Perceptions of Field Instruction:  The Practicum

Instructor Evaluation Form (PIEF) Validation Study  

            Social work has a long history of using and appreciating the benefits that field placements can provide students in transferring theory from the classroom to practice.  The research on field education is diverse.  For instance, some recent studies have evaluated differing teaching techniques in field education.  In addition, a range of research methods, both quantitative and qualitative, have been used to evaluate field performance.  Recently, direct measures of student learning in field have been touted as the preferred method of evaluating field education.  Clearly, the importance of direct evaluations of student outcomes can not be overstated.  However, indirect measures of social work education, i.e., student perceptions of their experiences, are an important means through which we evaluate the educational climate that students experience.  Both direct and indirect measures of field education are useful tools for comprehensive evaluation of field education.  The purpose of this research was to develop an instrument to measure students’ perceptions of field instruction quality and conduct a preliminary psychometric evaluation of the instrument.

            Methods:  Domain sampling theory was used to generate 26 items to measure quality of field instruction.  Some examples of item content are teaching quality, use of students’ time, instructor responsiveness to students, evaluation standards, and field training assignments.  Research packets were developed and distributed to students via their school mailboxes.         

Results:  Students in two schools of social work participated in the research (N = 245).  There were 183 female and 57 male participants.  Students’ ages ranged from 20 to 61 (Mean = 30, Median = 27, Mode = 23).

Internal consistency reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha.  The alpha with all 26 items in the scale was .99.  The corrected item-total correlations for items ranged from .71 to .91.  No item, if deleted, would have resulted in a higher coefficient alpha. 

A principal components analysis was conducted to evaluate the extent to which the items comprised a unidimensional scale, as hypothesized.  The data were well-suited for factor analysis, as evidenced by the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin MSA (.97) and the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (χ² = 7472.692, α < .001).  The principal components analysis found a single factor for the items.  The initial eigenvalue was 19.494 for this factor (74.98% of variance was accounted for by the one factor), with no additional eigenvalues at or above 1.0.  Although a Promax rotation initially was planned, only one factor was found with these data and no rotation was needed.

Implications:    In these and other psychometric evaluations, the PIEF performed well, providing initial evidence of internal consistency, unidimensionality, and content, factorial, and construct validity of this scale.  Field education often has been described as the most important component of social work education. Students’ perceptions of the quality of field education are an essential component of evaluating social work education, improving field instruction, and furthering the development of social work practice.