yes Yes
5. Department of Social Work, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan
Yes Yes No Yes
6. Department of Studies in Social Work, Karnatak University, Dharwad
No Yes No Yes
7. Faculty of Social Work, M.S. University, Baroda
No Yes Yes Yes
8. Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune No Yes Yes Yes
9. Madras School of Social Work, Chennai
No Yes Yes Yes
10. Rajagiri School of Social Work, Kochi Yes Yes Yes Yes
11. Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai**
No Yes Yes Yes
Notes: * Education in Social Work at undergraduate level is necessary for entrance to master’s programme. ** Offers bachelor’s programme in it’s campus in Tuljapur but not in the campus in Mumbai. Source: Field Data
In addition to this, during data collection, a senior Social Work educator of the University of
Delhi, Mr Pandey expressed that the bachelor’s programme in Social Work has never been
planned properly; the planning has always been around the master’s programme. Even today,
there are no more than fifteen institutions of Social Work which offer a BSW (Bachelor of
Social Work) and that is also not planned well.
For these reasons, the issue of the relationship between theory and practice appears to be
mainly relevant only at the master’s level. Hence, I have limited the analysis of Social Work
education and training in relation to social work practice to master’s level only. Before we
examine the curriculum of Social Work, it is important to briefly state a few observations
with respect to the development of Social Work in Indian context, both in relation and in
contrast to the West. This will help us in understanding the role that Social Work plays to
address social issues in Indian context and how it impacts the curriculum of Social Work.
27
Social Work as an academic discipline has undergone many shifts during the last
seventy-five years of its formal establishment in India. According to Mr Pandey, “Social
Work started with charity-based orientation. After independence, there was a shift towards a
welfare-oriented approach in Social Work, which later shifted to a development-oriented
approach and then towards justice and empowerment”. The shift in focus towards justice and
empowerment has been emphasised by many social work educators since the mid-1980s who
have since then advocated for a greater focus on macro-level social work practice than
individualised social work practice (Desai 1984; Nanavatty 1985; Ramachandran 1988).
During the early phase, in India, the idea of Social Work was borrowed from the West.
But soon it was realised that the western model of Social Work might not be relevant in the
Indian context. The role of the government in the development of Social Work was much
more central in the West as compared to India. Moreover, the government as well as the
society in India viewed social work as a voluntary activity and not as a professional activity.
Social Work educators too were quick to realise that the individual-centric social work might
not work well in India, as community life is central to Indian culture and society. This also
explains why community-based social work developed faster than casework and group work
in India. But paradoxically, casework and group work have enjoyed more emphasis in
education and training of Social Work students in India.
According to Social Work educators, education and training plays many roles in social
work. These are: (i) developing an understanding of social problems among students, (ii)
building professional capacity of students with respect to thinking process and interaction
patterns, (iii) developing social skills among students, and (iv) imparting the understanding
that social work, is an organised activity, which needs to be planned and executed. In brief,
Social Work, as an academic discipline, educates and trains people to address social issues
through interventions at individual, group, community and policy levels and the curriculum is
designed accordingly.
Social Work Curriculum
An analysis of the Social Work curriculum imparted in different institutions is important to
understand the nature of relationship between theory and practice, as it elucidates what is
designed to be taught as the basis of practice. The direction in which Social Work education
in India is headed gets reflected through such an analysis. As observed by Michael F.D.
Young (1998), the curriculum is always a selection and organisation of the knowledge
available at a particular time. In case of a practice-oriented discipline like Social Work this is
more pertinent as the field reality changes rapidly and Social Work education needs to
28
continuously select and organise that knowledge in its curriculum. In reference to Social
Work curriculum Meher C. Nanavatty observed,
No curriculum design is determined on a blank slate or in a vacuum. It is circumscribed by time, place and the prevailing social, political, economic and cultural context in a given country. As such, it is to be a continuous exercise of examination and change, to maximise the opportunities of development, and to minimise the constraints faced by the profession (1990: 309).
As observed by the educators, Social Work curriculum has not been able to keep pace
with the rapidly changing reality in a diverse and complex society like India. For example,
senior educator Ms. Swamy of Karnatak University, Dharwad said, the institution to which
she belongs has to keep in line with the uniform pattern recommended by the University
Grants Commission (UGC), though the pattern has a cosmopolitan influence and the
experiences and requirements of mofussil institutions, such as her own, are missing in it.
Educator, Ms. Sukhdev, of the Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi (an institution situated in the
urban context) also said that Social Work curriculum has only partially responded to the
changes in the society especially in the rural context. Discussions revealed two reasons for
this. One was the hegemony of a few institutions of Social Work especially TISS and the
other was the administrative problems in review and restructuring of Social Work curriculum
in affiliated institutions. The central position that TISS enjoys can be highlighted from the
fact that even the UGC while setting up the curriculum development centres in different
universities, assigned first curriculum development centre to TISS for Social Work education
which was later circulated to all the universities (ibid. 1990).
The administrative problems include the financial problems associated with the release of
funds by the universities as per the requirements of the institutions and the time-consuming
bureaucratic procedures. These administrative problems make restructuring a tedious and
long-drawn process rendering the up-grading of knowledge and curriculum – neither smooth
nor up-to-date – in affiliated institutions of Social Work. The concern with respect to loss of
flexibility in experimenting with the curriculum, if affiliated to the university system, was
expressed by the founder educators of Social Work in India such as Clifford Manshardt
(1941) and J.M. Kumarappa (1952) in their writings in The Indian Journal of Social Work.
However, despite cautioning against the loss of freedom and initiative, other educators such
as Dorothy Moses (1951), and Parin Vakharia (1951) recognised the need for university
recognition in order to avail the institutional arrangements for promotion of Social Work
education and training in India, and therefore pushed for the same. For these reasons, the
curriculum is – many a time – at variance with the existing field realities.
In India, ‘professional’ Social Work education started with the establishment of Sir
Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work in the year 1936. The School, now known as
the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai has since then taken the lead to promote
29
Social Work education in the country. It is for this reason that most of the institutions of
Social Work in the country have, in part, tried to borrow and adapt many components from
the TISS curriculum (Desai, Pimple, and Jaswal 2000).
Broadly, looking at the curriculum of the institutions covered by the study, there are four
broad categories of courses: (i) the theories and concepts, (ii) the methods and skills of social
work practice, (iii) the history and values of the profession, and (iv) the fieldwork practicum.
The educators expressed that the fieldwork component of the curriculum makes Social Work
different from other social science disciplines. Thus, fieldwork is one of the core features of
Social Work curriculum. Since it is one of the unique and important features of Social Work
therefore it has been discussed separately in-depth in chapter three.
As TISS has been the pioneer Social Work institution, one would have expected the TISS
curriculum to provide the point of reference for analysing the curriculum of other Social
Work institutions. But, TISS being a deemed university, enjoys certain academic privileges
that other Social Work institutions do not. The autonomy that TISS enjoys to experiment with
its curriculum is unique. The other institutions of Social Work do not enjoy the same degree
of autonomy, to experiment with its curriculum. Hence, UGC model curriculum developed in
the year 2001 has been considered as the point of reference, as it involves the participation of
other institutions also along with TISS, in the study. Following which, the uniqueness of
curriculum of each institution has been captured in comparison to the model curriculum.
There is a limitation in this approach as no educator from five (out of eleven) institutions that
are covered by the study were involved in the committee appointed by the UGC to develop
the model curriculum. However, feedbacks were taken from all the institutions (that have
been covered by the study), before the model curriculum was developed. In addition, we may
reiterate the important position that TISS occupies among different institutions of Social
Work, as the convenor of the core group that laid the foundations of the model curriculum
was selected from TISS.
At the outset, the model curriculum is designed on the premise that Social Work is to be
practised and is not suppose to be limited to academic learning therefore, the component of
practice–learning opportunities is vital (UGC, 2001). The practice content in the curriculum
makes up for about forty per cent of the total marks apportioned for examination. Based on
the four categories, contents of the curriculum have been laid out (see Table 2.2). According
to UGC (2001), the frame adopted in the designing of the model curriculum places the
instructional content in four sets. Three of these are labelled as ‘Domains’. The word
‘domain’ is understood as a sphere of knowledge be it cognitive, affective behavioural or that
to support attitudinal change and value clarification, either singly, in combinations, or in
totality (for titles of the four sets, see Table 2.2).
30
Table 2.2: Curriculum Content – Domains, Numbers and Titles
1. CORE DOMAIN TITLE: SOCIAL WORK PROFESSION: THEORY AND PRACTICE AND SOCIO
POLITICAL CONTEXT
2. SUPPORTIVE DOMAIN TITLE: SOCIAL WORK
PROFESSION: HUMAN GROWTH,
ENVIRONMENT
3. INTERDISCIPLIN-ARY DOMAIN
TITLE: SOCIAL WORK PROFESSION:
INTERDISCIPLINARY BASES
4. ELECTIVE CONTENT
TITLE: SOCIAL WORK
PROFESSION: ELECTIVE CONTENT
1.1.0. Social Work Profession and the Professional 1.1.1. Social Work History and Ideologies 1.1.2. Contempora-ry Ideologies of Social Work 1.1.3. Social Work Professional: Personal and professional Growth
1.2.0. Social Work profession: Intervention: Methods and strategies 1.2.1. Integrated Social Work Practice 1.2.2. Work with Communities/Community organisation Development 1.2.3. Work with Groups/ Group work 1.2.4. Work with Individuals/ families 1.2.5. Social Work Research 1.2.6. Management of Developmental and Welfare Services 1.2.7. Communication: An Introduction to Audio-Visual Media 1.2.8. Social Work Personnel: Training and Development 1.3.0. Social Work Practicum 1.3.1. Orientation 1.3.2. Visits 1.3.3. Structured Experience Laboratory 1.3.4. Workshop: Skills Development 1.3.5. Rural Camp 1.3.6. Study Tours: Urban/Rural/Tribal Innovative Projects 1.3.7. Concurrent Practice Training 1.3.8. Summer Placement 1.3.9. Block Placement
2.1.0. Human Growth and Environment 2.1.1. Human Growth and Developme-nt 2.1.2. Family Social Work 2.1.3. Population and Environment Suggested Titles 2.1.4. Health and Health Care System 2.1.5. Rural Issues and Developme-nt
2.2.0. Socio-Political Bases 2.2.1. Social Policy and Planning 2.2.2. Social Developme-nt 2.2.3. Gandhian Approach to Developme-nt (Optional)
3.1.0. Interdisciplinary Bases 3.1.1. Sociology for Social Workers 3.1.2. Political Economy and Planning 3.1.3. Political Economy and Development
4.1.0. Elective Content Optional Courses 4.1.1. Counselling: Theory and Practice 4.1.2. Disaster Management 4.1.3. Geroentological Social work 4.1.4. Legal Systems in India Suggested Titles 4.1.5. Women and Development 4.1.6. Children in Difficult Situations 4.1.7. Youth and Development NB 1. Introduction to Computer 2. Use of Computers in Social Work (As per Institution’s arrangement)
Source: UGC (2001: 19)
As can be seen from Table 2.2, the ‘Core Domain’ of Social Work is that which
characterises the profession for its philosophy, ideology, practice, values, ethics, theory, and
concepts. The ‘Supportive Domain’ content provides knowledge and skills to assist the ‘Core
Domain’ in specific areas of social work practice. The ‘Interdisciplinary Domain’ has relevant
theories, concepts, and perspectives that are borrowed from other disciplines such as the
social sciences, in order to, help understand the social phenomena necessitating change. The
‘Elective Content’ provides for optional courses. The content of these courses is developed to
meet national and local needs (specific to the – economic, political and social context – on the
one hand, and resources available to the institutions of Social Work in different parts of the
country on the other).
31
It is evident that the model curriculum of Social Work has been designed keeping in
mind that social work is practice-oriented and that Social Work education must focus more on
applied rather than academic knowledge. This can be highlighted by the fact that the
‘Interdisciplinary Domain’ is incorporated in the model curriculum so that it helps in
understanding social phenomena to necessitate change. In addition, it also highlights the
inherent relationship between theory and practice in Social Work. If we look at the ‘Core
Domain’, fieldwork stands out as the core component in the education and training of social
workers. Within this domain, the main focus is on methods of social work practice with
individuals/families, groups, and communities. The first column of the Table suggests an
orientation towards developing social work as a profession focussing on the attitudinal change
of students towards the conceptualisation of social work and the meaning it takes
professionally. However, there are two courses (1.1.1. and 1.1.2.) that highlight pluralism in
social work, connecting it to ideologies which have underpinning theoretical assumptions (see
Table 2.2).
The second column in the Table points to the emphasis on training and skill development
of social workers. Thus, in Social Work, the theoretical and academic parts of the discipline
appear to occupy only an auxiliary position. The ‘Supportive Domain’ and the
‘Interdisciplinary Domain’ and their position in terms of content both quantitatively and
qualitatively are appreciated less as compared to the training part. This is because when
theoretical courses are taught, only relevant knowledge for practice is borrowed from other
social science disciplines and in-depth academic knowledge of the same is not encouraged.
The elective content, as given in the last column of the Table, highlights two important points
about Social Work education and its contextualisation with reference to India. Firstly, the
specialisations in Social Work are field-based and not method-based. This reflects the
emphasis on an integrated approach to social work practice in India. And secondly, there are
some specific specialised areas of practice for social workers in India. This highlights that
Social Work curriculum is both dynamic and it changes according to the context of practice.
Thus, the model curriculum of Social Work designed by UGC highlights the importance
given to training, theory, and context in education. The importance given to practice
underscores the applied nature of Social Work. The analysis of the model curriculum suggests
that theory plays an important yet a secondary role to inform social work practice. The study
aims at exploring the nature and extent of this relationship.
However, an important point to note here is that there might be a shift in the emphasis on
different courses pedagogically (one may argue this), but the contents and the classification of
the Social Work courses of the UGC model curriculum, published in the year 2001, do not
digress much from the contents of the curriculum that existed more than three decades earlier.
According to Nanavatty (1967a) and Yelaja (1969b), the contents of the curricula of different
32
institutions of Social Work follow a common pattern of education that involves, (i)
knowledge drawn from the social sciences, (ii) knowledge of methods of social work practice,
and (iii) knowledge of different welfare areas, services and policies. These three categories
are easily comparable with the domains highlighted in the UGC model curriculum published
in the year 2001.
Having examined the model curriculum for Social Work education overall, we will now
discuss the knowledge base of Social Work and then do a comparative analysis of the
curricula of the Social Work institutions covered by the study. This also, incorporates the
reflections of educators and students on Social Work curriculum and its various components.
Knowledge Base of Social Work
The knowledge base of Social Work can be broadly divided into two parts, namely, (i) the
theoretical base, and (ii) the methodology. Senior educator, Ms. Jhunjhunwala of the M.S.
University, Baroda said, an analysis of the contents of Social Work curriculum suggests that
50 per cent of knowledge base in Social Work is borrowed from social sciences and the
remaining 50 per cent is its own, which largely focuses on the methodology. This highlights
an important feature of Social Work vis-à-vis connection between theory and practice,
wherein the curriculum designing is directed towards amalgamation of both education in
theory (borrowed from the social sciences) and methods (classroom teaching–learning), and
learning by doing (fieldwork).
The theoretical base of Social Work is interdisciplinary in nature, wherein an effort is
made to develop an understanding of concepts that are relevant for practice. The knowledge
of these concepts is largely borrowed from the social sciences such as economics and
sociology, and the behavioural sciences such as psychology. Ms. Vashi, an educator from
TISS observed that Social Work is clearly built upon an interdisciplinary approach in teaching
and a trans-disciplinary approach in practice. The intention behind such an approach is to
enable social workers to find a certain kind of a niche to address social issues and raise social
concerns within different projects and programmes and have the technical expertise to raise
the social agenda. Thus, Social Work basically trains students to work in a team comprising
of professionals coming from different backgrounds such as lawyers, doctors and bureaucrats,
to create an effective space for social workers in different settings. Also she highlighted that,
academically Social Work needs to draw on theories and concepts from other disciplines and
then examine them in the light of different field situations. Thus, Social Work is an
intersection of different disciplines and contributes to emerging fields in terms of applied
social sciences such as habitat studies and disaster management.
Shagufta, a student of TISS stated that, as Social Work is interdisciplinary it gives a
space to understand social problems from different theoretical perspectives and then to locate
33
practice in a perspective that suits the field reality. This reflection by a student highlights the
plural and accommodative nature of Social Work and the need to understand the theoretical
assumptions underlying social work practice.
Many students from different institutions observed that the theoretical base of Social
Work also includes knowledge related to constitutional rights, law, different concepts such as
family, community, and local and national social issues. This highlights two important points
about curriculum of Social Work: that it aims at providing a working knowledge to students
about different concepts, and that theory plays an important role in connecting micro-issues
with macro-issues.
The second major part constituting the knowledge base of Social Work is methodology.
It is directed more towards training of students in terms of methods of social work practice
and development of skills for effective practice. Social Work has over a period developed
different methods of practice which include Social Casework, Social Group Work,
Community Organisation and Development, Social Action, Social Work Research, and Social
Welfare Administration. Knowledge of these methods of practice is imparted in different
institutions of Social Work so that social work practice is organised for planned interventions
to take place. The assumption behind organised practice is that the methods of social work
practice are so designed that they can direct intervention made by social workers on the field.
Different methods train students to work at different levels. For example, Social Casework
provides training for working with individuals, and Community Organisation provides
training for working at the community level. These methods are based on humanitarian values
and are accordingly guided by some principles. Ms. Krishnan, an educator of Karve Institute
of Social Service, Pune, said, methods of social work practice are more focussed on skill
development and perspective building. But, the perspective again draws on understanding
from other social sciences disciplines. For example, casework draws heavily from
Psychology, and community organisation draws from Political Science and Economics. The
reflections of the educators and the students on the knowledge base of Social Work are in line
with the sources of Social Work knowledge identified by Grace L. Coyle (1958). According
to Coyle, the methods of social work practice, namely, Casework, Group work, Community
Organisation, and Public Welfare are the central sources of social work knowledge which are
connected to knowledge from related professions such as Medicine, Public Health, Law, and
Education and knowledge from the Social Sciences such as Anthropology, Economics,
Political Science, Psychological Sciences, Social Psychology, and Sociology. All this when
taken together constitutes the knowledge base of Social Work.
Two important points emerged from the discussions with educators and students about
the knowledge base of Social Work. Firstly, it is built and revised depending upon the needs
of the society. This highlights that the context of social work practice is embedded in Social
34
Work education and training, which needs continuous revision. Secondly, Social Work
borrows its academic base from the social sciences, develops models of practice using their
concepts and the experiments that are done by social workers through interventions in the
field.
To summarise, the knowledge base of Social Work is partly borrowed from other social
sciences and partly developed through field experiments of the social workers. Thus, in Social
Work curriculum, theory and practice are intertwined. To further examine this relationship we
shall now do a comparative analysis of the curriculum of different institutions in relation to
the UGC model curriculum (see Table 2.3). Of the eleven institutions, we could access the
curriculum of eight institutions; three institutions either desired or delayed granting
permission to access their curriculum.
Table 2.3: Structure of the Curriculum*
Name of the Institution
Number of
Courses
Structure Nature Specialisations
(if any) Core Domain Inter-disciplinary Domain
1. College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan
25
1. Philosophy of Social Work 2. Social Work Intervention: Methods and Strategies
1. Social Science Foundation For Social Work 2. Human Development and Health 3. Social System and Social Conflict 4. Special Interest Areas
Generic N.A.
2. Department of Social Work, Assam University Silchar
20
1. Social Work Profession 2. Social Work Methods 3. Areas of Social Work Practice 4. Integrated Social work Practice
1. Indian Society 2. Dynamics of Human Behaviour 3. Psycho-Social Counselling 4. Social Legislation 5. Social Policy, Planning and Development
Generic N.A.
3. Department of Social Work, Jamia Milia Islamia
20
1. Foundations of Social Work 2. Theory and Practice of Social Work Methods 3. Social Welfare: Areas and Settings for Social Work Practice
1. Social Sciences Concepts for Social Work 2. Counselling: Theory and Practice 3. Human Rights and Social Justice 4. Social Policy, Planning and Development 5. Urban and Rural Development, Environmental Concerns for Social
Speciali-sation
1. Social Welfare 2. Social Development
35
Work Practice, and Poverty and Livelihood
4. Department of Social Work, University of Delhi
21
1. Nature and Development of Social Work 2. Methods of Social work Practice 3. Areas of Social Work Practice
1. Sociological Concepts and Contemporary Concerns 2. Human Behaviour and Social Environment 3. State, Political Economy and Governance 4. Social Justice and Empowerment 5. Social Policy and Social Development 6. Human Rights and Social Work Practice 7. Social Legislation
Generic N.A.
5. Department of Social Work, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan
32
1. Social Work Profession: Philosophy and Concepts 2. Methods of Social Work Practice 3. Areas and Settings of Social Work Practice
1. Man and Society 2. Human Behaviour and Social Environment 3. Social Policy and Environment 4. Social Development 5. Counselling Theory and Practice
Generic N.A.
6. Department of Studies in Social Work, Karnatak University, Dharwad
20
1. Social Work Profession: History, Philosophy and Ideologies 2. Methods of Social Work Practice 3. Fields and Areas of Social Work Practice
1. Society and Social Pathology 2. Human Growth and Development 3. Social Policy, Planning and Development 4. Social Justice and Empowerment for promotion of Welfare 5. Legal Systems on India
Generic N.A.
7. Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune
20
1. Social Work Profession 2. Methods of Social work Practice 3. Areas of Social Work Practice Personal and Professional Development for Social Work Practice
1. Psychology for Social Workers 2. Social Sciences for Social Workers 3. Social Legislation and Legal Systems in India 4. Social Policy and Planning
Special- isation
1. Family and Child Welfare 2. Medical and Psychiatric Social Work 3. Urban and Rural Community Development and Practice 4. Human Resource Management
8. Tata Institute 27(or 23 1. History and 1. Understanding Concent- 1. Community Org.
36
of Social Sciences, Mumbai
+1)** Ideology of Social Work 2. Social Work Practice (Methods) 3. Areas and Fields of Social Work Practice
Society. 2. Introduction to Economics 3. Development Experience, Social Conflict and Change 4. Polity, Governance and Public Policy 5. Law and Social Work 6. Human Growth and Behaviour 7. Critical perspectives on Society: Introduction to Social Work
rations and Dev. Practice 2. Persons with Disability and Equalisation of Opportunities 3. Health and Development 4. Dalits and Tribals: Social Justice, Equity and Governance 5. Criminology and Justice 6. Social Work with Children and Families 7. Women-Centred Social Work
Notes: * The structure excludes the fieldwork component (discussed in-depth in Chapter 3)
** Students are either required to pursue 27 courses or 23 if they choose to pursue 1 research dissertation. Source: Field Data
Structure
As can be seen from the second column of Table 2.3, the minimum number of courses that
students study in Social Work is twenty. This figure goes even up to thirty-two in the
Department of Social Work, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan. Both the educators and students
expressed concern with respect to the number of courses that are required for studies in Social
Work. For instance, senior educator, Ms. Wagle, of the Karve Institute of Social Service,
Pune complained that MSW is a heavily loaded course. Students have to study as many as
twenty courses (or more) along with their fieldwork training. The students receive a little bit
of everything, but no in-depth knowledge of anything. This, results in half-baked learning and
students later learn according to their personal orientations after they start working on
completion of their master’s programme.
A student of TISS, Mumbai said, as there are so many courses to be studied, they hardly
get time to reflect upon the importance of each course. They are hardly able to relate many of
these courses to their field practice. Similar views were expressed by many educators and
students from other institutions of Social Work.
The concerns with respect to a loaded curriculum point to the fact that, two years is a
very short period to understand the various components of Social Work education and
training. Also, a major part of the learning for students takes place on the job after the two-
year master’s programme, which in fact emphasises the importance of learning through
practice for the students. As there is insufficient time to reflect on the relationship among the
various courses, on the one hand, and between the courses and practice, on the other, students
37
are often unable to relate the proceedings of the classroom with the field. This gap is viewed
by many students as a gap between theory and practice in Social Work.
A comparative analysis of Tables 2.2 and 2.3 suggests that all institutions accommodate
most of the courses recommended in the UGC model curriculum into their respective
curriculum. However, the titles of the courses vary across different institutions. It is evident
from these tables that the core domain of Social Work includes courses which are directly
related to social work and its development as a profession. One common course that occupies
a significant place in the core domain of social work across all the institutions is ‘Social Work
Profession’; though it is titled differently in different institutions (see Table 2.3). The contents
of this course, however are almost the same in all the institutions; it includes the history and
development of social work as a profession (both Indian and western), values, ethics, and
principles of social work profession. It also includes theoretical perspectives/ideologies for
social work practice. Apart from this, the core domain includes papers on methods of social
work practice, and the areas and fields of social work practice.
Thus, the analysis of the core domain of the Social Work curriculum reveals the
emphasis on component of practice. The theory component supports the practice component
in developing an understanding of the field realities, so that practice is better organised. The
contents of the courses on social work profession and methods of social work practice –
specially, casework, and group work – highlight that social work practice needs to take place
in the light of certain principles, ethics, and humanitarian values that guide the profession; the
first unit of these courses focuses upon these. For example, the course on casework in the
curriculum of different institutions is introduced as a basic methods course that signifies the
principles on which social work practice with individuals and families is based and the
perspectives of this work.
Analysing the courses on methods of social work practice in comparison with the courses
on areas and fields of social work practice yields two important observations. (i) Although,
the significance of various methods in a particular field of practice might be justified, the
fields also guide which method gets priority in application. For example, in a hospital setting,
it is casework (work with individuals and families) that gets priority in intervention. On the
other hand, while engaging in the field with respect to the issues of marginalised
communities, the methods of community organisation and social action take precedence over
casework and group work. (ii) The role of social theory becomes more significant when social
work shifts from a micro-setting to a macro-setting. In brief, the core domain of the
curriculum is concerned more with the methodology component in Social Work and it
justifies the uniqueness of Social Work as an academic discipline.
The interdisciplinary domain of Social Work comprises of knowledge borrowed from
other academic disciplines and professions. These include Psychology, Sociology, Political
38
Science, Economics, Law, Management, Environmental Sciences, and Health. In the
curriculum of different institutions these courses might be titled differently but the contents
are almost the same. For example, the course borrowed from Sociology is titled
‘Understanding Society’ in TISS whereas it is titled as ‘Man and Society’ in Department of
Social Work, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan. An important observation on the interdisciplinary
domain is that, in six of the eight institutions, Economics, Political Science, and Sociology
have been combined together in one course. For example in the Department of Social Work,
Jamia Milia Islamia concepts from these three disciplines are put together in one course,
which is titled as ‘Social Sciences Concepts for Social Work’. However, the knowledge of
Psychology has always been separated in the curriculum and it enjoys separate space whether
it goes by the title ‘Human Growth and Development’ or ‘Psychology for Social Workers’.
This is because, in Social Work education and training, individualised practice has since the
beginning enjoyed a greater space all over the world. However, in India, a more
comprehensive approach has been followed and the contents of this course have been changed
to suit the context. In Human Behaviour and Development the trend must be to move away from a narrow focus on individual growth and behaviour to the larger perception of an interactional relationship between individuals, groups and communities and special environments, away from the emphasis on closed theoretical systems toward more open theoretical systems as ego psychology and sociological interaction theories capable of absorbing varied conceptual and empirical discoveries. [. . . .] What is important is to present a well rounded balanced perspective to gain an understanding of man and his functioning in society (Mehta 1981: 6–7).
Another important course in the interdisciplinary domain that cuts across the curriculum of all
the institutions is of Law.
The interdisciplinary domain in the Social Work curriculum highlights the importance of
theory in Social Work. For effective social work practice, it is essential to develop an
understanding of the individual and the society through theories. However, it is the
application of theory that takes precedence over knowledge development in Social Work.
Therefore, it is largely concepts, borrowed from the social sciences which are to be developed
in pedagogy rather than understanding theory per se. In other words, it is knowledge for
practice that is emphasised rather than knowledge for its own sake. This makes the
relationship between theory and practice more critical in Social Work. The extent to which
theory is important is based on its usefulness in practice.
The unique space that knowledge of Psychology enjoys in the curriculum highlights how,
traditionally, Social Work has always focussed more on the development of knowledge and
skills for individual-centric interventions. However, in the Indian context, community-based
work has been emphasised more in the field, and this has had a significant impact on the
Social Work curriculum in recent times. For example, the course on ‘Social Action’ as a
39
method of social work practice in the core domain and courses such as ‘State, Political
Economy and Governance’, ‘Critical Perspectives on Society’, ‘Development Experience’,
‘Social Conflict and Change’ have been introduced in the interdisciplinary domain. Thus,
social work interventions in the field and the strategies that have emerged in the field have a
significant impact on the curriculum of Social Work. As the interventions have shifted from a
micro-base to a macro-base, an alternative theoretical perspective, referred to as ‘Radical’
perspective, has emerged in the curriculum and pedagogy of Social Work.
The knowledge of Law is another important part of the interdisciplinary domain of Social
Work. Senior educator, Ms. Swamy of the Karnatak University, Dharwad observed that, as
there is a shift in perspective towards Social Justice and Empowerment in Social Work,
knowledge of social legislations has gained prominence. Also, with the growth of the
voluntary sector, there has been an increasing interface between the profession of social work
and management. For example, courses such as ‘Management of Non-Profit Organisations’
have been introduced as elective courses in the curriculum. Thus, the existential conditions of
society providing the context for practice, and the job market, influence social work
profession (discussed in-depth in Chapter 4) and accordingly affect the Social Work
curriculum.
Having analysed the structure of the curriculum, we will now present a few reflections of
the educators and students on the curriculum, as these reflections highlight the nature of
relationship between theory and practice in Social Work. Educator Mr Gangte of the Assam
University, Silchar opined that knowledge of local issues is pertinent and needs to be included
in the curriculum of Social Work, depending upon both the socio-cultural context and
geographical location of the institution. For example, in the north-eastern region of India,
students of Social Work need to practice in tribal communities, where one of the major issues
is the identity of the tribal people vis-à-vis the Indian State, and its development policies in
the region. In such a context, the knowledge of a theoretical perspective such as the radical-
humanist perspective is important for the students to understand the development process and
its impact on the people, and it will subsequently have an impact on their intervention
strategies as social workers. Ms. Shinde of the Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune felt that
standardisation of Social Work curriculum across different institutions is problematic, as
regional factors play an important role with respect to the fieldwork placement of the
students. Paul, a student of Madras School of Social Work, Chennai pointed out that, “we
learn multiple things during the two years of our education and training wherein we are
exposed to knowledge about multiple issues, multiple methods of practice, and multiple areas
and fields of social work practice; however, towards the end, we develop a particular
perspective depending upon our individual interest”. All the three reflections highlight the
40
plurality in Social Work education and training, and the complementary relationship between
theory and practice in Social Work.
Based on the foregoing analysis, we may now summarise the overall observations and
reflections on Social Work curriculum. Somehow whenever a question is asked about the
curriculum, one starts to look at it from the vantage point of the methods of social work
practice. But the history and the context of Social Work is a very linear one where students
study how social work developed as a profession internationally, and how it developed in
India based upon the philosophy and work of social reformers such as Raja Ram Mohan Roy
and Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar. The work of these reformers and its impact finds a place in
the discussion of the history of social work in the writings of M.S. Gore (1965), and Shankar
A. Yelaja (1969a). So, basically, it is more an informative course where students are given
the background of what started as social work and what it is today. It helps the students to
contextualise the history on the basis of the philosophy of the reformers. The philosophy of
the earlier reformers might not be radical but given their space and time, they did bring about
a certain change in the society and it is important to acknowledge that.
Methods of social work practice such as working with individuals, groups and
communities enable the students to understand a wide range of approaches in terms of the
skills that they develop and they also help them to realise the need of linking micro-practice
with macro-practice. On one hand, the curriculum includes radical social work or anti-
oppressive social work, which deals with structural upheavals and structural subversion and,
on the other, work with individuals which is more localised. The basic premise on which the
curriculum is designed is to build the capacity in the students, to shift between the clinical and
radical extremes and help people to transform themselves, and at the same time transform the
society they live in. This shift is possible because of the various disciplines to which students
are exposed within Social Work, and the different perspectives that guide practice. For
example, the issue of migration has various aspects such as the political economy of space,
household relations, culture specific study, and a little bit of geography, history, politics, and
all these are interrelated.
Then there are courses with respect to certain specific fields (as electives or
specialisations) such as women-centred social work that fit into the larger framework of
Social Work and sharpen analytical tools and skills, and build a perspective from which one
can look at the society and the various processes going on within it. Then there are some
courses such as ‘Human Growth and Development’ that take a positivistic approach, that is,
they observe problems as they appear in reality and look at possible solutions to solve them.
41
Nature of Education and Training: Generic vs. Specialisation
The institutions of Social Work either follow a generic model or a specialisation model in
education and training. Six of the eleven institutions follow the generic model and the
remaining five, the specialisation model. Different institutions follow different systems of
specialisations; even they differ in the fields of specialisations (see Table 2.3). In Jamia Milia
Islamia, New Delhi the specialisations are based on the approach that students want to adopt
in the field, that is, whether a student wants to follow a welfare-oriented approach (based on
philanthropic thinking) or a development-oriented approach (based on critical thinking) in
practice. In Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune it is based on the fields of practice such
‘Family and Child Welfare’ or ‘Medical and Psychiatric Social Work’. In TISS, Mumbai the
specialisations are offered in the form of ‘concentrations’ in the second year of the master’s
programme. Students at TISS can either continue in the same concentration in both the third
and the fourth semesters or can opt for two different concentrations in these two semesters.
The analysis of the UGC model curriculum and the curriculum followed by the
institutions covered by the study suggests that the focus in Social Work is more towards
developing an integrated approach for practice. According to Mehta (1981: 4), “The methods
[of social work practice] must be seen holistically in an integrated fashion using the specific
approach singly or in combination as the tasks demand rather than see them as isolated
assignments of casework, group work, community organisation, research or administration”.
The integrated approach aims at the amalgamation of all the methods of social work in
practice, rather than a compartmentalised approach with respect to specialisations in methods.
According to Dr Armaity Desai (2000), who pioneered the development of this approach in
Social Work education and training in India, the social workers should have skills to move
from one situation to another based upon the need and this can be developed through an
integrated approach in Social Work. Thus, the consensus seems to be that the nature of Indian
social and economic problems is such that we do not require a highly specialised worker
dealing with individual adjustment, but a generic social worker who can work at different
levels rather than practising only one method of social work practice per se (Yelaja 1969a).
Even in institutions following the specialisation model in education and training, more
than 50 per cent of the courses taught to the students are generic in nature. For example, at the
Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune out of the twenty courses taught twelve are generic,
common to all students. The schools offering specialized education in first year treat the second year as the year of specialization and the first year as a period of “generic orientation to social work.” In this sense the differences between generic and specific concept in social work education become less important because the schools offering specialization recognize the generic base of social work education (Yelaja 1969b: 20).
42
The educators and students expressed different opinions on the debate whether the nature
of education and training in Social Work should be generic or specialised. Senior educator,
Ms. Asrani of the M.S. University, Baroda, opined that Social Work should have a strong
generic base, as, in India, there are no water-tight compartments of social work practice. In
fact, in the voluntary sector, where the bulk of social workers are employed, most
organisations work on many issues simultaneously. Therefore, social workers need to develop
an understanding about different issues and the skills required to address them. Mr Sinha of
the University of Delhi pointed out that, a specialisations-based model is not desirable as it
gets more into the market-driven approach, whereas the generic model gives more space to
the development of a strong knowledge base and diverse skills in the students. He further
added that specialisations take away certain fields of practice from the domain of Social
Work. This is what happened with the Personnel Management and Industrial Relations (now
known as Human Resource Management) specialisation which is now a separate discipline.
This observation is confirmed by Nanavatty (1990), who argued that, the disadvantage of
specialisations-based curriculum is that, it bifurcates the interests of social work profession
which is already seen in practice with the separation of field of Labour Relations and
Personnel Management in a premier institution of Social Work.
According to senior educator Mr Khan of the Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi a
specialisation provides in-depth knowledge in a particular area of practice, but it is doubtful if
the student’s choice is an informed or a confused one. This was confirmed by Kulpreet, a
student from the same institution who mentioned that, though she chose ‘Social Welfare’ as
her area of specialisation, later she felt that she should have opted for ‘Social Development’.
Ms. Pinto of the College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai said that her
institution follows a generic model, as specialisations only make sense if there is an integrated
five-year programme in Social Work. In such a programme the first three years could be
devoted to methods of social work practice and skills development, along with building a
perspective. Only then one can consider specialisations in the next two years. The two-year
master’s programme in Social Work is too short to impart the knowledge and skill
components, and most of it is acquired on the job. This view was also shared by senior
educators Ms. Bansal, of the Department of Social Work, University of Delhi, Ms. Swamy of
the Karnatak University, Dharwad, and Ms. Krishnan of the Karve Institute of Social Service,
Pune.
Mr Samuel of the Rajagiri School of Social Work, Kochi argued that the nature of
education and training should be specialised, as it builds a strong base for the student when
s/he takes up a job after the completion of the master’s programme. Mr Mahajan of the Karve
Institute of Social Service, Pune expressed a similar view favouring specialisation in Social
Work. He further added that, the specialisations in fields of social work practice will be
43
effective if the students’ fieldwork placements during the programme are also in their fields
of specialisation.
Senior educator Mr Iyer of the Madras School of Social Work, Chennai advocated for
method-based specialisation. According to him, Social Work should promote specialisation in
methods of social work practice, such as casework, group work and community organisation,
as is the practice in the western countries where social work is recognised as a profession.
This approach, he thought, would enable social work to attain the status of a profession in
India (discussed in-depth in Chapter 4) as is the case with the legal and the medical
professions. However, this view was strongly opposed by many students as well as educators.
For them, the issue/problem is supreme and, therefore, the nature of the issue/problem should
guide the intervention strategy and the method of practice that is best suited in a particular
situation.
John, a student from Madras School of Social Work, Chennai pointed out that, despite
having specialisations, the course curriculum is designed in a very generic manner, as it better
serves the purpose of getting employment. He said, “if I am specialised in ‘Family and Child
Welfare’ or ‘Medical and Psychiatric Social Work’ then I cannot be placed with any other
sector. But with integrated approach in Social Work I can be placed in any sector”. Similarly,
students from Karnatak University also highlighted the employment factor in support of a
generic curriculum.
Kajal, a student from College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai, said, “I feel
that Social Work curriculum should be generic because a social worker has to work at every
level with different people in any organisation whether service-based or rights-based”. In
contrast, Tanvi, another student from the same institution said, “I feel that one semester
should be specialised, based on the area of interest of the student. In Social Work I am always
looking at subjects that have some practical implication (tangible) which helps me work in
the field”.
The entire debate on the nature of education and training in Social Work revolves around
the practice component. This debate, juxtaposing the generic model and the specialisation-
based model highlights the pre-eminence of the practice-orientation in Social Work. Also, the
debate focuses on the methods of social work practice in education and training. So, both at
the theoretical level and at the field level, practice seems to determine the knowledge base (in
terms of its content as well as its nature) of Social Work.
Having analysed the nature of relationship between theory and practice in Social Work
vis-à-vis the curriculum, we may now proceed to the pedagogy of Social Work. In doing so,
we need to highlight the similarities and differences between what is recommended for
teaching and what is actually taught in the classroom keeping the relationship between theory
and practice as the axis for analysis.
44
The Pedagogy of Social Work
The pedagogy of Social Work is shaped at two ends: at one end there is the educators and, at
the other, the students. The courses in Social Work include methodology courses (unique to
Social Work) and the courses borrowed from the social sciences. The basic difference in the
pedagogy between the methodology courses and the trans-disciplinary courses is the use of
examples from the field. In the methodology courses, educators draw from both their personal
field experiences and the field experiences of the students. Thus, the pedagogy with respect to
the methodology courses is interactive. The trans-disciplinary courses are taught more in a
lecture mode and seldom is there an exchange of ideas from the students’ side. For example,
Pulkita, a student of TISS, Mumbai pointed out that the theory courses (that is the Foundation
Courses) were taught to about six hundred students together in the convention hall, where no
discussions took place, as it was hardly possible to hold discussions in such a large group.
Sunil, from Madras School of Social Work, Chennai reiterated this.
Philosophy of the Institution
The philosophy of an institution of Social Work informs its overall pedagogy and the
understanding of its educators and students about social work. This was evident in the
reflections of the educators and students. In a few interviews the institutional philosophy and
its bearing on pedagogy was explicitly stated, whereas in other cases it was only tacit. We
may note three reflections from the data collected during the research to explain the impact of
the philosophy of an institutions on its pedagogy.
One of the objectives of the Faculty of Social Work, M.S. University, Baroda is to
enable the students to develop, inter-personal and intra-personal, social, and communication
skills. It facilitates emerging professionals to equip themselves with right attitudes, value
system, and insights into individuals, groups and communities. It fosters among the students
creativity, leadership, discipline, adaptability, foresight, character, and ethics in order to
mould them into mature personalities. In light of this objective, senior educator Ms.
Jhunjnuhwala of that institution deliberated that, pedagogically, the focus in the classroom is
on teaching social work skills with a social service orientation. Hence, there has always been
an emphasis in the classroom on developing a helping approach guided by an ethical
behaviour and demeanour.
Ms. Bose, an educator of Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan claimed that her department is an
example of a strange case of timelessness. Its pedagogy has been caught up with
Rabindranath Tagore’s ideas of rural reconstruction and its educators think that the best way
to show respect to him is by sticking to his ideas. But there has been a minor change: earlier
45
the emphasis on rural reconstruction was tacit, but now it has become more explicit; earlier
the rural setting was taken up as a matter of fact and it was not distinguished with the urban
setting in the classroom as the students’ exposure to the urban culture was limited. But now
with increasing acceptance of urban culture among the students, there is a conscious effort to
see rural setting as a collective (different from an urban setting) that is glossing over many
things, as was envisioned by Tagore. Thus, the philosophy of the institution that is based on
Tagore’s ideas is being consciously built into the pedagogy by the educators.
Maria, a student from the College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai,
commented on the philosophy of her college and how it gets reflected in the pedagogy. As
Nirmala Niketan belongs to a religious order, its philosophy is service-oriented, and charity-
driven. Here, the students are taught not to take an aggressive stand or be radical in their
approach – either in thought or in action – that may disrupt the larger systems. This
philosophy is inculcated both directly and in a subtle way through teaching and supervision,
and students do not have the opportunity to raise fundamental questions.
Religion (Christianity) plays an important role in the institution, influencing teaching and
interactions. Students are told that, they should not be profit-oriented, that they should be
humble and pious, that they should dress in a certain way, and have an attitude of acceptance.
Students are judged on every choice that they make, so they are very careful in expressing
their concerns, because of which there is certain duality in the relationship between the
students and the teachers. The focus in the pedagogy is on simplicity, compassion, charity,
and acceptance of authority and the system. The institution has very little exposure to other
ideas, and therefore the students’ views are limited to the understanding that they receive in
the classroom. Hence, the entire viewpoint of the students towards a problem is restricted to
the charitable mode. Although a few faculty members challenge the charitable viewpoint in
Social Work, but most of them acquiesce with that.
Educators: Ideology and Field Experiences
The individual pedagogy of the educator largely depends upon her/his orientation into a
particular ideology and field experience. Ms. Mehta of TISS, Mumbai highlighted the
pedagogy that is being followed by the educators at the Centre for Community Organisation
and Development Practice there. The effort in the classroom is to build on existing knowledge
base and existing social theories through research, and then analyse and interpret the same in
terms of social work practice with respect to this area. With respect to the students’ point of
view, an understanding of a few concepts is developed in the students as pivotal thoughts, so
that they can conceptualise practice around them. The aim is to provide a starting point to the
students for practice in the field, which is based on a sound theoretical understanding. In
46
addition to this, the experiences of the educators, whether as an educator or a practitioner, are
articulated in theoretical terms, so that students are able to visualise the connection between
theory and practice of social work. Basically, the effort is to induce theories from practical
experiences, and then teaching the ‘practice theories’ to the students.
Educators from the different institutions highlighted the importance of field experiences
of the educators and the need to integrate them in their teaching. This largely owes to the fact
that Social Work is a practice-oriented discipline. If the educator has vast field experience, it
helps in bringing examples from the field into the classroom. If there is an ongoing
continuous experience, it also enables the educators to give updated examples from the field
in relation to the theories that are being taught in the classroom. This helps in upgrading of
both the theoretical knowledge component and the practice component in Social Work with
respect to the current context, thereby enabling the students to link theory with practice.
The individual ideology of the educator built into her/his pedagogy has an impact on
discussions in the classroom. This can be explained through contrasting examples given by
senior educators Ms. Kriplani of TISS and Mr Sinha of the University of Delhi. Ms. Kriplani,
in teaching the course on family and child welfare, aims at developing the understanding of
family among students through exercises on identification of family forms. Following this,
she identifies both the macro-factors and micro-factors that might give rise to problems in
individual families, and accordingly identifies social work interventions in light of the
methods of Social Work. However, Mr Sinha expressed that, if he would teach a course on
family and child welfare, he would, at the outset, critically and historically discuss the
concept of family in the classroom. He would discuss the concept in relation to its linkage
with private property and ownership of means of production. He would engage students in the
debate where family is not only meant for reproduction and emotional harmony, but is also a
site for the widest possible range of discrimination and violence historically.
This discussion on the personal ideology of the educators highlights how the theoretical
assumption underlying different ideologies affect the pedagogy of Social Work and
accordingly influences social work practice. Senior educator Mr Khan of the Jamia Milia
Islamia, New Delhi expressed that he teaches a course on theoretical foundations of
development whose contents include the concept of development in different theoretical
positions such as Capitalist liberalism, Marxism, and Post-Modernism. In teaching the course,
he engages the students to critically reflect upon current issues and then tries to relate these
issues to the theoretical concepts. The sources of knowledge that he borrows from in his
teaching include, books on sociology and economics, and articles from journals like
Economic and Political Weekly. He further emphasised that his attempt is to demystify
economics of development guided by neo-liberalism. This clearly indicates his ideological
position and how he builds it into his pedagogy in the classroom.
47
Ms. Wankhede of the Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune mentioned that, before
joining Social Work academics, she had the experience of working as an activist advocating
for Dalit rights. Therefore, when she teaches community organisation, she brings examples
from social movements on Dalit rights in the light of the philosophy of activists such as Dr
B.R. Ambedkar and Jyotiba Phule.
Mr Pandey of the University of Delhi visualises social work as a profession and therefore
his pedagogical focus is on building an understanding among the students that social workers
are like social doctors. They need to play a preventive role with respect to the social problems
in the society. In the current context, there is a huge demand for social workers nationally and
the social work students need to understand that. Therefore, he teaches that social work is a
systematically organised scientific process aimed at preventive intervention with respect to
social problems at the individual, group, community, and societal levels. According to him,
“Social Work needs to be professional and welfare-oriented in its approach”. Many students
of Social Work across different institutions endorsed Mr Pandey’s stance. They stated that,
during their journey through their master’s programme, many educators have repeatedly
taught that social work is a welfare- oriented activity but it is different from social service
delivery, as it is an organised and scientific activity which is built upon different methods of
social work practice that have evolved over the decades.
Thus, the ideology and field experiences of the educators are built into their respective
pedagogies. These ideologies and pedagogies might differ, but they do play an important role
in developing an understanding about the nature of relationship between theory and practice
in both Social Work education/training and social work practice. Hence, (i) the field
experiences of the educators and students are discussed in the classroom and efforts are made
to connect them to existing theoretical frameworks in order to develop practice theories, and
(ii) the ideology of an educator, in turn, is guided by theoretical assumptions underlying the
pedagogy.
Theory–Practice: A Problematic in Pedagogy
Educators. The educators from different institutions of Social Work highlighted that,
although theory and practice are intertwined in Social Work, the nature of the relationship
between the two is not always clearly manifested in pedagogy and that is why many educators
and students view the relationship as problematic. The educators deliberated on a number of
reasons for this unclear manifestation of the nature of relationship between theory and
practice in pedagogy.
At the master’s level the students, of Social Work, come from diverse academic
backgrounds. There are students from the social sciences, the natural sciences, Social Work,
48
commerce, etc., at the bachelor’s level who come with diverse understanding of social work
and have different expectations from the programme. When they are taught theories and
concepts (borrowed from the social sciences), they develop their own subjective
understanding about them. So the context in which the educator explains the theories is not
uniformly or similarly understood by all the students. Thus, it becomes difficult for the
educator to cater to the needs of all the students in the classroom as the courses need to be
taught in a limited time-frame. As a result of this, many students are not able to develop a
sound theoretical understanding of the theories and are not able to relate with them in the
field. This view was expressed by many educators from different institutions of Social Work,
especially those who have either taught theory courses in the past or are currently teaching
them.
Another concern that was expressed by the educators was that the field engagement of
Social Work educators has minimised in recent times. Since the educators are not able to
continuously engage with the field, they are not able to relate with the field experiences of
students today. The examples that the educators give from the field are outdated and do not
match with the current field realities. Senior faculty members highlighted that the problem of
low engagement with the field is even more with the young educators who have entered
Social Work recently. Earlier, most of the people who entered academics in Social Work
came in with minimum five years of experience as social work practitioners in the field. The
newly appointed educators now have minimal field experience; many of them are even
appointed immediately after they finish their master’s programme. The observation made by
Meher C. Nanavatty highlights that this problem is not recent and has perennially existed in
Social Work for decades now: Many schools of social work are not as much involved in current trends of social development as they should be. There primary focus is academic study. The majority of their staff do not have work experience in the field as they are recruited primarily on their academic performance. Lack of experience in the field has denied them adequate opportunities to apply theory into practice and thereby develop convictions for work and social responsibility (1967b: 14).
Some administrative reasons were cited by the educators for this problem. When it comes
to administrative workload of the educators, UGC treats Social Work at par with other
academic disciplines. It fails to recognise that in most of the institutions of Social Work,
educators perform the dual role of both teachers and fieldwork supervisors. Thus, the
educators are not able to continuously engage with the field as much as they want to or
should.
Most institutions of Social Work are facing an acute shortage of teaching staff. Senior
educator Ms. Bansal of the University of Delhi said,
49
The requirement of staff in her institution is twenty-four but the UGC has opened only eight positions for the same. This gap is then filled through the appointment of guest lecturers. The qualification required for the appointment of guest lecturers is clearance of National Eligibility Test conducted by UGC twice a year. The candidates who apply for these positions are not of satisfactory quality; they have minimal field experience as practitioners or researchers. The motivation behind applying for these positions is to earn some income and support their doctoral studies (either already pursuing or applied for one).
Ms. Bansal’s observation is even more startling as the total number of faculty members in the
institution to which she belongs was ten earlier (Yelaja 1969b) which is greater than the
current number of faculty members there although the student strength in the institution, over
the years, has gone up. This means that the faculty student ratio has gone further up. This not
only hampers the quality of doctoral research in Social Work, but also, more importantly the
pedagogy of Social Work becomes perfunctory. Another consequence of the paucity of
teaching staff is that, many a time, educators end up teaching courses in which they have no
prior field experience. For instance, an educator who has a vast experience in community
work ends up teaching casework! Such educators cannot give practical examples about what
they are teaching in the classroom. They consequently, end up following a didactic teaching
pedagogy rather than an interactional one. According to Ms. Kriplani, moving away from the
field reality has made pedagogy in Social Work more macro-based, wherein students learn the
analysis of a problem but its translation into practice is not learnt.
Students. One reason for the students perceiving the relationship between theory and
practice as problematic is similar to that advanced by the educators. They said that, they are
not able to relate theory with contemporary field situations they face in their fieldwork
placements, as the field examples given by their educators are either outdated or drawn from
the western experience. Even in classroom teaching, and in the reading list that is circulated to
the students, there is heavy reliance on foreign literature (Moorthy 1952; Nagpaul 1972). This
makes the problem further acute as it creates a contextual gap both at the classroom-level and
at the field-level.
As the educators have individual viewpoints about social issues which are based upon
their ideology, many a time the students feel that, if they do not share the same perspective,
their questions are either dismissed or ignored. When this happens repeatedly in the
classroom, the students perceive that it might affect their evaluation as well. Therefore, they
may choose to stay silent in the classroom, making the pedagogy even more didactic. This
discourages self-reflection on the part of the students and impacts their outlook on Social
Work. They feel that most of their learning takes place on the field and classroom teaching is
not of much relevance in Social Work. They tend to view that the usefulness of theory classes
is limited to the academic degree that they will get after the completion of the master’s
programme.
50
These findings were highlighted by the students during the interviews. Many of them said
that whatever they learn in the master’s programme is through their engagement with the field
when they are placed in different agencies and communities. When asked, if all the learning
happens on the field, then why so many courses are taught, they replied that they are confused
as they are not able to link the classroom knowledge with the field reality. Some students
even said that they attend the classes as it is a mandatory requirement for them without which
they will not get their degrees. A lot of mugging of theory happens just for the sake of
clearing the exams.
When such a thought develops among students, it affects adversely the overall pedagogy
in the classroom. Students who make conscious efforts to link theory with practice feel let
down. For example, a student of TISS, Mumbai observed that he continuously made efforts to
take learning from the classroom to the field and then bring the learning from the field back to
the classroom and got good grades in the evaluation as well. But, when he observed that it
does not seem to matter, as those who did not do that also got the same grades he felt
discriminated. Moreover, he felt that his efforts to integrate his learning from practice into the
classroom proceedings are not making him learn anything extra as the same is not
reciprocated by most of students and some educators as well. As a result of this, after a point,
he deliberately chose to remain silent in the classroom.
Having analysed the pedagogical reasons behind the perception of educators and students
that the relationship between theory and practice in Social Work is problematic, we may now
discuss the solutions proposed by them to address the issue.
Theory–Practice Problematic: Pedagogical Solutions for Congruence
Educators. Ms. Gavaskar of the College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai and Ms.
Sukhdev of the Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi were of the opinion that more efforts should
be made by the educators to promote an interactive pedagogy in light of the local context of
the field in which students are placed for fieldwork. This can happen if there is more
interaction among the faculty within each institution and continuous discussion among them
on the different settings in which they are supervising the fieldwork of their students. The
educators need to find more time to visit the fields of their students and draw learning in
partnership with them so that more discussions can be facilitated in the classroom. To make
this a reality the institutions of Social Work also need to facilitate the process.
Apart from the question of complementary nature of social work education and practice, the institutions promoting education for social work profession have a vital responsibility . . . The process of conditioning the attitude of the students is to be stimulated both in the class-room and field work agencies [. . . .] It is this area of work and influence that schools of social work have to play a major role (Nanavatty 1966: 67).
51
Ms. Vashi of TISS, Mumbai and Ms. Malhotra of University of Delhi highlighted the
need for educators to articulate the past field experiences more theoretically in the classroom.
According to them, examples from the field should be articulated more theoretically in the
classroom rather than being motivational stories. These views were shared by Mr Muthu of
the Madras School of Social Work, Chennai and Mr Gangte of the Assam University, Silchar.
Mr Roy from Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan emphasised the need for each educator to explain
the importance of the course s/he teaches and explain the relationship between that course and
other courses, on the one hand, and social work practice, on the other.
Students. Maria of the College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai said, There is a need for a space to debate on social issues that is focussed on the feedback of students from their respective fields of practice. Sometimes I feel that there is rigidity with respect to this space. If such a space is provided in the classroom then I feel that students will develop more clarity about the relationship between theory and practice in social work.
Sonal of TISS Mumbai, highlighted that, pedagogically, both at the students’ level and at the
educators’ level there is need for a critical analysis of different situations and a spirit of self-
enquiry at all points of time in terms of the individual learning from the classroom which then
might translate into individual practice.
Congruence between Theory and Practice: Implications for Pedagogy
Several educators and students reflected on the implications of congruence between theory
and practice on the pedagogy of Social Work, and their reflections may be summarised as
follows:
• A clear understanding on the relationship between theory and practice, in Social
Work, will strengthen the interaction in the classroom both between the educators
and students, and among the students themselves.
• Pedagogically, the compartmentalised teaching that takes place in many institutions
of Social Work will transform into a co-ordinated effort. This will enable the
students to understand the links between different courses that are taught to them
and accordingly they will be able to relate them to practice in a holistic and unified
manner.
• The students will develop a clear understanding of the perspective with which they
relate theory and the practice (both in terms of methods and interventions) that
follows from the particular perspective.
• It will develop a commitment towards teaching–learning in the educators that will
get pedagogically transferred to the students in the classroom environment, making
it more interactional.
52
• It will help in bringing contemporary and context-specific examples from the field
to the classroom.
• It will help in locating a clear space of Social Work as a discipline in the academic
world and as an organised activity in the society.
Evaluation in Social Work
Having analysed the curriculum and the pedagogy, we might discuss the final component of
analysis, in the chapter, that is, evaluation of students’ performance and how it impacts the
theory–practice relationship in Social Work. Students are evaluated both through external
assessment and internal assessment in every course that they study (see Table 2.4). The
system of external evaluation varies in different institutions. For example, Karve Institute of
Social Service is affiliated to a state university, of which few other institutions of Social Work
are also a part. The evaluation in such institutions is majorly done through an examination
that is commonly conducted by the state university for all the institutions of Social Work that
are affiliated to it. So, the examination papers are evaluated by external examiners in such
institutions. Whereas, in TISS the external assessment refers to the semester-end
examinations evaluated by examiners from TISS itself. The internal assessment refers to the
evaluation done by each educator, of the course that s/he teaches individually. Different
modes of evaluation are followed by educators for the subject they teach (see Table 2.4).
For comparative analysis of the evaluation procedure in Social Work, three institutions
have been considered. These three institutions represent three different university systems in
which institutions of Social Work are located. The Department of Social Work, Jamia Milia
Islamia, New Delhi is located in a central university. Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune
is located in a state university, and TISS, Mumbai is a deemed to be university. It must be
clarified that other institutions of Social Work that are covered by the study have similar but
not exact system of evaluation procedures as these three institutions.
Table 2.4: Evaluation in Social Work
Institution External
Assessment (%)
Internal Assessment
(%)
Mode of Evaluation for Internal Assessment
1. Department of Social Work, Jamia Milia Islamia 75 25 Assignments, Skill Labs, Case Studies
2. Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune 80 20 Assignments, Case Studies, Class Tests,
Class Participation 3. Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai - 100
Semester end exams, Assignments, Class Tests, Presentations (Individual and Group)
Source: Field Data
53
As is evident from Table 2.4, the institutions of Social Work under either a central or a
state university give higher weightage (between 60 and 90 per cent) to external assessment in
evaluation of the students’ performance in theory courses (fieldwork evaluation discussed in
Chapter 3). The external assessment in these institutions of Social Work is done in the form of
semester-end examinations. The remaining assessment is internal and is done mostly through
class tests, assignments, class participation, case studies and skill laboratories. The facility of
skill laboratories is not available in most institutions of Social Work due to the paucity of
faculty or lack of financial resources, especially in mofussil institutions.
The analysis of question papers (examination papers) and assignments of different
courses would have been useful for understanding the evaluation process. But due to the
unavailability of the same, the evaluation procedure has been analysed on the basis of the
reflections of educators and students.
According to the educators, the questions in the examination papers are framed to test the
analytical thinking of the students. The purpose is to find if the students are able to link
theories with their field experience. However, Mr Khan of Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi
observed that students generally do not prefer analytical questions, as they prepare for the
exams with the objective of securing good grades. They, therefore, prefer to study from the
class notes and the power-point presentations made by the teachers in the classroom rather
than reading books and articles and then relating them to practice.
Ms. Wagle of the Karve Institute of Social Service, Pune expressed that, in state
universities, there is often more than one institution that offers master’s programme in Social
Work. For example, in the University of Pune, there are three institutions that offer
programmes leading to MSW degree. The external examination, which has a weightage of 80
per cent in overall evaluation of the students’ performance, is common for all the institutions.
There is lack of communication between these institutions about the pedagogy, and the
pattern of fieldwork that they have followed. Therefore, it is difficult to design questions that
can uniformly test the competencies of students from the different institutions. As a result, the
questions are not application based; rather, they are information-seeking in nature. This
promotes rote learning and reproduction of concepts without any understanding of the same.
Obviously, the students are not able to develop insights for the application of theoretical
concepts in practice.
According to Ms. Vasvani, of TISS, Mumbai the educators design examination papers
that comprise questions which promote thinking and reflection on the part of students. For
example, questions are asked on given case studies, so that students can reflect from their
field experiences in relation to the questions.
Educators from the different institutions of Social Work were of the opinion that more
importance should be given to internal assessment in the evaluation of students’ performance.
54
According to them, through assignments students develop better reading capacity with respect
to theories and concepts. Also, in the assignments, the student’s understanding of a concept
can be evaluated by the educator based on whether the student is able or not to elucidate the
concept through field examples.
Class presentations, both individual and group are based upon the field settings of the
students therefore, they are also useful in analysing the work of the students on the field and
the efforts made by the students to understand the relationship between theory and practice in
the field. For example, individual presentations made by the students to explain the principles
of group work through their field experiences help both the educator and other students to
learn about application of group work as a method of social work practice. Students also
make individual and group presentations to explain the community setting in which they are
placed and the problems that are being faced by the people in the community, this helps in
collective learning about different communities and the application of different models of
community work that are learnt through classroom teaching. When students’ presentations are
evaluated, they take it seriously and analyse the field situations in relation to the classroom
teaching. Some educators pointed out that this can also help in generating practice theories
from the field.
Most of the students also opined that internal assessment of their performance through
assignments and presentations is better, as it enkindles in them the habit of reading theory, on
one hand, and reflecting on fieldwork practice, on the other. Through this, they are able to
understand different perspectives on social problems/issues in their fieldwork. However, they
were also apprehensive that, if their perspective is at variance with that of their educator, they
might get poor grades in their assignments.
Another important concern raised by both the educators and the students was that,
usually, the grades take primacy over learning, especially when the evaluation takes place
through examinations. A student of TISS, Mumbai said, What we are learning in first year of the master’s programme is not taken forward to the next year. People just study one day before the exam, and those who have a command over the language then get marks without understanding or taking forward the knowledge that they gain through their practice in the field. Knowledge and its application to practice is secondary to the marks that you get in the examination.
From the reflections of the educators and the students, it is evident even in the evaluation
process too, the focus is on developing an understanding about the nature of relationship
between theory and practice in Social Work. However, due to the overall evaluation process
where external assessment gets primacy over internal assessment and the preoccupation of
students in securing good grades, there is difficulty in establishing the linkage between the
two.
55
Summary
It is evident from the analysis of the curriculum, pedagogy, and evaluation procedure in
Social Work that there is an inherent relationship between theory and practice in the
discipline. However, the educators and the students feel that this relationship is not clearly
understood by all. They gave different reasons for this. These reasons can be classified as
academic and administrative. This is why the relationship between theory and practice
becomes a problematic in Social Work.
Social Work as an academic discipline comprises of three important components; (i) the
curriculum, (ii) the pedagogy, and (iii) the evaluation of students performances. The analysis
of Social Work as an academic discipline has been centred on the master’s level programme
in the study because the planning of Social Work academics has been primarily centred at this
level.
The curriculum of Social Work consists of two important components; (i) the course
work, and (ii) the fieldwork practicum (discussed in-depth in Chapter 3). The educators from
different institutions observed that the curriculum of Social Work, despite efforts, has not
been able to keep pace with the changing field realities. They pointed out that most of the
institutions of social work are affiliated to either central or state universities. The revision of
curriculum is a tedious process owing to the time-consuming bureaucratic procedures of the
universities. Thus, the curriculum, many a time, is not in line with the contemporary field
situations.
Moreover, due to the hegemony of a few institutions of Social Work, the diversity of the
local context of regional institutions is not captured in the curriculum. The smaller institutions
in order to remain in the mainstream, often borrow components of the curriculum of pioneer
institutions such as TISS in their respective curricula. Owing to these reasons, the theoretical
component of Social Work moves away from the contemporary field reality. However, there
have been co-ordinated efforts made by educators from different institutions to come together
and review the curriculum and design a model curriculum for Social Work. Two curriculum
review committee reports have already been published by the UGC in the years1965 and
1980. Also, UGC model curriculum for Social Work was designed by a committee
comprising of Social Work educators from different institutions all across the country with a
senior educator Dr N.A. Gokaran from TISS as the convenor. It was published in the year
2001 by UGC.
The curriculum of Social Work can be classified into four categories, namely; (i) theories
and concepts, (ii) methods and skills for social work practice, (iii) history and values of Social
Work profession, and (iv) fieldwork practicum. Most of the institutions of Social Work,
56
covered by the study, have designed their respective curriculum based on these categories,
and have tried to include most components of the UGC model curriculum. The UGC model
curriculum is divided into four parts, three of which have been labelled as domains. These
include: (i) the Core Domain, (ii) the Supportive Domain, (iii) the Interdisciplinary Domain,
and (iv) the Elective Content. The Core Domain focuses on the philosophy, history, methods,
skills, values, and fieldwork in Social Work. The Supportive Domain includes the knowledge
base and skills required in clearly marked out areas of social work practice. The
Interdisciplinary Domain includes the relevant theories and concepts borrowed from the
social sciences. The Elective Content focuses on the local context of national and regional
institutions with respect to particular areas of social work practice and the knowledge base
required for the same.
The curriculum and its various parts, broadly, highlight two components about the
knowledge base of Social Work. These are: (i) theoretical base, and (ii) methodology. The
theoretical base is directed at providing an understanding of the social reality through
different perspectives and the theoretical assumptions underlying them. Also, it provides an
account of the history of Social Work, how it has developed as a profession over the years,
and the values and ethics on which it is based. The methodology component provides an
understanding of the different methods of social work practice and the requisite skills required
in the application of these methods. The two components when analysed together highlight
the intertwined relationship between theory and practice in Social Work.
From the analysis of the curriculum of different institutions of Social Work two major
observations can be made. Firstly, the ‘number’ of courses in the curriculum are many. The
students feel pressurised with the workload as along with studying the high number of
courses, they need to cater to the fieldwork practicum as well. This results in half-baked
learning of many theories and concepts. Due to lack of in-depth understanding of theories, the
students complain of not being able to link them with practice in fieldwork.
Secondly, there is a debate within social work fraternity whether the curriculum should
have a generic base or a specialisation base. The generic base increases the job opportunities
for students after the completion of the master’s programme, and provides opportunities to
explore different areas of social work practice. Moreover, the voluntary organisations, where
most of the social workers are engaged as practitioners work on multiple issues
simultaneously. The generic base can meet the heavy and diverse demand of the voluntary
sector, as the students are educated and trained in multiple fields simultaneously.
On the other hand, the specialisations help the students to develop in-depth knowledge in
an area of their interest. But the educators and students expressed that the choice of
specialisations is a confused one for many students. However, in both the generic model and
the specialisation-based model the approach is an integrated one that focuses on training in all
57
the methods of social work practice. This highlights the practice-orientation in Social Work,
irrespective of the curriculum model, and the supplementary role of theoretical content which
is based on the practice areas.
The analysis of the pedagogy of Social Work suggests that it shapes at two-ends, the
educators and the students. As far as the educators are concerned, it is their individual
ideology (guided by the theoretical assumptions underpinning them) and the field experiences
that impact the pedagogy. At the students’ end, it is the academic background, and their
construction of the meaning of social work that impacts the pedagogy. In addition, in a few
cases, the philosophy of the institution impacts the pedagogy.
As the students come from different academic backgrounds, the understanding of theory
and the context in which it is being taught is not uniformly understood by all the students.
Specially, the students coming from non-social science or non-social work background find
difficulty in understanding the theories and concepts that are taught to them in a limited time-
frame (as governed by the UGC guidelines). This impacts the pedagogy as students are not
able to link and subsequently share the learning from the field in the classroom.
The theories and concepts that are taught to the students have been developed in a certain
context. The contemporary field reality is not always synchronised with the theories. This
demands, revision of existing theories and concepts and developing new theories according to
the contemporary field situations.
Educators and students pointed out that in order to understand the theory–practice linkage
it is important to have an interactive pedagogy that facilitates teaching–learning at both the
educators’ end and the students’ end. Also, educators from different institutions said that
pedagogically it is important to clearly articulate and explain the importance of each course,
and its linkage to other courses and to practice. When this does not happen students feel that
there is a gap between theory and practice in Social Work.
Educators from different institutions of Social Work were of the opinion that if a clear
linkage is established between theory and practice then students will be able to understand a
problem from different perspectives and the interventions that they guide in practice. It will
also help Social Work to chalk out an independent space for itself in the academic world,
especially under the university system. Also, at the practical end, social work will gain
recognition as an organised activity that empowers people and therefore is distinct from
charitable activities.
Finally, an important insight that emerges from the analysis of curriculum, pedagogy, and
evaluation procedure in Social Work is that, in order to understand the relationship between
theory and practice, it is important to examine social work practice in relation to the fieldwork
component. Many educators highlighted that Social Work is a practice-oriented discipline.
There is always a debate in Social Work, as to what takes primacy in Social Work; theory or
58
practice; is it theory that precedes practice, or is it practice that precedes theory? In order to
address this question, we shall in the following chapter analyse social work practice in
relation to the fieldwork component in Social Work.