In our experience, many practice assessors and placement supervisors are concerned about supporting students to develop their skills in linking social work theory to practice. Whilst it is not the practice assessor’s role to directly ‘teach’ a student about social work theory, it is an integral part of their role to support students in understanding the links between the theory they have been taught in University to their practice learning experiences. In order to effectively assist a student to develop their understanding of theory informed practice, practice assessors need a level of confidence about theory. However, as stated, many practice assessors can be anxious about social work theory.

Practice assessors and supervisors have often been qualified themselves for some time. They may well think that they no longer use theory in their practice – they may think that they have forgotten the theory, that they no longer have the time to consider their theory base and that they now work on “common sense” principles. We would challenge this by saying that everyone in social work and social care is using theory on a day to day basis. They may simply not recognise this as the theory has seeped into their “common knowledge” or “practice wisdom”.

In terms of the claim to work on ‘common sense’ principles – whose sense is common? Is your sense the same as everyone else’s? Just because someone cannot imagine another way to view something doesn’t mean that they aren’t using theory. It just means that their one or two theories are their entire world or “sense”.

Where placement supervisors are not social work qualified, they may have even more significant concerns about social work theory and practice. However, in many ways social work theory is drawn from a range of areas and disciplines. In fact workers from other backgrounds are often surprised at how familiar they are with many aspects of social work theory.

We have also heard practice assessors and placement supervisors express concerns about supporting a student in relation to social work theory through statements such as “the student will know more than me!” Whilst this may be true in terms of the student having an up to date understanding of theory in an academic sense (it isn’t always!), the student is unlikely to have the experience which their practice assessors/placement supervisors have – or the ability to relate their academic theoretical knowledge to practice. We have observed practice assessors in their work with students where both the assessor and the student have avoided talking about social work theory. In subsequent discussions, both have expressed the view that the other “will know more than me!” There is merit in informing a student that as a practice assessor you feel a little out of date with theory and that you can both learn from each other. This will go some way to equalising aspects of the power differentials which always exist in practice learning situations.

Whatever the reason that practice assessors and placement supervisors are concerned about social work theory and its links to practice, the fact remains that students need to be supported to make the links and this is a key role for practice assessors.

Whilst there has been some debate about what actually constitutes a theory, in scientific terms a theory is seen as helping to:

– Describe a situation
– Explain how the situation came about
– Predict what is likely to happen next

Sometimes, theories are also seen as helping to control a situation and bring about some form of change.

In supervision discussion, placement assignments, portfolios etc students should be able to describe the situation they are working with, explain why they think this came about, predict what might happen next and analyse how they can intervene and bring about some form of change. In doing so, they will clearly be drawing upon some form of theory. They may however, not be aware of this, or not be able to articulate this. This is where the practice assessor’s skills in questioning and supporting a student to translate theory into practice are vital.

Students need to be able to describe the actual application and use of theories rather than just getting into a habit of listing theories when asked about their decision making. Experienced practice assessors will know how it can go: In supervision, the student and practice assessor are discussing a situation the student has worked with and the practice assessor asks the student “what theories were you using?” once the petrified look has gone from the student’s face, they say “task centred practice and attachment”. The practice assessor says “OK”. Box ticked. Nothing further. That’s not applying theory to practice – it’s plucking a few phrases from a book.

The aim should be for the student to be able to describe:

– What they did
– Why they did it
– How they applied each theory
– What worked and what they might do differently in their application of a theory in future
– What other theories may have been relevant to a situation or individual and why they chose not to use these

This is what makes the difference between someone who is studying for a professional qualification in social work and one who acts on instinct or “gut”. If someone is professionally qualified, there is an expectation that they act ethically, with knowledge of why they make certain decisions, and that they are able to justify these, to managers, other professionals, vulnerable people and their families.

There needs to be scope within supervision sessions for reflection on decision making processes in relation to the use and application of theory. This is essential so that students can discuss their choices and means for coming to a decision. There also needs to be scope for theory to be something dynamic which is open to critique, as a worker who accepts everything which is “known” is not one who is thinking through application fully. A competent practitioner is one who makes informed choices with knowledge, understanding and conscious reasoning.

It is important for the practice assessor to ensure that students have opportunities to observe other workers putting theory into practice through their assessments and interpretations of need. This will enable the student to build their own confidence to try what works for them and to move away from the concept of theory as something purely academic and taught, to something which is used by everyone in the field.

Every single learning opportunity provides some scope for facilitating a student’s learning about theory. A skilled and reflective practice assessor will make full use of coaching questions to enable a student to fully consider the theoretical approaches used. Theory needs to be constantly on the practice assessor’s agenda to model theory-informed practice for the student.

A good working knowledge of theory is based on the perspective that each service user is a unique individual and that different approaches will be suited to individual circumstances, needs and cultural requirements. Students need to have a well equipped “toolkit” and a good understanding of the application of various approaches to ensure that this anti-oppressive, individualised approach is something they continue in their future career.

Students need to be able to move quite quickly in their ability to transfer the skills of learning about theory to future placements and work contexts. Allowing a range of activities and experiences, and focusing on building the student’s confidence in discussing theory should work to achieve this.

Supporting students to understand theory will support the development of critical thinking and analytical skills, which are again relevant to the professionalisation agenda and part of every degree course. There will also be benefits to the agency and the practice assessor in seeing things from a different point of view when a student is enabled to offer a well-informed critique. Finally, and arguably most importantly, allowing students to reflect on the best theory can offer and its application to different contexts will ensure future social workers are radical, creative and challenging professionals.

By: Chris Towland

About the Author:

When you are coaching and teaching players how to play soccer, having an understanding of “the Principles of the Game” is essential knowledge that will help your players adapt to any situation. Whilst not commonly taught or described in coaching manuals, The Principles of the Game are the very foundation of playing soccer. These principles

Have remained the same for as long as the game has existed, even though we may not have know it at the time. Apply to the game regardless of different systems of play and the different formations played by teams Will withstand the evolution of the game Will always apply regardless of whether your team, or the opposition team plays a 4-4-2 system or a 3-5-2 system or a 4-3-3 system. In fact the principles of play are vital in coaching because understanding them will make it far easier to deal with and exploit variations in formations and systems of play that you will encounter from opposition teams.

Getting players to an acceptable technical or skill level is a mandatory part of coaching, but understanding these principles will help you get the most out of your skilled players.

The principles of play are divided into 2 categories

Attacking Principles

The attacking principles apply when our team has the ball is looking to:

Keep possession of the ball Move the ball forward into an attacking position Create chances to score a goal
Defending Principles

Conversely, the defending principles apply when the opposition has the ball, and our team needs to:

Prevent the opposition from creating a chance to score a goal Limit the opportunities for the opposition to get into attacking positions Regain possession
Attacking Principles of Play Basics

When your team has the ball, the Attacking Principles apply, regardless of the position that the ball is on the field. The five principles of that govern play when you are attacking are:

Penetration Depth Width Mobility Improvisation
Defending Principles of Play Basics

Conversely, when the opposition has the ball, the Defending Principles apply, again,regardless of the position that the ball is on the field. The five principles of that govern play when you are defending:

Delay Depth Balance Concentration Control/Restraint

This article has covered the basic concepts of the Principles of Play, and I believe that it is essential to understand these principles when teaching players how to play soccer, and when coached correctly will equip players with all of the required knowledge to combat any side that you come up against.

By: Nigel Reed

About the Author:

You’ve seen the outside case – beige, black or some other muted colour, but what’s actually inside your computer? Covering all the components would take an age, so let’s just cover the basics.

The Processor, RAM, Mother Board and Hard Disk
There are many parts to the computer, but they all in some way support these 4 fundamental parts.

The processor is really concerned with the calculations in the computer. Let’s imagine that you’ve got some accounts to do, with a pen and some paper.

If you scribble sums on the paper, your brain is acting as the processor (CPU – or Central Processing Unit). It’s doing the calculating. The pad and pen are acting as the RAM (Random Access Memory). It’s where your’re storing your results. You’d write them in a format that would enable those results to be fed back in. You might have a total of all your monthly spending and another total of your monthly income. By subtracting your expenditure from your income, you’re left with how much cash per month you have left over. Keeping these totals handy for future calculations is what the RAM is for. It’s kept very close to the processor, so that calculations and results travel a short distance, very quickly.

The processor and RAM are kept together on the motherboard, for this reason. They are connected by two channels in both directions, the buses, which is how the information travels backwards and forwards (sometimes you will see FSB, or Front Side Bus speed quoted on the specifications – the higher the MHz, the faster the information travels).

The last part of the puzzle concerns the hard disk. If you were working on your monthly accounts, when you’d finished, you’d want to store that information somewhere, such as an accounts ledger; so that you could use it later – say, for your annual accounts. In this respect the hard disk, is like an accounts ledger. It’s a way of storing information you use in the short term – for the much longer term. The hard disk has a very important characteristic that the other parts do not share. The processor, RAM and motherboard are volatile. That means that when the power is switched off, the information is lost. So results which need to be kept, are sent to the hard disk, for long term storage.

Why have a Hard Disk? – Why not use more RAM instead?
There is another significant factor to consider here: cost. The processor and RAM are both chips – integrated circuits. The processor is one large one, made of many parts, the RAM is many smaller chips attached to a circuit board. They perform their tasks at phenomenal speeds and hence are costly. 4Gb of memory costs approximately the same as 400Gb of hard disk space, so the reason hard disks exist, is that they offer a lot of space for the money.

So that’s it. Certainly there are lots of other parts, that perform many useful and important functions, but they all support this model.

In fact this CPU/RAM design was originally called ‘Von Neumann Architecture” and was the basis for all early computer designs. As well as being a formidable mathematician, John Von Neumann was also highly influential in the fields of Computing, Weather Forecasting, Game Theory and Nuclear Physics (working on the Manhattan Project during WW2).

By: Patrick Seery

About the Author:

Competition is the fuel that makes capitalism work. It leads to better products for consumers and tends to help create more jobs than it costs. However, sometimes companies find that their competitors are just too strong and challenge everything they do. This obviously hurts the companies’ profits or worse. This can be changed by thinking outside the box a little and changing the rules of engagement.

In their research on game theory, Bradenburger and Nalebuff discuss how creative companies have begun using strategies that allow both themselves and their competitors to benefit. There are several advantages to these strategies. Most importantly, they allow strategists to profit in a way that their competitors are not going to be as eager to counter. In many situations, competitors are actually willing to embrace the strategy since they are going to increase their own profits in return.

A famous example of a win-win strategy is the incentive program that was created by General Motors. At the time, the automobile industry was facing significant expenses due to the incentives that were being offered through retailers. General Motors decided to issue a new credit card which would allow them to apply a portion of their charges to a GM car. Shortly after, they also made it possible for customers to also apply a smaller portion of their charges towards purchasing a Ford car. This significantly lowered expenses for both GM and Ford.

An interesting way for companies within an industry to collaborate with each other is to work together to introduce new suppliers or try to create new customer groups. Coke and Pepsi once worked together to introduce a new supplier for their companies and in doing so managed to break the monopoly of Monsanto, their previous supplier, and force more favorable contracts.

But as Bradenburger and Nalebuff state, win-win strategies are not always ideal. Some strategies can force a strong company to forego potential opportunities to a weaker company that would not otherwise have the capability to capture those opportunities. Also, while companies can introduce strategies win-win strategies with or without the cooperation of their competitors, they must be careful that they do not give the appearance that they are colluding with each other. In the eyes of the FTC, honest creativity can be mistaken for price fixing or another antitrust violation.

It is important for companies to realize that while win-win strategies can be tempting because they may seem to lower risk and make strategizing easier, they also can also lower long-term profitability by sharing their success with competitors. Inevitably, managers must realize that while win-win strategies may be viable alternatives to the traditional competitive structure, they have not completely replaced it. Most of the time they are going to have to stand in the line of fire and be willing to take their competitors on directly.

By: Kalen Smith

About the Author:

Mindset refers to a series of assumptions, notations, or methods in which members of a group create abundant incentives for one another to retain those same previously held beliefs, behaviors, choices, and tools. Often the common answer that arises when asked about what is mindset, as a whole, has to do with a kind of cognitive bias of sorts, or even a mental inertia. Lastly, the popular expressions, “groupthink” and “paradigm” are also decent answers to the question, “what is mindset?”

As far as politics are concerned, if one can remember the infamous “Cold War mindset,” which trusted the game theory between both the U.S. and USSR. The command chain stated clearly that there was an understood, mutual destruction if either power was to target each other in a nuclear capacity; this is a good example of mindset in a potential war scenario. Although many theorists assume that a power structure needs to challenge the previous assumptions, which effectively make up the overall group’s mindset.

In many cases, when power structures fail to question their own mindsets, often devastating results can take place. Any singular mindset that is never questioned by its inner-workings will not possess enough flexibility central to its existence. The power structure is forced to continuously discern the mindset involved if it is to be successful.

In business terms, mindset is essential to the overall successful functioning of a company. Often the goals and strategies that are shared among a group instead of an individual create far better results. The idea behind an effective mindset in terms of business is to create as much value out of each individual and then bring that value into a group setting. What is mindset, if it is not a philosophical stance shared among a group of individuals for the greater benefit of the business, or perhaps it is that which fosters the best scenario in any business setting?

By: Steve Duval

About the Author: