527632

research-article2014
ISW0010.1177/0020872814527632International Social WorkSims et al.

Article i s w

International Social Work

2014, Vol. 57(4) 360­–372
The Global Agenda: Developing © The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
international perspectives and sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020872814527632
critical discourse in UK social isw.sagepub.com

work education and practice

David Sims
University of Greenwich, UK

Linda de Chenu
University of Hertfordshire, UK

Janet Williams
Sheffield Hallam University, UK

Abstract
This article discusses and evaluates the learning from a consultation with social work students in
respect of the Global Agenda for Social Work (GA). At the time the GA was being drafted it was
circulated widely for consultation. In the UK social work educators prepared a set of questions
for use with almost 400 students from six different universities. Responses revealed the GA
to be a valuable pedagogical tool, generating reflection on social work values, diversity, neo-
liberal agendas and international social work. The article analyses responses and suggests ideas
for further use of the GA in social work education.

Keywords
Global Agenda for Social Work, neo-liberalism, radical pedagogy, social justice, social work
education

Introduction
When consultation regarding the Global Agenda (GA) began in 2009 it appeared to offer the
prospect of a stronger voice for social work both in the UK and internationally. From discussions
at the IASSW Board (International Association of Schools of Social Work) it was taken to the UK
Social Work Education International committee where members (social work educators in

Corresponding author:
David Sims, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2UG, UK.
Email: d.sims@gre.ac.uk
Sims et al. 361

UK universities) undertook to develop a project to use the draft GA with students. The aim was to
test students’ level of interest in international social work, to extend and develop student learning
regarding international issues and to engage students themselves in the consultation. This article
will focus on the learning and outcomes from this project in the UK which aimed to develop and
extend pedagogical practice in respect of international social work.
The article will analyse how the project connected local social work practice to the initial GA
themes: social and economic inequalities within countries and between regions; dignity and worth
of the person; environmental sustainability; and the importance of human relationships. The pro-
ject commenced with the development of a set of questions and statements to stimulate discussion
with social work students in a variety of teaching sessions in six different UK universities, leading
up to World Social Work Day in 2011. The results were then presented at a national conference to
promote awareness of the GA. The decision of the UK International Committee to focus on the GA
also triggered collaborative action in the UK with the British Association of Social Workers and
other national campaigning groups.
The article will explore the methods used during the consultation and provide an analysis of the
students’ responses. These highlight the opportunity the GA presented for influencing the learning
of students. Following this, there will be a discussion of the experience of using the GA as a means
of generating critical discourse within social work education. Finally, the article will explore ideas
for using the GA as a tool for good pedagogical practice in social work and suggestions will be
made for using the questions and other activities to enhance students’ awareness of and knowledge
about international social work.

The Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development

The Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development (www.globalsocialagenda.org) has
been the product of a three-year collaboration between the International Association of Schools of
Social Work (IASSW), the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and the International
Council on Social Welfare (ICSW), which together represent social work education, practice and
policy (IASSW, ICSW and IFSW, 2011). Sequences of consultation and new drafts of the GA
resulted in the three presidents of these organizations signing off the final version in January 2012.
The Global Agenda outlines the reasons for inequality and gives us social and economic measures
to address it, emphasizing the social context of development and the specific contribution of the
profession. It has been well received by the Council of Europe and the United Nations because the
aims and actions resonate with their many social agendas, including the UN Millennium
Development Goals, the post-2015 Development Agenda and Social Protection Floor Initiative.
The greater awareness of inequalities, produced by globalization and the fundamental failures of
neo-liberal policies over the decades leading to the economic collapses since 2007, has raised
awareness and interest in alternative models underpinned by social justice, from social work and
organizations such as Occupy and the Equality Trust.
The development of the GA demonstrates that the international community of social work holds
common values and aims about social justice. The GA arose from international professional col-
laboration and it aims to articulate the social, as well as the economic drivers for action and policy
making locally, nationally and internationally (European Council and the United Nations). It was
designed to inspire application and a commitment to action at the local level.
It therefore aims to promote three levels of activity: first, within our own organizations at the
level of practice; second, within communities and with other partners; and third, at the level of the
United Nations and other international agencies. It seeks to inspire each locality, region and nation
to tailor actions to suit needs at a local level.
362 International Social Work 57(4)

The Global Agenda and social work education

For educators the GA provides a key tool for exploring the purpose of social work and profession-
als’ activities. The International sub-committee of the UK Joint Universities Council Social Work
Education Committee (JUCSWEC) focused on publicizing the GA and engaging academic col-
leagues and students throughout the consultation period. The GA was introduced in teaching to
assess how it could be used most beneficially; the materials and ideas generated were then put into
the consultation process.
In the UK social work educators and practitioners were encouraged to contribute both individu-
ally and through their professional organizations including the JUCSWEC, the British Association
Social Work (BASW) and other networks such as the Social Work Health Inequalities Network
(SWHIN) and the Social Work Action Network (SWAN). Joint work culminated in events in the
four countries of the UK and one at parliament in Westminster during International Social Work
Week 2012, celebrating the launch of the Global Agenda. Collaborative work continues to promote
the Global Agenda and to encourage measurable actions until 2016.

The consultation project

The UK International sub-Committee agreed in November 2010 to develop a project that would
engage students and educators in the consultation process and would demonstrate how students
could have a professional and political ‘voice’ in policy making at national, European and
International levels (one of the stated aims of the GA). The consultation project was developed
between six UK universities during 2010–11 with the aim of introducing the Global Agenda to
social work students and engaging them in the process of contributing to its development.
Based on the then current draft of the GA, members of the committee drew out several key
questions for social work educators to use with students and practitioners. The questions were
linked to each area of the GA identified earlier. In this way the students would not only be intro-
duced to the GA but would also be offered the opportunity to engage in a dialogue and to partici-
pate in the consultation process as policy actors. They were free to think ‘outside the national box’
as they were asked to consider broader issues linking to globalization. This was an opportunity to
engage learners in the development of a new paradigm through a transnational debate.
The questions, along with the draft of the GA, enabled educators to engage students with some
ready prepared materials in lectures, seminars and group-work. Although the questions came from
an international document it was decided to focus discussion on the local meaning and implemen-
tation of the GA, problematizing what happened locally in terms of globalization. Educators sought
to encourage participants to ‘think global, act local’ (Lawrence et al., 2009). It was important to
encourage students to recognize that they could engage in policy practice (Gal and Weiss-Gal,
2013) as a result of contributing to an international consultative process. They were informed that
their comments would be forwarded to the GA authors. In some cases students were also part of the
analytical process for refining their peers’ findings before sending the results to the IASSW. The
aim of the questions was to seek the students’ interpretation of the proposed themes initially articu-
lated in the draft GA. The themes have since been further developed through the consultation
process, but initially took the form of a series of bullet points.

Using the questions

The questions were used with almost 400 participants representing 11 groups led by staff from the
participating UK universities and included representatives from two partner universities from
Sims et al. 363

overseas. Groups comprised both undergraduate and postgraduate students the majority of whom
were on social work qualifying programmes. Each university determined the membership, timing
and size of the groups. Dependent on their different curricula and circumstances the aim was that
the consultation should take place around the time of International Social Work Day in 2011 and in
time for feedback to be sent to the IASSW.
Once the questions had been used, social work educators from the different universities recorded
the outcomes and sent them to two members of the committee, who collated and analysed them
thematically. The records were transcribed from flipcharts, from the questions which had been
circulated in groups and from the analysis by the educators leading the groups.

Outcomes from the consultation

In the following sections, the outcomes from the groupwork will be discussed, identifying key
issues and themes which were consistent across the consultation. The draft agenda document began
with a quotation which sought to highlight the both the global nature of social work but also the
idea of partnership working towards a common understanding about its political purpose. This
quotation proved to be a very significant part of the groupwork undertaken by students. The quota-
tion was as follows:

If you are coming to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you are coming because your liberation is
bound with mine, then let us work together. (Extracted from a poem by an Aborigine woman; draft Global
Agenda, IASSW, ICSW and IFSW, 2010)

This quotation from a member of an indigenous ‘first nation’ community provided an excellent
opportunity to support students to use the consultation to reflect upon working together with ser-
vice users. They were asked to interpret what this might mean for a social worker in their local
practice. Conversations which emerged were reported by educators from the different universities
to be rich, reflective and analytical. Key themes emerged from the responses as follows.

The nature of ‘help’ and the helping relationship

Students expressed the view that the word ‘help’ in social work sometimes means there is a power
imbalance between the helper and the helped and that what is really important in the professional
social work relationship is to find out what the service user wants and needs. How ‘help’ is defined
is important because it contains messages about the type of relationships social workers should
develop with service users.
Participants in the groups felt it was important to obtain consent in working together, to allow
the service user to define the problem and to help to prioritize what comes first. ‘Help’ could be
perceived as patronizing. The word ‘support’ rather than ‘help’ was a better way of describing the
role of the social worker, giving people the tools to help themselves. Vulnerable people did not
want pity or to be made to feel helpless but to be assisted to use their own abilities to regain or
maintain control over their lives.
There was a consensus of ideas that ‘support’ should assist people over the long term rather than
offering help to ‘fix’ things in the short term – this was supporting in sustainable way rather than
the giving of charity. These ideas link to the Strengths Perspective (Kondrat, 2010) which is
increasingly used in social work, and they echo a debate in social work about power and profes-
sions and the need to acknowledge professional power and seek to work in ways that share it. The
power to define the way things are seen can mean the power to define how things are (Fook, 2002).
364 International Social Work 57(4)

Coming from a member of a community which had been subject to colonial oppression the quota-
tion was a powerful opportunity for the groups to consider the values that would inform their
practice.

Working together in partnership as equals

Reflecting the preceding ideas was another theme of the responses to the quotation, in which the
relationship between the social worker and the service user was espoused as cooperative and col-
laborative and not based on the social worker ‘imposing’ a solution on a person. This involved a
common intent of working towards an agreed goal in a style of ‘open interaction’. This meant
treating people as equals and individuals and listening to their opinion as they are experts on their
own life or situation. This could be achieved by identifying choices and supporting people to have
‘agency’ by doing things with people rather than for or to them. Participants saw a key feature of
this relationship as being empathy, standing alongside people not standing over them. It was felt
that if a service user feels empathy from a social worker she or he is responsive to the social
worker’s efforts. It was considered important to achieve a balance of power and a meeting of
minds, treating others as you would wish to be treated. These ideas reflect the notion of ‘expertise
by experience’, a very important valuing of service user knowledge in the building of working
relationships together.

Liberation and rights for individuals: Working for the collective/society as a whole
and not just the individual
In the UK context in particular, social work has been criticized for its individualized role and pre-
dominant emphasis on assessment. The development of care management in the 1990s has been
said to have moved social work away from the idea community work (Jones et al., 2007). In the
groups a strong sense of solidarity was expressed by some participants. Many groups felt that
social work was not just about supporting individuals (although it currently appeared to be the
dominant UK paradigm) but was about the overall welfare and improvement of society. The quota-
tion suggested a mutual desire for social justice. Through empathy social workers could show
individual service users that sometimes their problems were not uniquely theirs but related to
global or society problems. Participants identified that social workers often work with people who
are powerless in the political situation in which they live. Social justice was seen as a key issue for
social work, concerning liberation, empowerment and equal rights. Importantly, justice has been
identified as one of the nine capabilities social workers must strive to achieve in the new Professional
Capability Framework in England (College of Social Work, 2012).
Some participants felt that people needed to come together on a larger level to fight injustice and
inequalities through social work helping groups of people not just individuals. There was strength
in more than one voice. Liberation was considered to be about having and getting a voice and being
heard and understood. Two participants from different universities discussed this in relation to the
‘politics of aid’ which can be driven by powerful nations, whereby wealthier governments create
and sustain dependency which ‘keeps people in their place’.
These ideas clearly demonstrated the capacity of the GA to spark discussion about some of the
political and structural issues in social work, enabling social work students to reflect upon the big-
ger issues which impact on local practice. Many social workers are also members of the working
class or minority ethnic groups with shared experiences of discrimination and were able to connect
to these ideas on a personal level.
Sims et al. 365

The motivation for being a social worker

The quotation stimulated thoughts about how social workers should practice and why participants
had come into the profession. It was felt that having passion, empathy and the mindset of working
together as equals for change would mean that service users would respect and welcome their sup-
port. Some participants said social work was ‘more than a job’ and there were a number of state-
ments about personal commitment which again linked social work to achieving social justice. A
key point that came up in more than one discussion was the fact that there is reciprocal gain in
supporting others and that the relationship was not just ‘one way’. Social workers needed to recog-
nize that they gained from their work (support, empowerment, making a difference and liberation
were all satisfying to the social worker).

Building an international movement of social workers?

Students’ reflections on the quotation illustrated an engagement with ideas about a structural role
for social work. One of the aims of the GA is to generate an international movement of social work-
ers to support it and thus the students were asked for their views on building an international move-
ment of social workers. The students identified what they thought were the most important issues
and considered the potential advantages and difficulties in building an international movement.
Students expressed the view that it was a good idea to build an international movement of social
workers as this could address the increasing impacts of globalization. Students suggested that
social workers needed to think ‘globally’ as society is increasingly multicultural, and an interna-
tional movement would be more powerful in challenging discrimination. An international move-
ment of social workers could aim to end poverty. It was argued that a principle of this movement
should be that social work should not be an occupation merely for financial gain.
In order to develop an international movement the students thought that partnerships should be
built between countries with support for less powerful nations by social workers working together.
The students thought there could be an empowerment of the social work voice and as a ‘global
voice’ governments would have to seriously consider and listen to the voice of social work. Within
social work education it was thought that there could be an expansion of exchange programmes
and partnerships.
One view expressed was that although in principle the idea of a global movement of social
workers was good, how could social work address the corruption in societies and the selfish agen-
das of minorities who control the wealth of the world? It was also pointed out that an international
movement of social workers could lead to an unintended consequence of more international regu-
lation of social work. Additionally an international movement could also possibly foster a repeti-
tion of colonialization where there would be questions of who would lead, and whether each
country would try to impose its own social work agenda and approach on other countries.

The framework of the Global Agenda: Discussions from the

groupwork exercises
Promoting social and economic equalities
The first area addressed by the GA is ‘social and economic inequalities within counties and between
regions’. The GA argues that recent economic crises are worsening global inequalities, increasing
the marginalization of the poor, resulting in community disintegration and increasing the vulnera-
bility of people from countries without adequate welfare states. Groups were asked how they
thought these issues impacted locally and on their practice.
366 International Social Work 57(4)

First, the students emphasized that the growth of migration was linked to global inequalities and
oppression, yet within the UK migrants then experienced further discrimination, exclusion and
inequalities which needed to be recognized by social workers. These included the negative impacts
on their health and well-being leading to health inequalities. It was suggested that this increase in
inequalities could lead to local and global conflict.
There was concern regarding the effects on migrants of government cuts during the recession
and the subsequently reduced social work support for migrants. There was an argument that there
were not enough social workers to support asylum seekers in particular, and that resources and
services were being reduced at a time just when an increasing number of migrants were presenting
with needs. It was suggested that the problems of migrants were misunderstood by social workers,
their needs were not met and they experienced discrimination and oppression.
Students were concerned about growing inequalities in social care provision and it was argued
that the local privatization of social care and the government ‘cuts’ led to inequalities of social care
provision which were then implemented by social workers. Social workers were paradoxically
involved in policies implementing inequalities. Based on their practice experience the students
argued that policy changes leading to more privatized and individualized services had produced
variable levels of services and a ‘postcode lottery’. Students reported that they were increasingly
finding that services were finance-led and a minimum level was imposed for everyone regardless
of need, exacerbated by the cuts particularly in the voluntary sector, and Children’s Services were
becoming more ‘punitive’ than ‘preventative’. Social care cuts then led to further inequalities as
low paid foster carers, for example, would be paid even less which would increase inequalities of
pay for women.
The introduction of increased student fees for social work qualifications was also seen as adding
to inequality in education with the effect that social work will become more of a middle-class pro-
fession as access to university education will be harder for many poorer groups.
Local cuts in services such as housing and increased unemployment, which students were
witnessing in practice, would add to inequalities, marginalization and social injustices. Students
argued that just as wealth inequalities were increasing with low wages and rising inflation,
homelessness and overcrowding, the government appeared to be making the poorer more poor,
reducing benefits, causing unemployment, and increasing student fees. It was argued that
resource constraints, individualistic modes of thinking and approaches, lack of awareness and a
tendency to pass this off as part of the recession hindered supportive social work interventions
locally.
Overall it was suggested that social work needed to meet different cultural needs holistically by
addressing the range of interconnected needs experienced by migrants. Social work to prevent
health and well-being inequalities, particularly those experienced by migrants, should be included
in the GA. In order to advocate for equalities social work education needed more focus on support-
ing group cohesion and collective/group work approaches to defend/argue for service provision in
social care.

Promoting the dignity and worth of the person

This area of the GA addresses the role of social work in supporting the rights and the voices of
people and in promoting respect for diversity and different belief systems. It stresses that there is a
social work role in situations of political instability, violence, erosion of peace and in government
handling of terrorism. It also highlights the areas of migration, refugees and trafficking, demon-
strating a crossover between different areas of the GA. Groups were asked what areas of their
professional ethics and value base were relevant to these issues.
Sims et al. 367

Groups identified similar areas of professional ethics and values as those discussed in response
to the earlier quotation. These included the need for social workers to promote human rights and
adhere to essential values of respect, treating people in a person centred way, with acceptance,
empathy and non-judgmentalism. Some participants commented that there were conflicts in respect
of ethics and values in terms of some legislation (for example, where minority ethnic groups were
not entitled to asylum/benefits) and that oppressive laws needed to be challenged. It was also
observed that values and norms differed according to culture and that a multicultural approach was
needed linked to cultural competence in social workers. Diversity needed to be respected and gov-
ernments had a protective role (e.g. in respect of human trafficking).
Discrimination and oppression were important elements in the responses. It was felt that people
seeking support should not be blamed for their situation (or their ‘weakness’ as an individual) and
the structural aspect of discrimination needed to be recognized and acknowledged. In the consulta-
tion there were discussions about marginal groups such as prisoners and older people and the
injustices which can impact on them (voting rights and age related assessments, for example) about
which there was not always a clear consensus. It was also noted that ‘needs led’ assessments were
important so that not everyone was treated the same but according to their need, recognizing diver-
sity. Many participants felt that anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory practice were key aspects
of social work practice.
Factors which could impede the promotion of the dignity and worth of the person were identi-
fied by two of the groups. These included too much focus on paperwork and procedures, heavy
workloads, a ‘tick box’ culture and a lack of knowledge. In addition there were organizational/
political constraints, the abuse or misuse of power and a lack of access to resources. Local situa-
tions could be improved in respect of this area of the GA, improving awareness of what was avail-
able and through giving service users feedback through review and evaluation of work done
together. As one group commented: ‘Doing nothing is as dangerous as imposing our own values/
opinions.’

Working toward environmental sustainability

This area of the GA addresses the links between environmental and community sustainability and
the need to promote community responses to disasters and environmental issues alongside promot-
ing sustainable local communities and community development. Groups were asked how they
thought social work engaged with these issues at a local level.
This area was more contentious and students debated whether this was a social work role or a
role for all citizens. It was argued that if it were a social work role it may not be given priority by
the employers and may be difficult to fit into statutory roles in the UK. The groups suggested that
social workers helped people manage money and worked with vulnerable groups, and that an
understanding of developing sustainable communities and lifestyles was relevant to social work.
Furthermore, it was suggested that social work should promote environmental issues as these have
wide effects on health and well-being, poverty and quality of life.
It was observed that social work damages the environment due to the centralization of services
and a high mileage incurred visiting service users. It was suggested that a more locally based and
sustainable delivery of social work was required.
Considering the benefits of a sustainable approach, the group discussions acknowledged that
due to global markets a rise in local prices, particularly of food, affects service user groups who are
on a low income. It was suggested that social workers could support local people to develop cost-
effective resources (allotments/gardening). The groups also discussed how social work could pro-
mote empowerment and inclusion through involvement in collectives/credit unions so that people
368 International Social Work 57(4)

were more able to cope with adversity. Such involvement could promote a sense of worth, reduce
distress, improve well-being and promote social mobility so that people are able to borrow and
provide for themselves. It was thought that such involvement also promoted dialogue between
people on how to meet their needs and supported social cohesion.
In terms of the skills needed to promote sustainability, the students identified skills of anti-
discriminatory and anti-oppressive practice, awareness of diverse communities and cultural under-
standing, and skills of empowerment and communication. Working with individual service users to
help them manage and offer advocacy were also seen as important in supporting sustainable com-
munities. It was also suggested that social workers could visit service users during disasters and
support the community. Further skills of partnership work, and of using research and evidence
based practice, were suggested in supporting community sustainability. Social work also needed to
be locally based to do ‘patch’ work with local communities and to make links with global cam-
paigns concerned with sustainability. It was argued that social work needed to lose its managerial
approach and performance targets and spend more time in local communities. A challenging point
from the students was that social work practice itself should be examined for its effect on the local
and global environment.

Strengthening recognition of the importance of human relationships

This area of the GA addresses family and relationship issues across the lifespan and refers to the
needs of a range of service user groups and people suffering from violence within domestic and
intimate relationships. As there were several questions on the agenda for discussions with students
and this was the last one of the four key areas of the global agenda it had slightly fewer responses.
Time did not permit the depth of consideration of all the areas equally.
Responses indicated that both family relationships and social workers’ relationships with fami-
lies were of critical importance in social work practice. Within the UK social workers needed to
understand the importance of human relationships and relationship based practice (Ruch et al.,
2010) needed to be core to the curriculum with an emphasis on attachment and separation as key
areas of learning.
In respect of the GA, this area was seen as important in helping to give a better understanding
of hardships experienced in other countries. There was however some scepticism as to whether it
was realistic for social workers to fully understand what human relationships were like within
other countries and it was suggested they should focus on trying to improve local services before
trying to focus on a global scale. It was also suggested that the topic of human relationships could
be broken down into more specific areas in the GA. The draft circulated at the time of the consulta-
tion was really a list of service user groups. Participants felt there needed to be training to appreci-
ate the topic on a more global scale. It was felt that addressing the ‘generation gap’ and expectations
of older/younger people would help social workers to intervene more effectively. Additionally,
improving the way in which social services are portrayed would help to make the uptake of ser-
vices more effective.

Reflections on a radical pedagogy

Across the student groups the contextualization of social work in an international as well as a
national context was readily developed by the participants. The project coincided with the reces-
sion in the UK and on their practice placements students were exposed to increases in inequality as
expenditure in social care was increasingly limited and this formed a ‘dramatic change’ in the
practice environment (Reisch and Jani, 2012). Perhaps an important aspect of the project was an
Sims et al. 369

opportunity for students to ‘contextualize’ these local changes and make links to forms of globali-
zation such as the global financial crisis and the globalization of neo-liberalism which argues for a
small state (Deacon, 2007).
The direct introduction of the GA consultation into the educational setting triggered a number
of processes and it is argued that these processes enabled students to practise ‘international’ social
work. It is also argued that the introduction of the GA can contribute to a ‘radical pedagogy’ in
social work education as it engaged students in questioning dominant values (de Maria, 1992) in a
number of ways.
First, it engaged students in a critical group dialogue that placed local issues in a global context
and in proposing actions to respond to issues such as global and local inequality, particularly as
these affected migrants. The groups produced new shared knowledge in the links they made. This
could be described as developing a critical consciousness (Reisch and Jani, 2012) of how powerful
global causes are linked to local practice, challenging the neo-liberal emphasis on individual causes
and the associated demonization of welfare recipients in the UK. This demonstrated that at the
local level the GA paradigm can empower practitioners and students in contextualizing emergent
local issues, which is a crucial process in the development of international social work (Hugman,
2010). This global context as defining international social work is emphasized by Harrison and
Melville (2010) who argue that ‘global factors are implicated in local manifestations of social
conditions, which in turn shape domestic social work practices’ (p. 30).
A constant theme in the discussions from the UK focused on the detrimental effects of neo-
liberalism and marketization in tunnelling social work interventions into managerially regulated
work with individuals (Jones et al., 2007). The discussions highlighted that for social work to address
the local issues, group and community work skills need to be emphasized to support social capital and
sustainable communities in order for local social work to promote equalities, social justice and well-
being. This concurs with Hugman’s (2010: 69) view that to be international the role of social work
needs to be ‘broadened’ to utilize a full range of roles to support the UN Millennium Development
Goals, which informed the GA. It can thus be argued that the GA reinforces values supporting a wider
range of interventions than those highlighted by, for example, the UK neo-liberal context.
Second, an important aspect of the project was that a process took place whereby students con-
tributed with their feedback to the final draft of the GA. Hence they were participating in a policy
process as part of a policy public thereby increasing public debate on policy issues and adding to
the democratic process. Midgely (2007) argues that particularly in the context of globalization
social workers should become more politically active in contributing to the debates of international
organizations. Gal and Weiss-Gal (2013: 196) categorize this as social work policy practice through
a ‘recruitment network’ of social work organizations.
Third, through the GA project students were exposed to the organizational policy-making
processes at local, national and international levels of policy-making. Hugman (2010: 87) sug-
gests that social workers need to work ‘according to context’ and in addressing contextual fac-
tors an understanding of organizations and associated skills is important. Through the project
students were introduced to the international social work organizations and their structures, how
these co-operated internationally to produce the GA and also how these organizations relate to
the UN. Organizational learning also took place at a national level as the project group devel-
oped links with BASW and SWHIN in a national ‘GA Action Group’ and went on to present the
GA to the national parliament in 2012 and 2013. These processes were fed back to student
groups, and in 2013 a small group of the UK students participated in the parliamentary event.
Hence, students had the opportunity to learn about the relationships between organizations at a
national level.
370 International Social Work 57(4)

Fourth, by educators introducing the global context of social work, students were enabled to
practise as ‘international social workers’ through participating in the GA (Payne and Askeland,
2008) in addition to the international practice associated with the international context of social
work (Harrison and Melville, 2010). Hugman (2010: 155) concludes that there are a number of
different ways to practise as an international social worker, including ‘working with international
organisations’ and engaging in ‘practice that addresses local issues which originate in globalized
social systems’. Furthermore, as the international dialogue has progressed students have been able
to compare welfare responses in other countries to the UK, supporting an awareness of how social
work is socially constructed and how it can be changed.
Finally, it can be argued that the educators opened up an opportunity for social work students
to develop their involvement in policy practice along a ‘citizens–professional continuum’
which Gal and Weiss-Gal (2013) suggest is an important role of social work educators in sup-
porting social work policy practice. It is important to empower students by enabling access to
forums where they can engage as professionals and citizens to discuss issues relevant to social
work. As a ‘social movement’ social work practice translates the issues engaged with in every-
day practice to wider concerns and the GA offers a framework for this. The project took place
across six universities and involved a large number of students and it could be argued that this
constituted the beginnings of a ‘social movement’ in the UK context which can influence con-
textual debates.

Key learning points for social work pedagogical practice

From this work undertaken, educators identified a number of learning points from the construction
of the GA policy. The process of leading the groups demonstrated to educators how discussion of
global issues brought social work values strongly into focus especially due to the diversity of stu-
dents within groups. This diversity can sometimes be taken for granted in the busy process of cur-
riculum delivery, practice assessment and academic learning. The enthusiasm with which students
engaged in critical debate and discussion clearly stimulated new thinking and new learning. The
GA provided valuable reflective space in which to critically consider wider issues when there is
such a focus on the ‘local’ in terms of the students’ experience of meeting the requirements for their
qualifying programmes.
Here the authors make some suggestions as to how other social work educators may wish to use
the questions developed and the GA in their own work with social work students. The questions are
available from the authors of this article. The suggestions are as follows:

• introduce the Global Agenda and the roles of the international organizations early in the first
year of the social work programme. The existence of these may well not be known to new
students and they can be made aware that social work goes well beyond the ‘local’;
• as a part of learning about social work values early in the programme, provide workshop in
which students reflect upon their own cultural diversity/heritage and identify their own con-
nections with other cultures, traditions and countries (using a world map can be very useful
when doing this). Students can also be asked to present aspects of their own cultural knowl-
edge or heritage to each other in small groups;
• develop a further workshop in which the primary quotation is used. As can be seen earlier in
this article, a rich source of discussion emerges from this. Link discussions of policy and
practice to ideas about the neo-liberal agenda and to the Professional Capabilities Framework
domain rights, justice and economic well-being (College of Social Work, 2012);
Sims et al. 371

• later in the programme revisit the GA and highlight its four areas for development, using
some of the questions to develop more in-depth discussion about the GA role in promoting
a collective understanding and identity in social work. It is best to be selective in which
questions to use as time is needed in which to develop the discussions;
• the GA can also be used where overseas students or lecturers attend or teach on UK courses
or vice versa (e.g. on Erasmus schemes);
• use nominal group technique to achieve maximum exchange of individual and collective
views about the role and potential of the GA to influence local practice;
• finally, use World Social Work Day as an opportunity to diverge from the set curriculum and
celebrate social work as an international profession.

Conclusions
The project discussed in this article arose uniquely from the work on formulating a global agenda.
The resulting student dialogue engaged readily with the social work purpose of supporting local
and global social justice. Through participating in the GA there was the opportunity to learn about
the international movement advocating for social justice overall. The discussion of sustainability
highlighted how the GA can also support ideas for local social workers to develop new practices
around sustainability and the person in their environment. Hugman (2010: 155) suggests that the
international practices of social work ‘must be regarded as contested sets of ideas and practices’
and are not straightforward. For example, Harrison and Melville argue that ‘social workers must
guard against dressing up imperial practices in new clothes by uncritically electing to intervene at
the global level’ (2010: 31) and a critical approach needs to ask questions of such tendencies in the
GA. Lavalette (2006) highlights that the UN, which has influenced the emergence of the GA, may
not be a benign organization in promoting international well-being because it is representing pow-
erful interests. Finally, an equally important dimension of the future use of the GA in social work
education is that it includes the direct participation of service users and carers.
Key results that emerged from the feedback and discussions with students showed them to be
politically and internationally minded, holding international perspectives on local inequalities, on
disadvantages experienced by migrants, and on the need to promote human rights and relationship
based social work. Students also asserted a need for more skills in empowering group and com-
munity work. The sessions drew on the international experiences of students reflecting on their
diversity whilst seeking at the same time to extend their global awareness and literacy.
Through their engagement in the consultation project on the GA both students and social work
educators have had a voice in the international policy process and the opportunity to reflect upon
how they might ‘think global and act local’ (Lawrence et al., 2009). This involvement can only
help to strengthen the identity of social work globally and perhaps help to explore the potential for
constructing an alternative international discourse which challenges both a global and local UK
manifestation of the neo-liberal agenda.

Acknowledgements
With acknowledgements to the members of the JUC SWEC International Committee who contributed to the
development of this Global Agenda project. In particular our thanks go to Chaitali Das at Queen’s University
Belfast, Surinder Guru at the University of Birmingham, Graeme Simpson at the University of Wolverhampton
and Hellmuth Weich at De Montfort University.
The six participating universities were the University of Greenwich, the University of Hertfordshire, Sheffield
Hallam University (with Tbilisi State University, Georgia), Queen’s University Belfast, the University of
Birmingham and the University of Wolverhampton.
372 International Social Work 57(4)

Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit
sectors.

References
College of Social Work (2012) Professional Capabilities Framework. London: College of Social Work.
Deacon, B. (2007) Global Social Policy and Governance. London: SAGE.
De Maria, W. (1992) ‘On the Trail of a Radical Pedagogy for Social Work Education’, British Journal of
Social Work 22(3): 231–52.
Fook, J. (2002) Social Work: Critical Theory and Practice. London: SAGE.
Gal, J. and I. Weiss-Gal (eds) (2013) Social Workers Affecting Social Policy: An International Perspective.
Bristol: Policy Press.
Harrison, G. and R. Melville (2010) Rethinking Social Work in a Global World. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Hugman, R. (2010) Understanding International Social Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
IASSW, ICSW and IFSW (2010) The Draft Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development. IASSW:
http://www.iassw-aiets.org/. ICSW: http://www.icsw.org/. IFSW: http://ifsw.org/.
IASSW, ICSW and IFSW (2011) The Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development. IASSW:
http://www.iassw-aiets.org/. ICSW: http://www.icsw.org/. IFSW: http://ifsw.org/.
Jones, C., Ferguson I., Lavalette M. and L. Penketh (2007) ‘Social Work and Social Justice: A Manifesto for a
New Engaged Practice’ in M. Lavalette and I. Ferguson (eds) International Social Work and the Radical
Tradition. Birmingham: Venture Press.
Kondrat, D. (2010) ‘The Strengths Perspective’, in B. Teater (ed.) An Introduction to Applying Social Work
Theories and Methods. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.
Lavalette, M. (2006) ‘Globalisation and Social Policy’, in Social Policy: Theories, Concepts and Issues.
London: SAGE.
Lawrence, S., K. Lyons, G. Simpson and N. Huegler (eds) (2009) Introducing International Social Work.
Exeter: Learning Matters.
Midgley, J. (2007) ‘Global Inequality, Power and the Unipolar World: Implications for Social Work’,
International Social Work 50(5): 613–26.
Payne, M. and G.A. Askeland (2008) Globalisation and International Social Work. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Reisch, M. and J.S. Jani (2012) ‘The New Politics of Social Work Practice: Understanding Context to Promote
Change’, British Journal of Social Work 42: 1132–50.
Ruch, G., D. Turney and A. Ward (2010) Relationship Based Social Work. Getting to the Heart of Practice.
London: Jessica Kingsley.

Author biographies
Dr David Sims is Professional Lead for Social Work, School of Health and Social Care, University of
Greenwich, London, UK.
Linda de Chenu is a senior lecturer in social work and social policy at the University of Hertfordshire, UK.
Janet Williams is Associate Lecturer (Principal Lecturer retired) at Sheffield Hallam University, UK.