Influence of Stressors and Resilience on Social Work Student’s Preparedness for Field Practicum

Background and Purpose

Social work (SW) students encounter a higher level of stress in academia than in other disciplines, and field education is a major stressors for students. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of stressors (social determinants of mental health) and resilience on student SW’s preparedness for field education in the United States. Transition from a classroom to experiential learning causes stress, role adjustment, and reality shock among students. Students entering fields with a lack of adequate preparedness may experience apprehension, anxiety, and burnout. Guided by resilience theory and self-efficacy theory, we tested three hypotheses: 1) There is a statistically significant relationship between students’ readiness for field education and resilience. 2) Factors promoting resilience serve as a significant predictor of the readiness of students for field education. 3) Stressors serve as significant predictors of student readiness for field education.

Methods

An online survey was used in this exploratory study. Following IRB approval, students were recruited via an email sent to SW program directors along with the survey link to be distributed to students. BSW and MSW students (n=131) from Mid-Western Universities responded. Independent Variables (IV) included resilience measured by the Connor-Davidson Resilience scale, factors promoting resilience measured by three scales: the Brief Cope Scale, the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale, and the Short Self-reflection and Insight Scale. Stress factors (IV) were measured in two categories: structural determinants and social cohesion (the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support and capital determinants (the In-Charge Financial Distress-Financial Well-Being Scale). The dependent variable-students’ readiness for field education was measured by a self-reported scale.

Result

A Spearman’s rank correlation analysis provided a significant positive relationship between students’ readiness for field education and overall resilience, r_s(108) =.23, p=.017, as well as perceived self-efficacy (SE), r_s(109) =.28, p=.004. A logistic regression analysis revealed the model not statistically significant (χ2 (6) = 11.729, p=.068). Only SE (p=.039) was found to play a role in predicting students’ readiness for field education. A logistic regression analysis for testing H3, found the overall model to be non-significant means combined effect of the predictors did not significantly predict students’ readiness for field education. Despite this, the model accounted for 33.3% of the variability in students’ readiness (Nagelkerke R2), and it accurately predicted 86.3% of cases.

Conclusion and Implications

Our study revealed GSE is the sole significant predictor in shaping students’ readiness for field education. Findings suggest targeted policy-based interventions for enhancing students’ self-efficacy and preparedness for field practicum. There was no significant influence of structural determinants, social cohesion, and capital determinants on SW students’ readiness for field education, suggesting factors beyond demographics or immediate life circumstances may be more influential in shaping students’ readiness. Our findings entail two key implications- 1) Students’ resilience and self-efficacy are important in determining their readiness for field practicum. 2) SW programs should incorporate ways to enhance students’ self-confidence for executing skills while entering field practicum or when on the field.