Simulation
DebriefingSWP 341
By: Ainsley, Emily, Erika, Katie, Monica, Sabrina
AGENDA1. Theoretical considerations2. Issues of power, powerlessness, privilege,
and oppression3. Structural issues4. The use of self in practice context5. What you would do the same/differently
“Whatever the practice context, it is essential that the setting be accessible
with enough space to offer privacy and a certain degree of comfort.”
Lundy, C. (2004). Social work and social justice: A structural approach to practice . Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press. (pp. 111-127).
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Approaches used, how anti-oppressive principles were/were not incorporated
• Lundy explains that it’s important that the setting be accessible to offer privacy and provide comfort
• The first few minutes of the meeting are crucial as the service user is observing to see whether or not the social worker is someone that they can trust
• Introduction – tuning in approach
• Lundy explains the importance of tuning in, as is it when social workers get in touch with personal biases, feelings and concerns
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Approaches used, how anti-oppressive principles were/were not incorporated
• We began the meeting with respectful, attentive, interested, caring, trustworthy, friendly, genuine, honest and warm demeanor
• Throughout the meeting, we tried to incorporate an anti-oppressive framework as much as possibly by asking everyone how they were feeling
• This was difficult due to the language barrier that Enrique experienced
• We attempted to provide equal opportunities to speak throughout the meeting, however, Penny and Doug spoke often as their personalities were stronger and which led them to having more of an advantage throughout the meeting.
POWER VS.POWERLESSNESS
In social work role, relational dynamics, fluidity of powerISSUES OF POWER + PRIVELEGE
• A social worker is believed to be in a position of power and privilege however it is a social workers responsibility to break this barrier and provide a power-with approach instead of a power-over approach
• Our group held an enormous amount of privilege as the social worker while dealing with the service workers
• This caused more confusion and frustration between the service users and our group
In social work role, relational dynamics, fluidity of powerISSUES OF POWER + PRIVELEGE• The ideas of privilege and issues of power are factors that
show how important an anti-oppressive framework and approach is in order to better understand and support the service users
• In order to eliminate issues of power, privilege and oppression, it is important that the social worker does not talk over or talk more than the service users.
• Our group tried to do this as much as possible, by allowing the service users to express how they were feeling, and how different solutions would affect them rather than telling them what we thought would be best for them.
• Issues were seen when we asked the service users about Ben and the other individuals that have been helping them access food through the back door.
STRUCTURAL
ISSUES
Structural issuesSpecific to population/issue, specific to you/service users in simulation
• Our group had a hard time with regards to population needs, as introductions from the service users were not addressed in the beginning of the meeting
• A better introduction would have allowed us to understand each service user and what they struggled with
• Enrique was struggling with transitioning into Toronto
• Nancy was struggling with paying for a baby sitter• Doug was there because of his wife, Edie
• Penny was an Aboriginal woman who was proactive and wanted to help in order to see a change for not only herself, but the whole community.
Structural issuesSpecific to population/issue, specific to you/service users in simulation
• According to Payne 2006, a process is “a series of actions and factors affecting [the service user] that go towards making or achieving something”
• Our group would identify this meeting as an “empowering process” which is “strengthening people's ability to overcome social barriers”
• Most applicable to this situation because the users of the backdoor service needed to overcome the barrier of the warehouse shutting down, which allowed them accessibility to food.
• Identifying which process to use is important because it changes how the social worker would approach the conflict.
“What am I feeling?” “How am I presenting?” “What did I do?” “Why did I do it?”.
Lishman, J. (2002). Social work: Themes, issues and critical debates . London: MacMillan. (pp. 89-103).
COMFORTOpen Welcoming
THE USE OF SELFYour unique identities and subject positions, how you used “yourself” in simulation
• Remained calm • Kept a professional stance (posture) • Maintained eye contact• Admitted frustration in not knowing as much
information• Work with information given
WHAT TO DO DIFFERENTLY
Using reflection on action skills and knowledge, what would you do next time
• Be more welcoming• Allow members of group to properly introduce
themselves• Allow service users to feel more as an individual
(personal experiences and the effects of it)• Make sure and acknowledge what they are saying• When dealing with group, do not put all of them
under same category• Provide beverages and snacks
• Do not form questions in a “cryptic” manner
• Be as specific as possible
• Do not repeat the same question or use long phrases
• Be careful of wording (may “accuse” the client)
• Feed off of each other to gather information
WHAT TO DO DIFFERENTLYUsing reflection on action skills and knowledge, what would you do next time
• Be aware of anything such as language barriers
• Continuously remind them that we were advocating for them
WHAT TO DO THE SAMEUsing reflection on action skills and knowledge, what would you do next time
• Agreeing with the group about their circumstances
• Our body language and eye contact
• Remained neutral and professional and avoided getting frustrated
• Our demeanor while speaking to the clients
DISCUSSION • We weren’t given not a lot of information prior to our simulation, so if you
were in a similar situation where you didn’t have the answers that the clients were asking for, how would you answer them in a way that satisfied them? And how would you react to them being angry at your lack of information?
• With dealing with 4 completely different people, what approach would you have taken in this situation to hold the meeting? How would you have tried to get everyone's voice heard and kept control of the interview with so many voices giving you so many different ideas and questions?
• Specific to a distinct individual who was a part of the interview, how would you have approached the situation? (ex. How would you have included Enrique into the conversation)
DISCUSSION Table 2.1 (Payne, 2005) TYPE OF PROCESS
WRITER AIMS
Critical Fook (2002); Healy (2000)
Move towards transformation of social relations
through dialogical, shared relationships
Developmental
Smalley (1967) Help people to 'grow' in understanding and skill
Ego-
supportive Goldstein
(1995)Strengthen people's will to plan and
organize lifeEmpowering Solomon
(1976); Lee (2001)
Strengthen people's ability to overcome social
barriersPerson-
centeredRogers (1967) Release individual's capacity for self-
actualization
DISCUSSION con’tTYPE OF PROCESS
WRITER AIMS
Problem solving Perlman (1957) Help people to specify and overcome problems
Psychosocial Hollis (1964) Help people to identify
and respond topsychological and social
stressesProcess
Knowledge Sheppard et al. (2002) Make assessments and
decisions through cognitive processe
Systems Evans and Kearney
(1996)Phases that place work
tasks in sequence, according to connections
in time
ANY questions?THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!
ReferencesAllen, G. & Lanford, D. (2007). Types and purposes of interviews in the agency context. In Effective interviewing in social work and social care: A practical guide. (pg. 52-60). New York: Palgrave McMillan.
Lundy, C. (2004). The helping process: Assessment and intervention. In Social Work and social justice: A structural approach to practice. (pg. 111-120). Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press. Lishman, J. (2002). Social work: Themes, issues and critical debates . London: MacMillan. (pp. 89-103).
Payne, M. (2005). Social work process. In R. Adams, L. Dominelli & M. Payne (Eds.) Social work futures: crossing boundaries, transforming practice (pp. 21-35). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.