isw08 nayar

Coordinating and Managing the Growth of International Social Work

Usha S. [email protected]

[email protected] 6th-8th 2008

Organization of Discussion

Social WorkSocial Work

TeachingTeaching

ResearchResearch

PoliciesPolicies

AdvocacyAdvocacy

Field Work Education

TEACHING

Example: Collaboration – TISS, LSE, WUSTL

Facilitating Conditions

Presence of International Students – Diversity Courses that provide Issue Based understanding

of Local and Global Perspectives Support from Institutional Leadership Support from Peers Support between collaborating institutions Sharing of Organizational Values in Educational

Institutions

Obstacles and Barriers involved in Teaching

Inequality in Human and Infrastructure resources of Collaborating Educational Institutions

Imposition of Curriculum without consideration of Local Constituencies of Students as well as Faculty Competencies

Inappropriate Planning time for Action and Implementation of Teaching Programs

Mistakes to Avoid

Competent Core Faculty is a MUST for a Teaching Program

Students should not be used to experiment Curriculum otherwise not entirely ready. [Access to Teaching, Learning materials, Literature, etc]

Evaluation of the Program should be on going Special attention should be given to the

culturally diverse community for better understanding for both local and international sensitivity

Resources

Share Information internally and externally in Teaching Programs

UN Organizations and International Bodies promote certain areas of interest – Teaching programs are almost first in hierarchy to be receivers of such grants.

Sharing of Grey Literature among Collaborating Institutions

Partnership between Libraries and Library Staff to train students and faculty to garner resources and provide funding opportunities

RESEARCH

Example: Child Participation, Street Children Project


Identifying common socially relevant research themes and they are enumerable where social work is concerned

Openness of faculty and institutions to learn from each other in collaboration

Identifying the Institutions with common priority research areas to collaborate. This is done both at Institutional level and at Faculty level

Some Institutions allocate having funds for research and encourage faculty to undertake researches

Barriers

Heavy teaching work-load may discourage the faculty to undertake research

Over Emphasis on Grant money or sponsored ‘Research’ may shift the priority areas of research. This in turn may not allow the faculty and institutions to specialize and grow in depth in research

Mistakes to Avoid

Discussion on commonly used key terms is essential so that one can avoid mis-translation. Words used may be the same but meanings may differ in contexts

Research designs, tools of measurement, plans of analyses, etc all these steps should be centralized. They need to be developed together with partner research collaborators and variations, adaptations and derivations due to local conditions that can be reasoned and articulated

Resources

The agencies that fund research have their priorities distributed in themes – geographic, economic, cultural, health and disease, etc. It is a challenge to have resources available for International Research that will not have local benefit. Social Work concerns have an International appeal for research and the scope for development.

SW research can have better chances at resource generation if it links with multi disciplinary teams.

Management of Risks

Over site of local realities to create global common standards

The use of inappropriate methodologies thus drawing conclusions on the basis of artifacts

Non completion of research studiesDomination of ‘North’ models, theories and

paradigms to adapt, imitate in countries in the ‘South’

FIELD WORK EDUCATION

Example: Brown School, Tulane, Adelphi, The New School


Establishment of Demonstration Field Work Projects by the Institution

Positive and Active Linkages with Local NGOs, International NGOs, UN bodies, Government Agencies

Barriers

Matching Time Schedules with Collaborative Institutions

Continuous Field Place For Varied Time Periods

Absence of Functional Use of Local Language

Varying Levels of Cultural Sensitivities & Competencies

Mistakes to Avoid

Rigid Pre-Determined Field Work Schedules

Communication Gaps and Information Exchange on Field Work Expectations

Lack of Clarity in Evaluation and Allocation of Credits

Resources

Shared Resource Commitment from Partner Institutions

Students as Resources University LeadershipFaculty Commitment Links with Government Officials

Management of Risks

Students Involvement in Local Politics to be Discouraged

Advance and Follow-up Linkage of Course Work to International Field Work

Early Planning with Host Institution on Proposed International Field Work

POLICIES

Example: Head Start in USA, ICDS in India, UK’s emphasis on Parenting Support


Recognition of commonalities and differences in Utilization of research for policy formalization, review and change in different countries to value the knowledge of policies for service delivery systems in different political, economic and welfare states provide learning experience.

UN Conventions and millennium development goals provide overarching objectives for comparative policy research collaborations.

The evidences of different nations on how to communicate with policy planners is a value for international collaborative work.

Barriers

Over emphasis on differences in contexts due to political, economic, social and cultural variations across nations

Prevalent biases amongst policy planners as well as social workers that values amongst western and other cultures are not compatible

Political instability in nationsNations involved in war

Resources

Research to support Policy DevelopmentTeaching Programs that initiate critical

review for Policy DevelopmentState, Government and International

Support from grass-root organizations to multi national Institutions

Fund raising activities to mobilize policy supporters

Manage Risks

To manage risks in Policy Development & Change it is imperative to educate and create awareness in people

Both Positive and Negative feedback and aspects should be evaluated frequently

Utilization and Implementation of the Policy needs to be tested at the consumer level

ADVOCACY

Example: IBAVI, Issue based advocacy for vulnerable groups – Child Labor


Multi-sector support cooperation between government, universities, NGOs, corporations and communities

The bottom up approach works in some issues

Scaling up the practice cooperation from top is imperative

Contact with media for disseminationInternational Networks

Barriers

Conflict of interests amongst stake holdersPolitical will is not thereCommunities are scattered widely and

spread outLack of awareness and education in terms

of understandingCultural Differences and different Cultural

PrioritiesConflicting ideas and beliefs

Resources

People themselves are resource in advocacy Partnership with International Networks Local Resources Utilization of Expertise at a Global Level Sharing of Institutional Resources Student Exchange and Student Chapters in

Various Institutions (e.g. Amnesty International) Leadership

Manage Risks

Education of Stake Holders Share Common Values towards People

Centered Development Necessity of Tolerance and Awareness of

Diversity Pluralism Urgency of International Growth and creating an

International Platform for Dialogue Negotiating Skills

Concluding Remarks