Speaking of Justice: Assessing justly

With Gavin Rennie and Craig Tunnicliffe

A capstone for the Degree:◦ uniting and reweaving the threads of the Bachelor

of Social Practice

◦ Counselling, Social Work, Community Development.

Developed in 2001 by David Epston, Ksenija Napan and Gavin Rennie

experience and intuition (practice wisdom) as much as theory

Meaning

Published article after the two years of teaching

In researching this discovered Finn and Jacobson’s Just Practice paradigm (2004).

Praxis

Critical Reflection

ContextPower

History

Possibility Meaning

Adapted from Finn & Jacobson, 2008

The three strands of social practice all operate within the “social” domain

social work

International definition promulgated by IASSW and IFSW, “the social work profession promotes social change, problem solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well being”

It is therefore social (justice) work

“….each of us has an idea of an image of social justice. For some of us, social justice relates to notions of equality, tolerance, and human rights. Others of us know social justice through its absence, for example, through personal experience of injustice, degradation, exclusion and violence (Finn & Jacobson,2008,p.14)

Interestingly many of our student cohort have experienced these oppressions

Meaning: Social work as social Justice work

Demographics

2nd chance learners? Non-linear path to education (life rich)

ContextAge Gender Ethnicity

21-56 M=10F=61Fafefine=1

Maori =11Pakeha (nz)=28Samoan=9Tongan=4Fijian=2Tokeleau=1Cook Is Maori=1Chinese=7Korean= 1African=3Other=7

We both have backgrounds in sociology

Both undertook social work education after studying sociology

The traditions of academic sociology that resonated with us were that social change is both possible and desirable

Provides tools of social analysis to identify sites of resistance.

Our context

Paper has been taught since 2001 The cohort size has increased from 23 to 72.

Initial assessment required both an essay and a group presentation.

With the growth in numbers this method of assessment proved unsustainable

History

Re designing the assessment A number of factors needed consideration

◦ Cohort size◦ The course is taught within 6 week (students go

on placement immediately after)◦ Placement is full time (45 credits) and needs full

engagement. Thus completing outstanding assessment is not an option (hitherto this had occurred)

◦ The assessment reflected just practice principles

History

Central was the question how do you assess justly; reflection, professional development, personal stories of change/empowerment…

and still assign a grade?

Power

Assessment (can be defined) “as a process of documenting, usually in measurable terms, knowledge, attitudes and skills”

power and assessment: the elephant in the room

Or does it become the panoptic gaze of assessment.

Does this reflect just practice?

Transparent Relevant Appropriate Inclusive Meaning Equity

From power over to power with

Toward just assessment

Recognise the centrality of process

A return to origins Collaboration

◦ Two of the three original designers of the course David Epston (co-designer) Gavin Rennie (co-designer & co-lecturer) Catherine Hughes (Programme Leader) Craig Tunnicliffe (co-lecturer, & recent graduate)

Building on the current strengths ◦ as highlighted by student feedback

So how did we do this?

Assessment is twofold:

1. 80% attendance requirement

2. Group work leading to an individual presentation

The assessment

“Tell a story about how you have come to your commitment to making a stand for Social Justice”

◦ What has been your inspiration and who stands behind you?

◦ What does this mean for your future practice?

Questioning-an invitation

Is there a clear articulation of what social justice means to the student

20%

The context of the student in briefly acknowledged, including socio/cultural history

10%

Power is recognised and identified 20%

Has the student clearly demonstrated, with examples area(s) of social justice that will be their focus and explained how this commitment will be made achievable (Possibility)

40%

Creative engagement and demonstration of benefit from the group process (Critical reflection)

10%

Guest speakers:◦ providing both narratives of just practice in action

and providing exemplars of the assessment. Reflection (whole cohort, individual, small group)

Group process: ◦ de-individuating the assessment process.

safety agreement, sharing knowledge(s), respectful dialogue, linking of similarities and the recognition of difference.

Mentoring:◦ A “with journey” of assessment

Academically strong in groups with those who are not.

Lecturers as “floating” resources. Question posers.

Utilised a process of “with”

Manifest in the invitation to tell their story of social justice and where and with whom they will stand◦ Linking the personal and the political (the micro and the macro)

and vice versa

Residing within the group process◦ Finding strength in similarity and diversity

Within the class context◦ Dialogical exchange(s)◦ Exploring opportunities for mutual learning/teaching

Possibility

Student feedback…

Empowerment?

Epston, D., Rennie, G., Napan, K. (2004) On becoming a just practitioner: Experimenting with the final paper of an undergraduate programme as a rite of passage. Social Work Review, Jubilee Edition, 16, (4). pp 38-49.

Finn, J., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Just Practice: A social justice approach to social work (2nd Ed). Peosta, Iowa: Eddie Bowers Publishing.

References

Possibility