Naadu is a female multilingual social work student on her second placement in a children and families team. She is enjoying placement and as her mid-point review approaches, she has been told that her written language skills are weak and that there are concerns about whether or not she will pass. Naadu is surprised and upset that this has not been highlighted as an ‘issue’ prior to this. She argues that this is unfair especially as she has limited time to improve by her mid-point review which is less than 2 weeks away.
Her PE feels Naadu’s anger is unjustified because on many occasions she made corrections and amendments to reports and other written work which Naadu has then reviewed and included in her portfolio. Naadu states that she is a student and would expect corrections and amendments to be made to her work and did not feel this issue was peculiar to her. Her PE responds by saying that in her experience students for whom English is an additional language have difficulties with written English but acknowledges that Naadu’s spoken English is of no concern. The disagreement continues and at the mid-point meeting Naadu is surprised that her PE does not comment on her language skills, given it was an area of concern two weeks prior. Instead, the PE states that although there are some difficulties in relation to her written work, these can be overcome in the remaining 40 days on placement.
Areas for reflection
- How would you make sense of Naadu’s initial reaction to her PE’s comments about her language abilities?
- As a PE, how else might this situation have been approached?
- Are there any areas where the PE or Naadu may have acted or responded in ways that could be perceived as oppressive or discriminatory?
- How would you rationalise the PE’s change of view at Naadu’s mid -point meeting? What message(s) might this be conveying to the student?