Archive

The project aimed to pilot shared practice learning, to evaluate the results and to use the data to direct future curriculum development. It involved two social work students from the MA/DipSW programme at Nottingham University and two from the district nursing intake to the BSc (Hons) degree in community health care nursing at Derby University. The students were co-located in separate health centres.

Several important issues emerged relevant to two areas: practice, particularly assessment; and education and training.

On practice, three main points were highlighted:

• All participants agreed that student co-location enabled a smoother assessment process and improved the quality and depth of assessments.
• This applied particularly in risk assessment. Whereas the district nurse students were clear about the consequences of health risk and could apply detailed medical information, the social work students were better able to find out service users' perspectives. These combined approaches helped in the analysis and response to risk.
• The similarity in the content of social services and district nursing assessments was marked, with the main differences being of emphasis. As such, the roles and skills of district nurse and social worker were complementary.

The above points indicate that the single assessment process for older people, which would have social workers and district nurses at its heart, could indeed improve the quality of assessment processes and outcomes.

On the educational side, there were also benefits, although these were balanced by some practice difficulties. On the credit side, these points emerged:

• The practice experience gained by each student was richer than if they had undertaken a "normal" placement, largely because of the additional knowledge and understanding that each gained of the other's role.
• The competence required by both sets of students was broadly compatible.
• There were overlaps in the ways that evidence was collected. The main difference was that the district nurse students were responsible for its presentation, but in the case of the social work students, this responsibility was shared with the practice teacher.

This indicates that there is sufficient compatibility of the practice learning experiences of the two professions to make shared practice learning a possibility. The principle could also be extended to other professional disciplines such as health visitors and community psychiatric nurses.

However, the practical hurdles to be overcome are significant. Considerable overlap between the placement structures of each course was unpremeditated but would be a complex task to plan for compatible placements between different professional courses.

This problem is compounded where the courses are offered by different universities, as was the case here. The availability of practice placements is another complicating factor, taking account of the fact that placements for social work students in any given setting can rarely be guaranteed - unlike those for community nurses.

Given the centrality of inter-professional learning to the new social work degree, the establishment of shared practice learning alongside shared learning in academic settings has clear benefits, as this project has identified.

However, thought needs to be given to the planning and organisation of practice learning for its benefits to be realised.

Claire Torkington, independent consultant; Mark Lymbery, University of Nottingham; Andy Millward, Nottingham social services; Maureen Murfin, Broxtowe and Hucknall Primary Care Trust; and Barbara Richell, University of Derby.