Social Work - Field Education

It seems to me that social workers who take on the responsibility for the supervision of students(i.e. Field Education) ought to ask the universities whose students they take on, "What's in it for me?" before doing so.

There is no way that in this country that we will ever get to the stage where the professional practice of providing professional supervision for students on a practicum will ever be anything other than a voluntary task.

Expecting the already financially pressed universities to come forward with an offer of remuneration for the work involved in providing this professional supervision and assessment of a student's practice skills is a hopeless notion.

Asking the universities to provide some professional courtesy however, may not be as far fetched.

If a student supervisor provides both a teaching program and an assessment program that is a necessary part of the student's course work then why is the supervisor not considered part of the academic staff for the duration of their service to the student?

Were the supervisor to become a member of the academic staff a number of privileges would follow.

For example:

. a staff member can access the university library and its Internet holdings;

. a staff member can obtain academic versions of software at a much lower rate than the regular retail price;

. a staff member can add his/her status as such to their CV and so increase their attractiveness to new employers;

. a staff member could have a say in the curriculum of the university;

. a staff member could seek discounted continuing professional development;

In other words, without the university actually expending any money it could confer on the supervisor considerable benefits that would make student supervision more attractive and so increase the pool of people who might be willing to take on the job of providing supervision to students.

As field educators and universities throughout the country are bitterly complaining about the lack of supervisors for their students it would be in their interest to consider that they have some level of 'mutual obligation' towards colleagues who provide services to them.

Let's hear from the Universities and the heads of schools of social work about this!

Book Review - "In the Blood" - Steve Jones

In the Blood by Steve Jones is the transcript of the BBC television series of the same name. The author provides interesting information about genetics and exposes some of the myths and some of the conclusions which are emerging from genetic studies around the world.

While this is a fascinating hotch potch of information with some really memorable and quotable bits, it is nevertheless a book which seeks to document what was after all a television series. Each chapter may well have been a half and hour show and together with the pictures that no doubt accompanied the text would have been pleasant viewing. As a book however it ranges from interesting items that leave the reader highly anxious to read on to other items that are, at least from this reader's perspective more 'ho hum".

All in all, worth picking up and storing on your bookshelf as both a curiosity and as the source of some useful information. It has a wonderful section at the end called Further Reading which should enable people to follow up on some of the information provided and get some more in depth and presumably well researched information that corroberates some of the grander conclusions that this book reaches. Published by Harper Collins in 1996 it is probably only available in second hand bookshops and as long as you get it for a substantial reduction on its original sale price of $19.95 it is probably a good buy.

Have fun with it - but do not believe everything you read. Consider it as something that raises interesting questions rather than as a definitive answer to questions about genetics.

Book Review - "Devices and Desires" - P. D. James

Yet another in the popular series of books which have been featured in a TV series involving Commander Adam Dalgleish of New Scotland Yard. Set on an imaginary headland of the north east coast of Norfolk it is as one would expect a story about murder most foul and involves a nuclear power station, and terrorists. It is a book of our time although written in 1989.

I must confess that I find the pace of the book somewhat slower than I am comfortable with and so this is, at least for me, not the "page turner" that I have discovered with other authors. Nevertheless it is well written and even if it does not keep you on the edge of your seat at all times it does manage to suck you into the plot and keep you guessing from one chapter to the next about who is doing what to whom and why.

This is the sort of book I like to have with me on holidays. It is something I can read when the time is right and that I can leave on the bedside table when I have more interesting things to do. Published by the Penguin group it is of course available in any good second hand book shop.

Land Tax

Generally I have no problem with understanding that a government needs to find sources of revenue. To do this it requires people to pay one form of taxation or another. I do however have a problem with LAND TAX in the Australian Capital Territory.

In South Australia: "Land Tax is an annual tax based on land ownership", in NSW: "Land tax is a tax levied on the owners of land in NSW as at midnight on 31 December of each year." in Victoria: "The Land Tax Act 1958 imposes an annual tax on the total unimproved value of all land owned in Victoria at midnight on 31 December of the year preceding the year of assessment." In Western Australia: "Land Tax is an annual tax based on the ownership and usage of land owned at midnight on 30 June."

It is not the notion of taxing income producing landholdings that is abhorrent to me. It is not that I am opposed to such a tax on any principle that I can think of.

I have a problem with this tax simply because it is not possible for an individual to own land in this Territory.

The Commonwealth government (or more to the point the Crown) owns the land and the ACT Government manages it. The absolute maximum that can be obtained in the ACT is a 99 year lease.

Given that one cannot own the land why is it possible for the government to charge Land Tax?