- Expressive Play Therapy 1 (COUN-3100): Oct 24-25
- Expressive Play Therapy 2 (COUN-3105): Oct 26-27
- Introduction to Art Therapy for Counsellors and Therapists (COUN-1017); Nov 3-4
- An Introduction to the DSM-5 (COUN-1015); Dec 6-7
- Assessment Practices (COUN-1115): Nov 18-19
- Motivational Interviewing 1 (COUN-1125): Dec 9-10
- Aboriginal Focusing-Oriented Therapy and Complex Trauma - Applications due November 28 for January 2017
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Professional development: Play, Expressive and Complex Trauma Therapy courses at the JIBC
Professional development: Jack Hirose & Associates Inc - Burnaby & Richmond
Presented by
Ross Greene, Ph.D.; Lynne Kenney, Psy.D.; Lynn Lyons, MSW; Gordon Neufeld,
Ph.D.; Donald Meichenbaum, Ph.D.; Lynn Miller, Ph.D., R.Psych; Lisa Ferentz,
LCSW, DAPA
November 7 – 9,
2016 | Richmond, BC
Presented by
Colleen Carny, Ph.D., C.Psych.
November 16, 2016 |
Burnaby, BC
Presented by
Martin M. Antony, Ph.D.
November 21 – 22,
2016 | Burnaby, BC
Presented by
Sheri Van Dijk, MSW, RSW
November 28 – 29,
2016 | Burnaby, BC
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Controversy: Opting out of child protection laws in the UK
Social workers in fierce row over children’s bill
Government plans to allow councils to opt out of child protection laws
bitterly divides the profession and fuels privatisation fears
Tickle, L. (Oct. 18, 2016). The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/18/social-workers-fierce-row-childrens-bill
There is a ferocious battle going on among individuals who have
dedicated their professional lives to protecting children. On one side
are well-performing children’s services departments, which believe the
law can be an impediment to more effective and efficient ways of
working. On the other are children’s rights campaigners, some social
workers, family lawyers and senior social work academics, who view with
horror the prospect of hard-fought-for laws upholding children’s rights
being being made to disappear by the secretary of state.
At the centre of this struggle is the government’s children and social work bill, which proposes allowing councils to request specific exemptions from legislation and statutory guidance so that they can “innovate” to improve children’s experience of being looked after or, and with perhaps somewhat less lofty ambition, achieve “the same outcomes more efficiently”. Opponents fear the bill is a way of skirting difficult problems caused by funding cuts and social worker recruitment and could even lead to children’s social care being outsourced and privatised.
The bill being debated in the Lords on Tuesday proposes that a director of children’s services could ask the secretary of state to suspend part of a statute or guidance so social workers in that area could, for up to six years, try out an idea they believe would benefit children but that would, at present, be against the law.
Examples floated by ministers and other supporters of the bill include: removing the statutory requirement for an independent reviewing officer to carry out six-monthly care plan reviews; asking children in care whether they want to continue to have a social worker; removing the demand for foster carers of children in settled placements to write a daily log of what has happened in a child’s life; and removing the “looked-after” status of children who end up in custody, which would also mean they lose the rights that status confers. The last is a suggestion that Lord David Ramsbotham, former chief inspector of prisons and one of the peers opposing the bill, says he deplores.
“I would abor removing the care status of all children in custody,” he says.
Some social work leaders are frustrated with aspects of the child protection system, which they feel stifles innovation and can lead to a high turnover of staff. So they are irked and baffled by children’s rights campaigners’ opposition to the bill.
Carolyne Willow, director of the Article 39 charity, which fights for the rights of children living in institutional settings, is leading Together for Children, a group of some 40 organisations – including the Care Leavers’ Association, Liberty and the Howard League for Penal Reform – campaigning against the bill.
“It is a breathtaking outrage,” she says. “It’s no good being swayed by kindly sounding voices and people who say they want to do right by children. These are the laws that protect children who have been through horrific experiences and who are in dire need. Without [statutory] duties, my experience is that local authorities do not have the capacity, funding or mindset to provide for children or vulnerable care leavers.”
As a social worker of 30 years standing, Willow says that when a council has failed to provide good care, the one thing she has been able to offer a child is recourse to the protections of the law. “Without legal obligations, she says, “we are back to before the second world war, where we were relying on individual goodwill or professional discretion and where families had no call [as of right] on the state.”
At the Association of Lawyers for Children, Martha Cover, a barrister and children’s rights specialist, warns: “More than ever before they [councils] are driven by the need to protect their resources and their reputations. This is unsurprising given the 40% reduction in their budgets over the last few years, and the public willingness to blame social workers whenever a child is killed.”
Unusually, there was no consultation (such as a green paper) before the bill was presented in the Lords in May. Its main cheerleader, Isabelle Trowler, chief social worker for children and families, has tabled a government amendment to the bill this week, at the report stage, to quell fears that it is a Trojan horse designed to open up children’s services to privatisation. Her action suggests the government is worried about the scale of opposition. Shadow children’s minister Emma Lewell-Buck has vowed Labour will fight against the bill’s “exemption” clauses allowing councils to opt out of sections of the 1989 Children Act.
Trowler has made it clear the government wants social workers to be able to exercise their professional judgment without too many rules getting in their way. “[Now, ]what the bill will hopefully enable us to do is where authorities request that [exemptions], they can innovate and do things differently,” she said earlier this year.
Three local authorities have publicly embraced the bill: Leeds, Hampshire and Lincolnshire. All have children’s services designated by Ofsted as at least “good” and elements rated “outstanding”, which is presumably why they feel they have earned the right to be trusted when they judge that parts of the legislation are not working for children and want to try alternatives.
“I’m seeing some of the best social work in Lincolnshire I’ve seen in my career. And we’ve shoehorned that into current legislation. With the opportunity to innovate, we could achieve something fantastic,” says Stuart Carlton, assistant director of children’s services at Lincolnshire county council.
“Under the current legislation and guidance, where things aren’t working well, children’s rights are being let down anyway,” he says. “So why are we so opposed to allowing good local authorities try something out? I understand the concerns: there need to be really good safeguards, but this could be a once in a lifetime opportunity to put the child right at the centre of everything we do.”
In Hampshire, director of children’s services Steve Crocker says it is vital the social work profession is not limited by an imperative to practise in a way that is “frozen in time” by laws passed more than a decade ago. “If you only build up more legislation and regulation, why are we surprised that social workers are leaving the profession at the rate that they do?” he asks. “Nobody’s saying, take away all the regulation. It would only be very specific parts. It’s about suggesting tweaks to what highly skilled people do.”
Crocker insists a way has to be found “to safely experiment that will help us all in the sector in future”. Underlying at least part of the enthusiasm for the potential freedoms contained in the bill seems to be immense frustration that child protection social work is minutely scrutinised by Ofsted and then savagely blamed in public when something goes wrong. The latter scenario typically leads to more legislation, and tighter prescription of what a social worker should do, how it should be done, and by when.
“I do think there’s a debate to be had about whether we aren’t massively over-regulated and over-checked in terms of our practice,” says Dave Hill, president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services. “There’s an underlying issue of trusting professionals to do the best thing for children. [These clauses] would give us space to work. I can’t see millions of downsides.”
Yet lessons from Cornwall suggest that attributing poor practices to stifling over-regulation could be a red herring. The council has turned around a poorly performing children’s service over the past six years by rebuilding confidence and stability in the system through listening to families and children, reducing caseloads and better engaging with social workers.
Kathy Evans, chief executive of charity Children England, says she would be up for a thorough overhaul of the factors that impede social workers in their efforts to care for children and families. “But to do that does not warrant putting all child protection and care legislation and guidance up for grabs,” she says. If a child in custody with no social worker ends up having their rights breached, where are they to seek justice if the very law intended to protect them has been locally disapplied.
“There is no explanation so far about how a child in an exempted area might be able to challenge or complain. I have no lack of respect or sympathy for local authorities – but with the best of professional intentions, you can miss what an exemption could mean for a child.”
The job of a child protection social worker is so difficult that many last only a few years in frontline practice. Those supporting the bill believe the attrition rate is precisely because of the overwhelming demands of detailed statutory guidance. But opponents of the bill are not convinced.
“Local authorities must be held to account by the law which protects children’s rights,” says Cover. “Even with the existing framework in place, poorly performing local authorities regularly fail to carry out their duties to children. The law reports of care cases demonstrate this with depressing regularity.”
At the centre of this struggle is the government’s children and social work bill, which proposes allowing councils to request specific exemptions from legislation and statutory guidance so that they can “innovate” to improve children’s experience of being looked after or, and with perhaps somewhat less lofty ambition, achieve “the same outcomes more efficiently”. Opponents fear the bill is a way of skirting difficult problems caused by funding cuts and social worker recruitment and could even lead to children’s social care being outsourced and privatised.
The bill being debated in the Lords on Tuesday proposes that a director of children’s services could ask the secretary of state to suspend part of a statute or guidance so social workers in that area could, for up to six years, try out an idea they believe would benefit children but that would, at present, be against the law.
Examples floated by ministers and other supporters of the bill include: removing the statutory requirement for an independent reviewing officer to carry out six-monthly care plan reviews; asking children in care whether they want to continue to have a social worker; removing the demand for foster carers of children in settled placements to write a daily log of what has happened in a child’s life; and removing the “looked-after” status of children who end up in custody, which would also mean they lose the rights that status confers. The last is a suggestion that Lord David Ramsbotham, former chief inspector of prisons and one of the peers opposing the bill, says he deplores.
“I would abor removing the care status of all children in custody,” he says.
Some social work leaders are frustrated with aspects of the child protection system, which they feel stifles innovation and can lead to a high turnover of staff. So they are irked and baffled by children’s rights campaigners’ opposition to the bill.
Carolyne Willow, director of the Article 39 charity, which fights for the rights of children living in institutional settings, is leading Together for Children, a group of some 40 organisations – including the Care Leavers’ Association, Liberty and the Howard League for Penal Reform – campaigning against the bill.
“It is a breathtaking outrage,” she says. “It’s no good being swayed by kindly sounding voices and people who say they want to do right by children. These are the laws that protect children who have been through horrific experiences and who are in dire need. Without [statutory] duties, my experience is that local authorities do not have the capacity, funding or mindset to provide for children or vulnerable care leavers.”
As a social worker of 30 years standing, Willow says that when a council has failed to provide good care, the one thing she has been able to offer a child is recourse to the protections of the law. “Without legal obligations, she says, “we are back to before the second world war, where we were relying on individual goodwill or professional discretion and where families had no call [as of right] on the state.”
At the Association of Lawyers for Children, Martha Cover, a barrister and children’s rights specialist, warns: “More than ever before they [councils] are driven by the need to protect their resources and their reputations. This is unsurprising given the 40% reduction in their budgets over the last few years, and the public willingness to blame social workers whenever a child is killed.”
Unusually, there was no consultation (such as a green paper) before the bill was presented in the Lords in May. Its main cheerleader, Isabelle Trowler, chief social worker for children and families, has tabled a government amendment to the bill this week, at the report stage, to quell fears that it is a Trojan horse designed to open up children’s services to privatisation. Her action suggests the government is worried about the scale of opposition. Shadow children’s minister Emma Lewell-Buck has vowed Labour will fight against the bill’s “exemption” clauses allowing councils to opt out of sections of the 1989 Children Act.
Trowler has made it clear the government wants social workers to be able to exercise their professional judgment without too many rules getting in their way. “[Now, ]what the bill will hopefully enable us to do is where authorities request that [exemptions], they can innovate and do things differently,” she said earlier this year.
Three local authorities have publicly embraced the bill: Leeds, Hampshire and Lincolnshire. All have children’s services designated by Ofsted as at least “good” and elements rated “outstanding”, which is presumably why they feel they have earned the right to be trusted when they judge that parts of the legislation are not working for children and want to try alternatives.
“I’m seeing some of the best social work in Lincolnshire I’ve seen in my career. And we’ve shoehorned that into current legislation. With the opportunity to innovate, we could achieve something fantastic,” says Stuart Carlton, assistant director of children’s services at Lincolnshire county council.
“Under the current legislation and guidance, where things aren’t working well, children’s rights are being let down anyway,” he says. “So why are we so opposed to allowing good local authorities try something out? I understand the concerns: there need to be really good safeguards, but this could be a once in a lifetime opportunity to put the child right at the centre of everything we do.”
In Hampshire, director of children’s services Steve Crocker says it is vital the social work profession is not limited by an imperative to practise in a way that is “frozen in time” by laws passed more than a decade ago. “If you only build up more legislation and regulation, why are we surprised that social workers are leaving the profession at the rate that they do?” he asks. “Nobody’s saying, take away all the regulation. It would only be very specific parts. It’s about suggesting tweaks to what highly skilled people do.”
Crocker insists a way has to be found “to safely experiment that will help us all in the sector in future”. Underlying at least part of the enthusiasm for the potential freedoms contained in the bill seems to be immense frustration that child protection social work is minutely scrutinised by Ofsted and then savagely blamed in public when something goes wrong. The latter scenario typically leads to more legislation, and tighter prescription of what a social worker should do, how it should be done, and by when.
“I do think there’s a debate to be had about whether we aren’t massively over-regulated and over-checked in terms of our practice,” says Dave Hill, president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services. “There’s an underlying issue of trusting professionals to do the best thing for children. [These clauses] would give us space to work. I can’t see millions of downsides.”
Yet lessons from Cornwall suggest that attributing poor practices to stifling over-regulation could be a red herring. The council has turned around a poorly performing children’s service over the past six years by rebuilding confidence and stability in the system through listening to families and children, reducing caseloads and better engaging with social workers.
Kathy Evans, chief executive of charity Children England, says she would be up for a thorough overhaul of the factors that impede social workers in their efforts to care for children and families. “But to do that does not warrant putting all child protection and care legislation and guidance up for grabs,” she says. If a child in custody with no social worker ends up having their rights breached, where are they to seek justice if the very law intended to protect them has been locally disapplied.
“There is no explanation so far about how a child in an exempted area might be able to challenge or complain. I have no lack of respect or sympathy for local authorities – but with the best of professional intentions, you can miss what an exemption could mean for a child.”
The job of a child protection social worker is so difficult that many last only a few years in frontline practice. Those supporting the bill believe the attrition rate is precisely because of the overwhelming demands of detailed statutory guidance. But opponents of the bill are not convinced.
“Local authorities must be held to account by the law which protects children’s rights,” says Cover. “Even with the existing framework in place, poorly performing local authorities regularly fail to carry out their duties to children. The law reports of care cases demonstrate this with depressing regularity.”
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Professional development: Tuning in: The Person of the Therapist - Vancouver
Vancouver Couple & Family Institute
Date: Oct 20 - 21, 2016 Time: 9:00am - 5:00pm
Location: Canadian Memorial
Centre for Peace - 1825 West 16th Ave Vancouver, BC
In this workshop
you will discover new ways to use your inner experience to navigate stuck places
and nurture healthy bonds in your work with individuals and
couples.
We will incorporate
video excepts, engaging didactic presentation and small group exercises focusing
on:
1) Helping
therapists find new ways to share how we are impacted by our clients.
2) Exploring how to
navigate and repair times when we become triggered in our therapist role.
3) Self-care.
Ethical Decision-making Models and Tools for Social Workers
Social workers are faced with many different types of ethical dilemmas in our professional work and practice. When making ethical decisions in our work, it helps to use ethical decision-making models. To support ethical decision-making in our work some social work models and tools are presented below.
Ethical Decision Making Toolkit. BC Association of Social Workers. Retrieved from: http://www.bcasw.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Ethical-Decision-Making-Toolkit.pdf
Ethical Decision-Making in Social Work Practice. Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Social Workers. Retrieved from: http://www.nlasw.ca/pdf/Practice_Standards/Ethical_Decision_Making_Framework.pdf
Ethical Decision-Making Models in Resolving EthicalDilemmas in Rural Practice: Implications for Social Work Practice and Education.
Edwards, B. and Addae, R. (2015). Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 12, (1). Copyright 2015, ASWB. Retrieved from: http://jswve.org/download/spring_2015,_vol._12,_no._1/articles/88-JSWVE-12-1-Rural%20Practice-Resolving%20Ethical%20Dilemmas.pdf
Essential Steps for Ethical Problem-Solving
From the National Association of Social Workers. Retrieved from: http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/oepr/steps.asp
Is there a conflict of values, or rights, or professional responsibilities? (For example, there may be an issue of self-determination of an adolescent versus the well-being of the family.)
2. IDENTIFY the key values and principles involved.
What meanings and limitations are typically attached to these competing values? (For example, rarely is confidential information held in absolute secrecy; however, typically decisions about access by third parties to sensitive content should be contracted with clients.)
3. RANK the values or ethical principles which - in your professional judgement - are most relevant to the issue or dilemma.
What reasons can you provide for prioritizing one competing value/principle over another? (For example, your client's right to choose a beneficial course of action could bring hardship or harm to others who would be affected.)
4. DEVELOP an action plan that is consistent with the ethical priorities that have been determined as central to the dilemma.
Have you conferred with clients and colleagues, as appropriate, about the potential risks and consequences of alternative courses of action? Can you support or justify your action plan with the values/principles on which the plan is based? (For example, have you conferred with all the necessary persons regarding the ethical dimensions of planning for a battered wife's quest to secure secret shelter and the implications for her teen-aged children?)
5. IMPLEMENT your plan, utilizing the most appropriate practice skills and competencies.
How will you make use of core social work skills such as sensitive communication, skillful negotiation, and cultural competence? (For example, skillful colleague or supervisory communication and negotiation may enable an impaired colleague to see her/his impact on clients and to take appropriate action.)
6. REFLECT on the outcome of this ethical decision making process.
How would you evaluate the consequences of this process for those involved: Client(s), professional(s), and agency (ies)? (Increasingly, professionals have begun to seek support, further professional training, and consultation through the development of Ethics review Committees or Ethics Consultation processes.)
From discussion by Frederick Reamer & Sr. Ann Patrick Conrad in Professional Choices: Ethics at Work (1995), video available from NASW Press 1-800-227-3590. Format developed by Sr. Vincentia Joseph & Sr. Ann Patrick Conrad. NASW Office of Ethics and Professional Review, 1-800-638-8799
Reamer, F. G. (2002). Making Difficult Decisions. Social Work Today: Eye on Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.socialworktoday.com/news/eoe_101402.shtml
Sunday, August 28, 2016
Global Politics: Increasing Racism and Marginalization of Refugees
Shifting Social Constructs: The Rising Villianization of Refugees
Keyes, A. (2016). Social Work Helper. Retrieved from: https://www.socialworkhelper.com/2016/08/24/shifting-social-constructs-rising-villianization-refugees/
Headlines detailing the fallout of refugee migration throughout
Europe appear in major news sources almost daily. While discussion
around countries and organizations being overwhelmed by sheer numbers
remains the same, the sentiment toward refugees appears to be shifting
from benevolence to something entirely different.
As a nation, Germany serves as a case study for this hypothesis. In 2015, Germany accepted over a million refugees, larger than the amount the United States has in a decade, as well as the highest number accepted by any European country for the calendar year. The open-door policy authored by German Chancellor Angela Merkel toward refugees fleeing Syria and Iraq last fall sanctioned the influx.
During the initial months of the policy being in effect German citizens actually came to train stations where refugees were arriving and applauded them as they arrived. However, this widespread welcoming attitude has since been abandoned. Events like mass sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, alleged high crime rates within refugee camps, and infiltration of terrorists amongst refugees contributes to the recasting of refugees within Germany as deviants.
CNN reporters recounted how in the city of Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015 there were ninety criminal incidents recorded reported with a smaller number of such instances in Hamburg. Of those incidents, twenty-five percent were reported as being sexual assaults including one instance of rape. All victims described the individuals as “gangs of Arab or North African men”. At that point in time, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas “warned against linking the assaults to the immigration issue” but with the description of the perpetrators broadcast, connections were drawn and the public outraged.
Additionally, German authorities announced on May 11 that there were 40 open investigations regarding believed Islamic militants who immigrated to Germany with the refugees. The announcement confirmed and built upon already present fears regarding terrorist attacks. Instances like the July 19 axe attack, one of three violent acts by refugees this month, aboard a German passenger train by an individual identified as “teenage Afghan refugee” continue to fuel fear and provide further evidence to solidify the relegation of refugees’ social construct, within Germany’s perceived popular opinion, to the deviant category.
Aljazeera went as far as to label this the emerging image of “the rapist refugee as Germany’s boogeyman”. It is an image which will inform future immigration policy and popular opinion. It is already noted in the decreasing support for two term German Chancellor Angela Merkel as she continues to support immigration and is experiencing a drop in polls with almost two-thirds surveyed saying she should not run again in 2017.
The focus on the miscreant minority casts a shadow over the refugee majority’s potential. It is a potential that economists assert could be the answer to Germany and Europe’s aging workforce. The labor market needs an influx of young workers to make up for the millions reaching retirement age. It is a need which roughly one third of the refugees within Germany’s borders can fill. Yet, the success of refugee integration into the German labor market hinges on more than just age. It encompasses language, education and skill levels, qualification recognition, legal right to work, and employer openness.
Successful integration into the labor market does not operate in a vacuum where only the listed criteria apply. Instead it will be steered by society which begs the question: will a criminal minority shift the perception of the refugee population at large? The fallout politically, socially, and economically for refugees in Germany and in other receiving countries is yet to be determined. However, the swinging social construct will impact millions of lives globally.
As a nation, Germany serves as a case study for this hypothesis. In 2015, Germany accepted over a million refugees, larger than the amount the United States has in a decade, as well as the highest number accepted by any European country for the calendar year. The open-door policy authored by German Chancellor Angela Merkel toward refugees fleeing Syria and Iraq last fall sanctioned the influx.
During the initial months of the policy being in effect German citizens actually came to train stations where refugees were arriving and applauded them as they arrived. However, this widespread welcoming attitude has since been abandoned. Events like mass sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, alleged high crime rates within refugee camps, and infiltration of terrorists amongst refugees contributes to the recasting of refugees within Germany as deviants.
CNN reporters recounted how in the city of Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015 there were ninety criminal incidents recorded reported with a smaller number of such instances in Hamburg. Of those incidents, twenty-five percent were reported as being sexual assaults including one instance of rape. All victims described the individuals as “gangs of Arab or North African men”. At that point in time, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas “warned against linking the assaults to the immigration issue” but with the description of the perpetrators broadcast, connections were drawn and the public outraged.
Additionally, German authorities announced on May 11 that there were 40 open investigations regarding believed Islamic militants who immigrated to Germany with the refugees. The announcement confirmed and built upon already present fears regarding terrorist attacks. Instances like the July 19 axe attack, one of three violent acts by refugees this month, aboard a German passenger train by an individual identified as “teenage Afghan refugee” continue to fuel fear and provide further evidence to solidify the relegation of refugees’ social construct, within Germany’s perceived popular opinion, to the deviant category.
Aljazeera went as far as to label this the emerging image of “the rapist refugee as Germany’s boogeyman”. It is an image which will inform future immigration policy and popular opinion. It is already noted in the decreasing support for two term German Chancellor Angela Merkel as she continues to support immigration and is experiencing a drop in polls with almost two-thirds surveyed saying she should not run again in 2017.
The focus on the miscreant minority casts a shadow over the refugee majority’s potential. It is a potential that economists assert could be the answer to Germany and Europe’s aging workforce. The labor market needs an influx of young workers to make up for the millions reaching retirement age. It is a need which roughly one third of the refugees within Germany’s borders can fill. Yet, the success of refugee integration into the German labor market hinges on more than just age. It encompasses language, education and skill levels, qualification recognition, legal right to work, and employer openness.
Successful integration into the labor market does not operate in a vacuum where only the listed criteria apply. Instead it will be steered by society which begs the question: will a criminal minority shift the perception of the refugee population at large? The fallout politically, socially, and economically for refugees in Germany and in other receiving countries is yet to be determined. However, the swinging social construct will impact millions of lives globally.
Global Education: Master of Narrative Therapy and Community Work
This is David Denborough writing from Dulwich Centre in Adelaide,
Australia.
We’re writing now to Canadian Social workers about our Master of Narrative Therapy and Community Work (in collaboration with the University of Melbourne). We don't know if you're already aware of this Master's degree, but in our first three years there have been 10 participants from Canada, and it's been a pleasure having them in the course!
This Master's program is designed so that International participants can attend - it only involves two trips of two weeks each to Australia. The rest happens online. And the cost of the program is the same for Australian and international participants (which is very unusual and makes it much more affordable for international students). The diversity of participants is a particular highlight with graduates from South Africa, Chile, Tanzania, Singapore, Spain, USA, Ireland, Denmark, Mexico, New Zealand, Israel, Hong Kong, UK, Australia and Canada! There is also a strong Aboriginal representation (on both the faculty and among students).
This program is practice-based and involves participants honing their narrative skills and innovating forms of narrative practice in their own contexts. We are excited about what this will mean for the continuing development of diverse narrative practices.
This Master's program is co-ordinated by Dulwich Centre, taught by our international faculty and in conjunction with Australia's leading university, the University of Melbourne. We are thoroughly enjoying the Masters and we are wondering whether any of you would be interested in joining us next year or in the future. If so, please write to me at dcp@dulwichcentre.com.au
Or look up this website: www.dulwichcentre.com.au/masters
Greetings to all in Canada!
Warm regards,
David Denborough
Dulwich Centre
www.dulwichcentre.com.au
We’re writing now to Canadian Social workers about our Master of Narrative Therapy and Community Work (in collaboration with the University of Melbourne). We don't know if you're already aware of this Master's degree, but in our first three years there have been 10 participants from Canada, and it's been a pleasure having them in the course!
This Master's program is designed so that International participants can attend - it only involves two trips of two weeks each to Australia. The rest happens online. And the cost of the program is the same for Australian and international participants (which is very unusual and makes it much more affordable for international students). The diversity of participants is a particular highlight with graduates from South Africa, Chile, Tanzania, Singapore, Spain, USA, Ireland, Denmark, Mexico, New Zealand, Israel, Hong Kong, UK, Australia and Canada! There is also a strong Aboriginal representation (on both the faculty and among students).
This program is practice-based and involves participants honing their narrative skills and innovating forms of narrative practice in their own contexts. We are excited about what this will mean for the continuing development of diverse narrative practices.
This Master's program is co-ordinated by Dulwich Centre, taught by our international faculty and in conjunction with Australia's leading university, the University of Melbourne. We are thoroughly enjoying the Masters and we are wondering whether any of you would be interested in joining us next year or in the future. If so, please write to me at dcp@dulwichcentre.com.au
Or look up this website: www.dulwichcentre.com.au/masters
Greetings to all in Canada!
Warm regards,
David Denborough
Dulwich Centre
www.dulwichcentre.com.au
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)