Search results

To examine how social work students and faculty perceive and embody cultural competence, we conducted five focus groups with graduate students ( N = 16) and faculty members ( N = 10) from Canadian schools of social work. We interrogated how different theoretical frameworks related to cross-cultural social work practice (CCSWP) have been circulated and reified in social work education, and how certain dominant frameworks have been translated to embodied cross-cultural interactions in social work practice. To examine the praxis of CCSWP, which is often subtle and embedded in the semantics of languages and discourses, we were informed by critical theories of power, language, and discourses to analyze the data. The interview transcripts of both student and faculty focus groups showed similar dominant discursive patterns: (1) critiquing the conceptual use of cultural competence, (2) having a preference for terms such as cultural humility, cultural safety, or other constructs, and (3) describing the embodied practice of these constructs mainly as a general practice and omitting cross-cultural work. Participants differed in their expressed opposition to cultural competence and the exact terms they preferred as an alternative. Overall, participants discursively changed from a critical debate on semantic and conceptual differences between these constructs to negating them altogether as meaningless, effacing the very notion of cross-cultural social work and its embodied practice. In the end, cultural competence was discounted as both oppressive and anti-oppressive, a position which is reflected in the contested scholarship on cultural competence.

Purpose: Social justice is a foundational social work value, but social work education continues to experience ongoing challenges with how to teach students to embody social justice values. The aim of this scoping review is to map empirical studies on teaching methods that translate social justice value into teachable curricula. Methods: Following Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework, we conducted a rigorous process in which we screened 5953 studies and included a final sample of 35 studies. Results: Our findings identified seven main teaching approaches: intergroup dialogue, online asynchronized discussion board, simulation and role play, group work and presentation, written reflection, community-engaged learning, and social action-oriented learning. In terms of competency development, most of the studies focused on awareness and knowledge versus skill-building. Most teaching methods emphasized students' affective experiences during the social justice learning activities. Discussion: Challenges, lessons learned, and future recommendations of each teaching method are presented.

Purpose: This article presents a scoping review that synthesized empirical studies on simulation in social work (SW) education. The review maps the research examining characteristics of simulation studies in SW education and emerging best practices. Method: Using Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework to develop the methodology and following the PRISMA-ScR checklist, we selected 52 studies for this review. Results: Most studies were published in North America and included quantitative (37%), qualitative (31%), and mixed methods (33%). Simulation was used to teach generalist and specialized practice with interprofessional practice as the highest area of specialization. Simulation was also used for assessment purposes, and the Objective Structured Clinical Examination was a commonly reported method. We identified several facilitators and barriers to using simulation effectively for teaching and assessment. Conclusions: Our analysis permitted us to identify emerging best practices that can be used to guide teaching. Implications for SW research, teaching, and practice are discussed.