Chinese Students' Learning Experiences and Understanding of Social Work in China and Australia

In this article, “China” refers to “mainland China.” Social work as academic discipline was first introduced to China’s most important universities, such as Yenching University, in the 1920s. However, social work, like other social science disciplines, was labeled as “bourgeois pseudo-science” and removed from Chinese universities in the 1950s, based on the idea that there were no social problems in socialist China, and thus no need for social work education. After the introduction of the Open Door and Economic Reform policy in 1978, social science disciplines were gradually reestablished in universities in mainland China beginning in the late 1980s, after a lapse of over thirty years. China’s rapid social and economic transformation has created different social problems since the late 1970s. As a measure to alleviate emerging social problems, the return of social work programs was advocated by the Ministry of Civil Affairs and by leading academics, who saw the need to develop professional social workers to handle the increasingly complex social problems arising from rapid social and economic transitions. Thus, the Chinese government reintroduced social work education programs to the universities in the late 1980s, for the clear political mission of establishing social stability and a harmonious society. Peking University was the first higher educational institute to launch a social work program at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels in 1988. Gradually, other universities and cadre training colleges in China followed its lead. In China in 2018, there were 348 undergraduate social work programs and 150 master’s of social work (MSW) programs. In China’s specific context, rural social work is one of the major subfields of social work. As social work was developed in the Western urban context, when it was reintroduced to China, some of the Chinese social work educators were aware of the differences in cultural and societal context between China and the West. They emphasized the indigenization of social work in China, and rural social work was regarded as the major component of this effort. They also thought social development and poverty alleviation should be a major factor. For example, Professor Wang Sibin, a leading social work scholar from Peking University, opined that social development and poverty alleviation should be the primary focus of social work education in China, and that individualized practice should only constitute a supplementary and secondary role in the social work curriculum. This is the context and direction of rural social work development in China since it was reconstructed in the 1980s. However, even today, rural social work is underdeveloped in terms of academic research and publication. Most of the bibliographies are in Chinese, and very few academic papers have been published in English in the area of rural social work in China. Nonetheless, in this bibliography, priority will be given to English academic papers. Only important and high-quality Chinese articles will be cited.

The contemporary development of Chinese social work has occurred in the context of strong engagement with international education exchanges and curriculum. Many issues in training students for practice have emerged. This study explored how Chinese students learned social work in two different educational contexts in China and Australia. A qualitative insider researcher approach with thematic analysis was used to explore learning experiences of two cohorts of participants over a two-year period. The first cohort studied social work in China only, while the second cohort studied both in China and in Australia. Five key themes emerged. The first three themes related to learning experiences, and the other two themes related to interactions with teachers and support systems. These five themes suggest that social work is learned in very different forms in China and Australia. Recommendations are made for better understanding of these differences and the resulting impacts for Chinese students.

This article analyzes the role of social work in the context of the special political, economic, cultural, and historical background in China. A historical perspective is used to understand the evolution of the Chinese welfare system and explain the timing of reintroducing the social work profession. A pluralistic perspective is adopted to define social work relating to different stakeholders in social welfare and services. The government starts to diminish its role as a direct service provider. The traditional family and community have less capacity to take care of people. Yet, the social work profession is not ready to take over. Finally, a social development perspective is used to illustrate why economic growth is prioritized by the Chinese government and social work as profession is supposed to work to promote social stability and prosperity. Implications for social work research and practice are discussed.

My research is concerned with the development of social work students’ personal and professional identities in the light of policy changes introduced into social work education. Since April 2005, social work students have had to register with the General Social Care Council and ‘sign up to’ the Codes of Practice. The Codes specify that social workers must not ‘behave in a way, in work or outside work, which would call into question [their] suitability to work in social care services’. The research is of particular interest because the participants were among the first social work students to be registered; I hope that it will contribute to academic and professional debates. The study is informed by a poststructuralist approach to identity and discourse. I argue that social work education and professional registration are part of a regulatory discourse. The research questions explore some of the discursive resources that social work students draw on to construct their personal and professional identities. I begin by locating the study within contemporary debates in higher and professional education, and then review the literature about social work registration and its implications for students and social work education. These policy and educational developments are considered through the lens of poststructuralist concepts: discourse, power and subject positions; governmentality and resistance. Finally, my literature review explores some concepts of identity and professional identity. The empirical data is derived from seven semi-structured interviews with social work students. The transcripts were interrogated using a form of discourse analysis developed from the work of Potter and Wetherell (1987). The research findings suggest that this group of students see professional registration as an integral part of social work education and becoming qualified. Their talk indicates that registration brings students’ private lives into a more public domain than previously. However, the data suggests that social work education itself challenges and de-stabilises identity as students negotiate the boundary between being ‘unqualified’ and ‘professional’. So while registration does impact on how students behave and how they see themselves, this must be placed in the broader context of learning to be a professional social worker. The study concludes by considering the practical implications for social work education.

With the continuous development of social work in China, the participation of civil force is indispensable. This paper aims to explore the relationship between the degree of Chinese community residents' social identification with three types of social groups (namely, community residents, social work professionals, and social work recipients) and community residents’ willingness to participate in social work-related volunteer service through the lens of social identity theory. The purpose of the research is to further apply the conclusions to social work practice in the time to come, so as to encourage more civil force to participate in social work. The research method of this study is a survey by questionnaire. Research results show that the degree of Chinese community residents' social identification with community residents, social work professionals and social work recipients are all positively correlated with their willingness to participate in social work-related volunteer service, among which the positive correlation between the degree of Chinese community residents' social identification with social work recipients and their willingness to participate in social work-related volunteer service is most significant. This study proves that enhancing community residents' social identification with social work recipients can effectively promote community residents’ willingness to participate in social work-related volunteer service. In other words, by enhancing community residents’ level of social identification with social work recipients in the future, there will be undoubtedly more civil forces encouraged to participate in Chinese social work.

The shortage of trained social work graduates challenges the professionalisation of social work in China. However, limited large-sample research has examined specific educational components that encourage undergraduates to pursue social work careers. Based on the identity-capability-reward perspective, this study surveyed 886 final-year social work students in Guangdong and utilised logistic regression analysis to identify factors predicting their pursuit of social work jobs upon graduation. Students with a stronger personal identity in social work, greater perceived competency in professional knowledge development, and who had more participatory opportunities for field practice were more likely to choose social work jobs. Moreover, women and students from disadvantaged backgrounds were prone to take up social work jobs, although students more confident in community work skills were reluctant to pursue social work jobs. These findings have implications for social work education to promote the pursuit of social work careers among social work students in China.

This article reports on the result of an exploratory qualitative study with in-depth interviews conducted with postgraduate students in Chinese universities. The data were collected from five schools of social work, covering three provincial-level administrative regions of Beijing, Shanghai and Shandong. The principal aim of this article is to understand the development of social work and student perspectives on the government’s role in social work development and the function of social work in China. The study shows that Chinese social work is still developing, and the expansion and function of social work education and practice is mandated by the state. Despite a robust authoritarian hold by the government, the study finds hope among the graduate students about the mission and future of social work in China.

本文目的在於以英國為例，嘗試著說明社會政策治理邏輯的改變如何影響其福利服務輸送體系，進而影響社會工作專業發展，藉此說明社會工作專業發展是如何鑲嵌於特定的國家文化、歷史脈絡和政治經濟脈絡中。在方法上，我們採取歷史追蹤分析方法。本文研究結果發現如下，在戰後福利國家的黃金年代，在以社會行政為基礎的科層治理形塑社會工作的專業主義上，社會工作者對於社會服務使用者的需求評估和處遇擬定都受限於科層體系的規範，也就是那些進入社會工作和社會服務體系的公民的社會權是被專業科層體系和法律所規範。在1980年代之後，西方福利國家立基於新自由主義，而使其治理模式轉往以管理主義以強調效率和選擇等價值，也影響社會工作轉向以管理主義為基礎，在論述上，強調透過個案管理、賦權和使能等概念以強化和正當化對於效率和個人責任的重視。但是，同時，新管理主義在過度強調效率和個人責任的情況下，反而削弱了社會工作者和接受服務者的自主性。2000年之後，社會投資政策理念興起，使得社會政策治理邏輯改以新公共治理為主，不再強調最佳模式，而必須反映了治理客體的現實，因此強調共同生產和網絡治理，且社會工作者可在其中扮演服務協調與創新的角色，而使得未來社會工作教育可能會進一步強調夥伴關係和社會創新等等價值與概念。我們認為本文也提出一些未來研究的可能性，認為未來可以更進一步強化社會政策與社會工作之間的連結，並將台灣的社會工作專業體系置於國際比較的脈絡中。This article aims to identify linkages between social policy and social work. Over the past few decades in Taiwan, social workers and social work educators have emerged as formal professions. However, the relationship between social policy and social work is often ignored, particularly how social work (education) is developed and shaped by social policy. This is because in the process of professionalization and specialization, social policy and social work are treated independently, and the linkage between them goes unacknowledged. Social work studies often focus on micro-level social work practices and methods, and social work is rarely seen as a type of policy model or regime at the institutional level. As a result, social work is often regarded as single undifferentiated policy model, with social work systems and education presented as identical across the world. However, a growing number of comparative studies have identified significant cross-national variations in national social work systems due to idiosyncratic historical, cultural and political economic contexts. This raises the need for additional research on comparative social work systems. In this study, we argue that the key to studying the linkage between social policy and social work is using models of governance to analyze and understand how social work systems are developed and understood. Models of social policy governance influence how social work is practiced and how social work curricula are designed. The remainder of this study is structured as follows: Section two focuses on how hierarchical governance and new public management shapes social policy and social work systems. Section three examines the impact of new public governance on social investment for social work systems. Finally, section four summarises the influence of various models of social policy governance on the development of social work systems, and propose issues for future research. We identify three stages of welfare state development. In the Golden Age of the welfare state, the logic of social administration underpins the model of social policy governance and broader hierarchical governance. The rights and obligations of welfare benefits as well as social work practices were legislatively regulated, along with the relationship between social workers and their clients, resulting in the professionalization of social work. In this stage, client assessments and treatments were be regulated to discipline client behavior and attitudes. However, with the neoliberalism of the Thatcher and Reagan governments, respectively in the UK and the USA, the welfare state shifted towards a workfare state, and the models of social policy governance shifted to a new public management paradigm. The welfare state discursively began to emphasize the role of the market in welfare provision, stressing values such as efficiency and choice, and embedding a managerialist approach in social policy governance. Social work practices and education were therefore transformed, and social workers were/are often regarded and trained as case managers, emphasizing concepts such as case management, choice, empowerment and enablement. Moreover, the relationship between social workers and clients was also transformed into a “manager-consumer” duality, in which the rights and obligations of welfare benefits are regulated by contracts and market mechanisms. This transformed the role of the client into that of the consumer. Third, after 2000, the emergence of social investment concepts has driven the emergence of a new approach to public governance in response to new social risks and the complexities of social problems, raising multiple obstacles to clients accessing welfare benefits. This new public governance pushes concepts of co-production and network governance to cope with social complexities and the emergence of new social risks. This has naturally changed the role of social workers in the provision of welfare provisions from case managers into coordinators of resources and services and policy innovators. The role of welfare beneficiaries is neither client nor consumer, but rather a stakeholder in the coordination and innovation of welfare provisions. In this study, we show that social work practices and education are not identical but are rather shaped by social policy governance and political economic contexts. We compare three models of social policy governance in terms of how social work practices and education are shaped, and propose issues for future research. First, additional attention should focus on the linkage between social policy and social work to provide a better understanding of the development of social work and social work education. Second, the development of social work in Taiwan should be examined in comparison to international practices.

A critical component in preparing social work students for healthcare settings will be Field Work Education. Healthcare Social Work always plays the role of power engine in the development of professional social work worldwide. When the Chinese government declared in 2006 the policy to support and expand social work services, social work agencies grasped the opportunity and entered, into hospitals. However, educational institutions are not prepared for the rapid expansion of social work in health settings. Social Work educators need a social work curriculum with a solid field practicum specifically related to health to prepare their graduates for healthcare settings. NASW has outlined the knowledge base and competencies for healthcare social work and they could be modified and revised for Chinese social work educators by taking into account of local disease patterns and healthcare systems. This chapter reveals that Social Work service units in hospitals of China, funded by healthcare institutions or government, and community health centers, are willing to accept student placements. Forming Teaching-Practicing-Researching Centers of Excellence in hospitals by Social Work Schools is therefore recommended as the best strategy for developing professional healthcare social work in China.

Social work education has experienced three stages since its introduction to China in the 1920s: introduction, abolishment and reinstatement. Theoretically, there are four types of social work in China: official–educational, official–practical, voluntary–educational and voluntary–practical. In practice, all four types of social work have not necessarily been embodied in each developmental stage, and the order of their historical development is not the same as the order of their logical development; i.e. some types are lacking in some of the stages. Each type of social work has its own characteristics, which are integrated into each development stage. Today, Chinese social work faces two major interrelated tasks: the professionalisation and the institutionalisation of social work. The former refers to the development of standardisation in Chinese social work; the latter has to do with the development of the social welfare institution in general and the development of institutional welfare in particular. In general, the dramatic development in Chinese social work largely depends on the accomplishment of the two tasks.

Current thinking suggests that evidence‐based practice (EBP) is a key to unlocking the potential for social work development in mainland China. But Chinese social workers may be confronted by the challenges of EBP in using research evidence, exercising expert judgment, as well as considering client characteristics, as social work is a relatively new enterprise in China's unique social–economic–political context. There is little indigenous research evidence for Chinese social workers to refer to. There are few experienced social workers and researchers since social work practice, education and research were reinstated only in the late 1980s. Mainland Chinese may not be aware of what social workers can do and may prefer authority‐based practice. This paper aims to first review the definition of EBP, followed by a discussion of the challenges and opportunities in applying EBP to social work in China. It then highlights the usefulness of collaboration between academics, practitioners, and clients in implementing EBP. A recent research project on ex‐offenders and their family members in Singapore is used to illustrate the feasibility of collaboration between academia and the field. 当前的理论认为， 以证据为本的实践是一个解开中国大陆社会工作重新发展潜能的钥匙。 然而， 中国社会工作者在运用研究证据、行使专业判断及考虑服务使用者的特质时， 或许会遇到实证为本的挑战， 因为在中国独特的社会、经济及政治环境下， 社会工作是一个相对地新兴的专业， 没有太多本土化的研究证据可供中国社会工作者参考。 同时， 因为社会工作实践、教育及研究在1980年代末期才得以复苏， 也没有太多富有经验的社会工作者及研究人员。 中国内地民众或许未曾意识到社会工作者能够做什么， 宁可依据以权威为本的实践。 本文的主要目的首先是检视以证据为本的实践的定义， 然后讨论在中国应用以证据为本的实践的挑战及机遇。 文章突出了在引用以证据为本的实践时， 学术界、前线工作者及服务使用者相互合作的益处。 藉一项在新加坡进行的前刑事犯人及其家人的近期研究成果， 以说明学术界与社会工作界合作的可行性。

This special issue in the Journal of Social Work Education is a forum for professional and scholarly discourse on military social work education initiatives developed to educate and train social work professionals and students for practice with military personnel, veterans, and their families across the micro–macro continuum. Special emphasis was given to educational and technological trends, innovations, and challenges related to educating the next generation of social workers to provide evidence-based services to a new generation of veterans that incorporate the CSWE’s (2010) advanced knowledge and practice behaviors in military social work and NASW’s (2012) practice standards. Additional focus was given to university–community and university–military partnerships, collaborations, and initiatives that involve community and military stakeholders. Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, and conceptual manuscripts from researchers, educators, and practitioners on military social work education and practice were solicited from the professional social work community. In this special issue we highlight select exemplars of the social work profession’s unique contributions to military social work education. The issue is divided into two sections: (1) discourse on the integration of military social work into professional social work education and (2) innovative military social work education and training programs for doctoral and master’s students, student veterans, and licensed social work professionals—many including program evaluation and other research components. Each section is described in following paragraphs, including a brief overview of representative manuscripts. Integration of Military Social Work Into Professional Social Work Education Four manuscripts highlight military social work as a field of practice requiring specialized knowledge and skills, teaching strategies based on the CSWE competencies and advanced practice behaviors in military social work, the inclusion of military and veteran culture in social work education curricula, and adapting social work field placements for training in military social work practice. Wooten presents a rationale for military social work as a specialized field of practice, the need for military social work education, and opportunities and challenges for professional social work education. She delineates foundation and advanced knowledge in military social work and concludes by proposing an integrated model of intellectual capital to guide strategic planning for professional military social work education in addition to professional infrastructure needed to develop intellectual capital in military social work. For social work educators unfamiliar with military and veteran culture, Daley provides examples of teaching strategies based on CSWE’s advanced practice behaviors in military social work for integration into social work courses, specifically focusing on their application to CSWE’s Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS; CSWE, 2008). He identifies foundation and advanced year military social work educational goals based on EPAS 2.1.1 to 2.1.10 and suggests that the infusion of military social work across the social work curriculum will assist students and faculty in becoming more sensitive to the issues faced by military service members, veterans, and their families. Continuing the application of CSWE’s EPAS to military social work education, Canfield and Weiss proposes the inclusion of military-related material into the foundation courses of undergraduate and graduate social work education because social workers providing services in civilian settings not focused on military-related difficulties may encounter military personnel, veterans, and families who seek services outside of the DoD and VA. Key issues, military examples, and resources are recommended for the integration of military culture into human behavior in the social environment, generalist practice, research methods, and social policy core curricula. With a focus on field education as the signature pedagogy of social work education, Selber, Chavkin, and Biggs advance a promising field instruction model in military social work with the growing student veteran population on American campuses. This innovative approach to field education expands placement opportunities beyond the VA for professional training in service delivery to current and past military cohorts.

The powerful boost of the Chinese Communist Party and the central government in developing the social work policy initiatives has projected a radiant future for social work education and social work profession in the decades to come. This strong stimulus, however, further intensifies the predicament of social work education already shaped by professional colonization, nativistic reaction, commodification of higher education and political appropriation into a vicious spiral. This article argues that service learning can become an alternative in indigenizing social work pedagogy to the above-mentioned predicament, as well as a pedagogical strategy to cope with the postmodern uncertainties of social work education. With reference to the five years' experience of service learning in the Social Work Research Institute of Yunnan University, the authors illustrate the implications of service learning to the indigenizing pedagogy through four approaches: experiential learning, civic responsibility, political and anti-foundational perspectives, as alternatives to the predicament of social work education and the development of social work in China. Citing the impact of service learning on social work education, the authors advocate that service learning should be promoted not just as a social work pedagogy, but also as a community engagement movement, as well as an intellectual movement in China.

Healthcare Social Work is always a power engine for professional social work development. In the west Almoners’ work in hospital has a history of over a century. In China Hospital social work has begun in early 1920s and shared a common educational heritage with their counterparts of the United States. However, its development has hibernated until 1980s when social work in China is allowed to re-emerge. Social Work services since then are offered in both hospitals and communities. Basically, development of Healthcare Social Work in China cannot be separated from three factors, namely (1) Recognition of the government for the career of social workers (2) Recognition of the need for social work services by the healthcare sector and last but not least (3) Recognition for the need of professionalization by social work practitioners in health related services. This chapter examines through secondary data analysis and literature review the recent growth of social work in health services in China taking situations in the Guangdong province as a major reference. Prevailing difficulties and how NGOs and Social work educators can help to meet the challenges for professionalism in this expanding field are discussed.

Social work education in China has expanded rapidly since it was reintroduced in 1988. This has led to a growing body of English language literature on the development of social work education in China. However, thus far, this literature lacks an empirical foundation and little research on students' perspectives has been done. To fill this gap, this paper reports on a qualitative study of a group of graduating social work students (n = 32) from four social work programmes in Jinan, the provincial capital of the Shandong Province. Three major findings are reported. Firstly, the students liken their social work learning experience to a roller coaster ride with many ups and downs. Secondly, the cultural compatibility of western social work in China has not yet been conclusively established, while an ‘indigenized’ social work needs to be compatible with Chinese family values, referred to as ‘familism’ in direct Chinese to English translation, and with the dominant socialist political ideology. Thirdly, the future of social work is bright given increasing government support for its development.