with SU as part of the project. It would be the SW who could follow up for feedback. There was a feeling that this process more onerous and more hassle than when SW’s were in training. Should this be done whist at university and not in workplace, assessors should not be teaching but consolidating? This is a more structured way of doing it addressing the recognised weaknesses in direct observation currently. There was anxiety around the being videoed by some SW’s what were the – thoughts after the project. We are still in the process of getting feedback. Jan added that in the Accreditation pilot, the vast majority of SW had high anxiety and dreaded the simulated scenarios– however, feedback showed the actual experience was enjoyable and positive. Mary was thanked for sharing Kent’s experiences and the project outcomes will be reported on when complete External moderation partnerships progress The group was asked their responses to some questions about partnership moderation and reminded about the requirements for all adults services to be part of a moderation partnership and for the moderation reports to be submitted to the next national panel Are you part of a partnership that includes Adults and Child and Family services? Most are, only 2 said they are in Adults only If you are in a mixed partnership, the moderation report is needed only for adults, is your partnership doing a report on both or just for adults? Slightly more said they were doing adults only reports but it was agreed that where the reports covered both, the report needed to ensure it was clear what evidence was from Adults and the national panel may have to consider whether joint reports were working. Do you think that the link between all the moderation levels: (internal, partnership and national) are working and clear? The general response was no links between internal and external moderation were often still not fully – established. And it was agreed that mostly this needed improving. This could be a topic at a future forum How many of you who are Children’s only are doing internal moderation a – majority were ( particularly those involved in partnership moderation) but not all How many of you are clear about who submits reports? There was a consensus that it should usually be the chair but still some confusion Are you clear about what happens to the feedback from the report; is the partnership working effectively and clear about the process? A minority thought this was working smoothly many thought it needed more work. Again this could be a topic at a future forum
with SU as part of the project. It would be the SW who could follow up for feedback. There was a feeling that this process more onerous and more hassle than when SW’s were in training. Should this be done whist at university and not in workplace, assessors should not be teaching but consolidating? This is a more structured way of doing it addressing the recognised weaknesses in direct observation currently. There was anxiety around the being videoed by some SW’s – what were the thoughts after the project. We are still in the process of getting feedback. Jan added that in the Accreditation pilot, the vast majority of SW had high anxiety and dreaded the simulated scenarios– however, feedback showed the actual experience was enjoyable and positive. Mary was thanked for sharing Kent’s experiences and the project outcomes will be reported on when complete External moderation partnerships progress The group was asked their responses to some questions about partnership moderation and reminded about the requirements for all adults services to be part of a moderation partnership and for the moderation reports to be submitted to the next national panel Are you part of a partnership that includes Adults and Child and Family services? Most are, only 2 said they are in Adults only If you are in a mixed partnership, the moderation report is needed only for adults, is your partnership doing a report on both or just for adults? Slightly more said they were doing adults only reports but it was agreed that where the reports covered both, the report needed to ensure it was clear what evidence was from Adults and the national panel may have to consider whether joint reports were working. Do you think that the link between all the moderation levels: (internal, partnership and national) are working and clear? The general response was no – links between internal and external moderation were often still not fully established. And it was agreed that mostly this needed improving. This could be a topic at a future forum How many of you who are Children’s only are doing internal moderation – a majority were ( particularly those involved in partnership moderation) but not all How many of you are clear about who submits reports? There was a consensus that it should usually be the chair but still some confusion Are you clear about what happens to the feedback from the report; is the partnership working effectively and clear about the process? A minority thought this was working smoothly many thought it needed more work. Again this could be a topic at a future forum
Notes-from-the-ASYE-Best-Practice-Forum-22-9-16.docx