“Because the Real Work Is Challenging”: Priorities for Training for Macro Social Work Practice As Expressed By Those in the Field

Purpose:

Macro social workers have consistently taken up the difficult task of articulating and refining our identity (Hill, et al., 2010). Deciding on priorities for the preparation of students is a key component of this work. Standards and areas of focus set by our accrediting and organizing bodies (CSWE; ACOSA) are a great help towards this goal. However, we need more community-engaged research that considers the priorities of front-line macro social workers, particularly because, true to our values, macro social work education should reflect a mandate from our communities. Currently there is little empirical work that collects and disseminates the viewpoints of macro social work practitioners to create and refine curriculum (Regehr, et al., 2012). The exploratory research presented here uses data from a series of interviews with practitioners that examines their viewpoints on the priorities of macro social work curriculum.

Methods:

Data are from in-depth interviews done with community practitioners in a large, urban area (N=16). Participants were recruited from a database of program alum. This resulted in interviews with many directors of programs or agencies, and the research team identified a lack of professional diversity in our sample. Thus, additional participants were recruited via snowball sampling and from organizations that did more advocacy and community organizing, even if individuals interviewed were not trained in or identified with social work. Subjects ranged in years of experience from less than 5 (n=6) to over 20 (n=3). The research team, comprised of four social workers, used conventional content analysis to analyze the data. Each analyst coded individually, organizing findings by major themes, sub-themes and examples. The team met several times to discuss and refine the coding scheme. This dialogical and iterative process, along with memo writing, promoted a reflexive analytic process.

Results:

Findings were grouped along four major categories: knowledge, skills, attributes, and programmatic considerations. Respondents emphasized the importance of knowledge about the political arena and processes; systems of power and oppression; and social work traditions. Major themes emerged related to skills of macro social workers included communication; critical thinking and problem solving; management; research; relationship development and collaboration; community organizing; and advocacy and policy development. Regarding attributes, participants detailed a need for conviction and passion; a social justice orientation; and adaptability. A few participants articulated the need for self-awareness and an ability to reflect on one’s own power and positionality. Participants asserted the importance of mentoring and interdisciplinarity within social work programs. 

Implications:

Findings of this exploratory study demonstrate the importance of integrating community-located research into curriculum development, particularly in the area of macro practice. The limitations we had around professional diversity within our sample illustrate the importance of reaching out to and gathering insight from practitioners who might not identify as social workers but whose work is very much within the tradition of macro social work.  Results points to the need to research effective pedagogical practices around social work education that address both concrete areas of expertise and the historical and philosophical underpinnings of macro social work practice.