ABSTRACT

Over the past ten years, fast-track social work qualifying training routes have been introduced and rapidly expanded in England. These programmes justify their existence through rhetoric that implies their students are superior to other students, and therefore require special privilege—the ‘best and brightest’. When evaluating fast-tracks, the approach taken largely ignores their broader public impact, including how they impact on the majority of social work students who continue to qualify through mainstream university social work education. This exploratory study seeks to gain an understanding of the impact that these changes have had on mainstream social work students, and in particularly how these students see themselves in relation to fast-track students. Based on the principles of democratic evaluation, brief and anonymous questionnaires were sent to all postgraduate social work students at two universities in England. The findings suggest that while mainstream students do not generally perceive themselves as being inferior future practitioners, they do recognise the financial and symbolic inequity they are subjected to, in particular as a result of their qualifying courses receiving significantly less financial support. Findings related to participants’ reasoning for not applying to fast-tracks, and how views differ based on demographics, are also explored.

摘要

在过去的十年里，快速的社会工作资格培训路线已经在英格兰引入并迅速扩大。这些课程通过暗示他们的学生优于其他学生的言辞来证明他们的存在，因此需要特殊的特权——“最优秀和最聪明的人”。在评估快速通道时，所采取的方法在很大程度上忽略了它们更广泛的公众影响，包括它们如何影响大多数继续通过主流大学社会工作教育获得资格的社会工作学生。这项探索性研究旨在了解这些变化对主流社会工作学生的影响，特别是这些学生如何看待自己与快速通道学生的关系。本着民主评价的原则，向英格兰两所大学的所有研究生社会工作学生发送了简短的匿名问卷。研究结果表明，虽然主流学生通常并不认为自己是未来的从业者，但他们确实认识到他们所遭受的经济和象征性不平等，特别是由于他们的合格课程获得的经济支持明显减少。还探讨了与参与者不适用快速通道的推理相关的调查结果，以及基于人口统计数据的观点如何不同。特别是因为他们的资格课程获得的财政支持明显减少。还探讨了与参与者不适用快速通道的推理相关的调查结果，以及基于人口统计数据的观点如何不同。特别是因为他们的资格课程获得的财政支持明显减少。还探讨了与参与者不适用快速通道的推理相关的调查结果，以及基于人口统计数据的观点如何不同。