Exploring How Social Work Students Who Hold Difficult Differences Experience Being Encountered in Social Work Education

Background and Purpose: Accommodating diversity in social work education is important. However, research suggests that people struggle to encounter some differences (e.g., religion, sexual orientation), especially when they find them contentious. Differences evoke discomfort, fear, and even hostility. Encounters for this project are purposeful or accidental meetings between small groups of two or more people.

In response, researchers have developed various approaches (e.g., Intergroup Dialogue) for improving contentious encounters in educational settings. However, no research has been done in social work on how encounters are actually experienced by students who hold difficult differences.

This study helps fill this gap by exploring the stories of encounter experiences from three groups of current and former social work students that the literature claims hold contentious differences. This includes members of the LGBTQ+ community, and those who identify as Muslim or Christian.

Methods: Thirty-two two-hour one-on-one interviews were conducted with graduate social work students from a Canadian university. This setting was chosen because encounters across differences regularly occur during classes, when students must discuss their identities, and contribute their perspectives on various social issues. Current students and alumni were recruited using flyers, social media, student listservs, in-class announcements, and snowball sampling. The final sample consisted of 11 members of the LGBTQ+ community, 10 Muslims, and 11 Christians. Participants were predominantly female (72% female; n = 23) although 16% (n = 5) were male, 9% (n = 3) were non-binary/gender fluid, and 3% (n = 1) were transmasculine. On average, they were 29 years of age (M_age = 29.6). Thirty-four percent (n = 11) identified as “Caucasian.” Eighty-four percent (n = 27) were MSW students, and 15% (n = 5) were doctoral students.

During the interviews, participants were asked about their realities, including their desired future experiences. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. They were analyzed using narrative inquiry to search for storylines (plotlines) common across all three groups’ stories to explain what their stories were about. Storylines were ascertained by reviewing transcripts several times attending to things such as the chronology of experiences, actions taken, and statements of assessment. Then, short summaries of each participant’s story were constructed around shared, important storylines.

Findings: Data analysis revealed six core storylines among participants. (1) Simplistic, unbalanced stories are often told about differences. (2) People tend to avoid, seek, or become torn between avoiding and pursuing encounters. (3) Encounters are managed differently when differences are treated mostly positively, mostly negatively, or with negative treatment disguised as positive treatment. (4) Restricting certain differences can hinder dialogue about or across difference. (5) Preoccupation with differences impedes encounters. (6) Considering the human beyond the difference might improve encounters.

Conclusion and Implications: Through participants’ experiences, this research offers recommendations for how social work students and educators can more constructively navigate encounters when difficult differences are present. This includes, for instance, focusing less on people’s differences in social work education. Beyond education, this research also has broader implications for the social work profession. By considering participants’ lived realities, social workers can better accommodate diversity.