ࡱ>  bjbjSS >11{Pd d 8 ,6 'BX"zzzUUU_'a'a'a'a'a'a'$)t,'UUUUU'zz'Uvzz_'U_'r&T+'z,!exW$'K''0''"-""-+'"-+' UUUUUUU''UUU'UUUU"-UUUUUUUUUd :  East Midlands Social Work Network Regional guidance for the reaccreditation of existing Practice Educators to meet the Practice Educator Professional Standards (PEPS) 1. General principles 1.1 This guidance has been written to support East Midlands social work education stakeholders in preparation for developing systems of reaccrediting existing Practice Educators (PEs) in the light of the introduction of the new Practice Educator Professional Standards (PEPS). It has been agreed by representatives from 7 universities and 9 placement provider organisations at two development days held in February and May 2012 and endorsed by the East Midlands Social Work Network. 1.2 The full version of the Practice Educator Professional Standards for Social Work and related guidance can be found on the College of Social Works (TCSW) website at  HYPERLINK "http://www.collegeofsocialwork.org/uploadedFiles/TheCollege/_CollegeLibrary/Reform_resources/Practice-EducatorProfessional(edref11).pdf"http://www.collegeofsocialwork.org/uploadedFiles/TheCollege/_CollegeLibrary/Reform_resources/Practice-EducatorProfessional(edref11).pdf 1.3 If anything in this guidance appears to contradict anything in the TCSW guidance, the latter should be taken as providing the definitive statement. 1.4 It is quite clear that the PEPS provide the national baseline requirements only for practice education. Decisions about the meeting of the standards, supply and training of PEs lies with partnerships of universities and employers and this includes whether an individual PE has met the requirements for the PEPS (although universities remain responsible overall for the quality assurance of their programmes including the quality of practice education). There is an assumption, therefore, that the processes described in this document are underpinned by principles and practices of partnership in line with those approved by the Social Work Reform Board. Whilst this guidance has regional agreement, the final decision on whether to adopt will remain with local partnerships. 1.5 The status of this guidance, therefore, is advisory rather than mandatory. 1.6 The guidance refers only to the reaccreditation of existing Practice Educators. However, because the PEPS recognise a variety of methods for accrediting new practice educators, with varying degrees of formality, it will be possible to transfer some of the principles and processes described here across to the accreditation of new PEs. 1.7 The reaccreditation of existing PEs will be a short-term and temporary process to ensure that capacity is maintained as the PEPS become embedded. Future demand will be met by new PEs undertaking training which has been adjusted to meet the new standards. Local experience suggests that most singleton PEs do not continue to practice educate beyond a two year period. However, it is also acknowledged that some PEs e.g. those in learning and development job-roles, senior practitioners with practice education as part of their job description and independent practice educators continue practice educating for much longer. The process therefore must be suitably robust to ensure quality standards are maintained but also as simple, efficient and economic on resourcing as possible. 1.8 An underpinning assumption is that most existing PEs undertake the role at least adequately under the current framework and would have continued to do so if changes had not been introduced. There is a risk of demotivating PEs with a resultant loss of placements if the process developed does not start from a position of assumed competence and is not delivered in the spirit of validating existing PE status. 1.9 The guidance and associated documents assume that the majority of PEs who are seeking reaccreditation will have previously undertaken training which was built on the domains in the publication Guidance on the assessment of practice in the workplace (GSCC/TOPSS 2002). Since 2002 the domains and their associated values statement have been used to develop practice educator training. For PEs whose training took place prior to 2002 it is likely that they will require more substantial refresher training. 2. Introduction to the Practice Educator Evaluation Form 2.1 The evaluation form, which appears in Appendix 1 of this guidance, has been designed for placement provider organisations to use with individual PEs in order to identify those elements of the PEPS that the PE is already in a position to demonstrate meeting and those which are yet to be met. 2.2 As such, it acts as both an assessment tool and a tool for presenting some evidence. 2.3 The form has been designed to be completed by PEs in a variety of roles including singletons, those in learning and development roles and independent PEs. 2.4 Some PEs will be able to complete the form independently others may require support from a mentor to do so. 3. Guidance for specific sections of the form The following numbering relates to the relevant question on the practice educator evaluation form and provides a fuller explanation of the question and its purpose: 3.1. It is a requirement for both Stage1 and 2 that the PE should be a registered social worker, qualified for two years and have a total of two years relevant work experience for Stage 1 and three years relevant work experience for Stage 2. However, PEs who are not registered social workers can continue to be Stage 1 practice educators taking first placements until the start of the academic year 2015 16. Relevant work experience has not been defined to date but the implication is that it would not necessarily have been in a social work post and, in the case of those seeking Stage 2 accreditation, can include one years pre-qualifying experience. Evidence sought from the PE might include qualification/registration certificates or documentation (although there may be HR processes or prior knowledge in the organisation which render this unnecessary) and oral or written evidence to indicate length of experience. 3.2. This question is designed to establish the currency of any training undertaken which may influence whether refresher or top-up training is required. Unfortunately, the variation in courses/programmes means that it cannot be assumed that all holders of a particular qualification will have met the same requirements. Evidence sought from the PE could include certificates although the organisations training, learning and development record systems might render this unnecessary. 3.3 This section applies only to holders of the Practice Teacher Award (PTA) or the PQ Higher Specialist Practice Education Award (HSpPEA) The PEPS state that holders of the PTA or the HSpPEA are deemed to meet the requirements for Stage 2 providing: they are qualified and registered social workers and their course met the practice educator standards observation of practice requirements and they have had direct responsibility for at least one student in the last two years or had relevant experience in practice education and have retained and developed their skills, knowledge and value base. In relation to the issue of direct observation, a regional agreement has been reached that holders of the PTA or HSpPEA have met the DO requirements for Stage 2. If the PE has not had direct responsibility for at least one student in the last two years they would need to demonstrate relevant experience in practice education. At the time of writing there is no formal guidance available on what contributing to practice education might include but suggested examples could be: contributing to the induction, supervision, assessment etc. of a student placed with a colleague, mentoring another practice educator or participating in practice education policy-making. Similarly, there is currently no formal guidance on retaining and developing skills, knowledge and value base in practice education. Suggested examples of the latter could be attending workshops/conferences on practice education topics, giving presentations to ones team, reading articles or texts. PTA/HSpPEA holders do not need to complete the remainder of the form as sections 1, 2 and 3 complete their evaluation. If the evidence presented is not considered to be sufficient, additional evidence could be sought in written and/or oral forms. This evidence should be designed to evaluate the PE in relation to the criteria in section 3 of the form i.e. contribution to practice education and/or retention and development of skills, knowledge and value-base. In rare cases, taking a further student placement or undertaking top-up training may be desired or required. 3.4. These questions check the currency of experience of PEs who hold qualifications other than the PTA or HSpPEA although there is nothing in the guidance received to date which places a requirement for currency as a condition of reaccreditation on non-PTA/HSpPEA holders. However, if PEs have not engaged in any aspect of practice education in the previous two years, evidence of currency could be sought in written and/or oral forms or top-up training undertaken. 3.5. This section addresses the issue of meeting the learning outcomes which are new to the PEPS. The PEPS are based on the domains and outcomes introduced in the Guidance on the assessment of practice in the workplace (GSCC/TOPPS, 2002). However the PEPS contain an additional domain, several additional outcomes and additional wording to the original guidance. The new criteria are presented in the Practice Educator Evaluation form in two parts; those relevant to Stage 1 and Stage 2; and those relevant to Stage 2 only. The new criteria are listed and for each one the candidate has the option of ticking one of 3 boxes. The first box allows for a PE to indicate that they would be able to meet that criterion without any teaching input i.e. they have existing written evidence or could put written evidence together, or could demonstrate the criterion verbally. The second box allows for a PE to indicate that they may require some teaching input, top-up training, mentoring support or similar before being able to evidence that criterion in writing or orally. The third box allows for a PE to indicate that they would need to take another social work student placement before being able to present evidence to meet that criterion. If the criteria are interpreted flexibly it is unlikely that many PEs would need to take a further student placement on the grounds of not meeting any/some of the new learning outcomes alone. Many of the new learning outcomes are worded in such a way that there is considerable scope for demonstrating them. For example, the use of the terminology Demonstrate an ability to., used in several of the criteria, suggests that the PE does not need to have actually done what is described but needs to show that they would know what to do if the situation arose. 3.6. These questions are designed to test whether the direct observation (DO) requirements have been met by the PE. For accreditation at Stage 1, one DO is required of the PE teaching, supervising or assessing a social work student. The wording suggests that they do not need to have held full responsibility for that student (however, if they are likely to seek Stage 2 accreditation at a later stage it would be advisable to take a further placement where they hold full responsibility) For accreditation at Stage 2 two DOs are required, one of which must be in the context of taking full responsibility for a social work student but the other can be with a non-social work learner providing assessment was made against relevant professional or occupational standards. If a PE has had one DO only but is seeking reaccreditation at Stage 2 they require one further DO only. For reaccreditation the PE would need to be able to present evidence of having been observed. The obvious evidence would be a DO report completed by a suitably qualified person but it may be sufficient for a written or oral statement by the observer to be accepted. There is nothing in the PEPS to say that the observed practice should have been to a particular level of competence but concern for quality would suggest that any observation previously completed would need to have been deemed as meeting the standards in place at that time. If the PE does not initially meet the DO requirement for the stage of accreditation being sought then s/he will need to be observed in line with the PEPS guidance, taking in to account the Stage of reaccreditation being sought and the type of observation which is missing. For example, if the PE is seeking reaccreditation at Stage 2 and has been observed once in the context of her/him taking full responsibility for a social work student then a further observation would need to take place but this could be in the context of teaching, supervising or assessing either a social work or non-social work student against occupational or professional standards. If the PE is seeking Stage 2 accreditation and has not been observed in the context of taking full responsibility for a social work student then the PE would need to take a social work student placement. 3.7 and 3.8 The requirements for both Stage 1 and 2 are that the PE should have contributed to the completion or review of a QAPL audit and completed a QAPL practice educator feedback form for each student they assess. The QAPL audit is effectively a profile of a placement setting which would normally be the setting in which the PE undertakes practice education. The QAPL feedback form is effectively an evaluation of the placement experience by the PE. It is recommended that the meeting of both these elements is approached flexibly for the purposes of reaccreditation. It would seem disproportionate to apply strict interpretations of this criterion especially as the learning outcomes include an element (D3) which relates to understanding HEI quality assurance processes. If the PE has completed or reviewed a QAPL audit and a QAPL PE feedback form, copies of these could be supplied as evidence. However, if the PE has not completed or reviewed a QAPL audit, s/he could be asked to review an existing audit and make suggestions for updating. If the PE has not completed a QAPL PE feedback form but has completed a placement evaluation form in respect of a previous social work student placement this could be deemed to be equivalent to the QAPL feedback form. 4. Evaluating values The PEPS include a set of values for work-based assessors. These are the same as the values used in the Guidance on the assessment of practice in the workplace (GSCC/TOPSS, 2002) but include a new introduction. As stated in section 1.9, PEs trained since 2002 will have undertaken courses where these values have been integrated so they do not need to be tested again. For PEs whose training took place prior to 2002 it may be appropriate to request the incorporation of the values in any written or oral evidence requested. In some cases top-up training may be appropriate. 5. Types of evidence to demonstrate meeting of standards 5.1 In the preceding guidance, examples have been given of the types of evidence which might pertain to each element of the PEPS. Reference has been made to both written and oral evidence. 5.2 Some of the written evidence to demonstrate the meeting of a particular criterion will be pre-existing evidence drawn from e.g. assignments, taking student placements etc. PEs will be familiar with the variety of such evidence which can be used to meet the standards, for example; induction programmes, practice educator report, student/tutor evaluations, direct observation reports, supervision notes etc. 5.3 Where such pre-existing evidence is not available, and written evidence is considered appropriate, there are also a range of ways in which the PE could produce new evidence such as short reflective pieces, lists of examples etc. These would need to be designed in line with the particular criterion to be met and agreed as suitable within a local partnership. It may be useful for approaches to be shared between local partnerships. 5.4 However, it would also be possible to present evidence in oral forms and this approach was strongly supported by regional stakeholders. For example, the PE is asked to describe and analyse orally how they have met one of the learning outcomes. This process has been referred to as a validating conversation in another region. Such an approach would recognise that the PE has existing knowledge, skills and values, reduce the formality of the process and make it less daunting. It would also reduce the workload on Assessors of PEs. 6. Where additional training is identified as required 6.1 The PE evaluation form allows for the PE to select additional training as one route to revising their knowledge, skills and values and potentially gathering missing evidence. It may also be the case that as part of the evaluation process it is agreed that such training would be appropriate even if the PE did not initially consider this as an option. 6.2 Training could take several different forms bespoke tutorial support from the Assessor/mentor, guided reading, top-up training developed in local partnerships or a full Practice Educator course. 6.3 It is hoped that partnerships in the region will be able to develop top-up training, addressing the most common gaps, where it is required. 6.4 Undertaking training is not evidence in itself that a PE has met all the outstanding requirements. The PE will still need to produce evidence that gaps have been met. 7. Priorities for reaccreditation Placement provider organisations will need to consider their priorities for reaccreditation. The PEPS state that assessors of PE candidates must be appropriately qualified to Stage 2 or equivalent. This suggests that the priority in any organisation would be to identify those who are likely to meet the requirements without any additional evidence being produced or any further training being required i.e. PTA or HSpPEA holders who are qualified and registered social workers, who have had a student in the last year or continued to contribute to practice education and have retained and developed their knowledge, skills and values. Such staff would include those employed in learning and development roles. Once reaccredited these PEs would then be able to undertake assessment of other PEs seeking reaccreditation. 8. Suggested outline process PEs who are deemed to be a priority for reaccreditation, who are likely to meet the PEPS without any additional activity being undertaken and are seeking Stage 2 reaccreditation complete the Practice Educator evaluation form and provide evidence of registered social worker status and practice teaching qualification. In the East Midlands this group is likely to comprise personnel from Workforce Development teams who are employed whole-time to support practice education or social work education more generally. At this stage, there will be no Stage 2 PEs reaccredited in the local partnership who can assess the evidence in the form. However, a distinction can be drawn between the activity of reaccrediting and assessing and it is reasonable to assume that the reaccreditation of this first tranche of PEs can be undertaken by a panel with suitable experience in practice education. The composition of the panel is a matter for local partnerships but should reflect the composition of the partnership. The role of the panel for this first tranche would be to review the form and supporting evidence and make the formal decision whether to reaccredit the PE. It is expected that this would be a formality in the vast majority of cases. The decision is recorded and a certificate given to the PE who has been reaccredited. The PEs who have been reaccredited in this first tranche would now meet the requirements of the PEPS to be able to assess other PEs The process is repeated with the next tranche of PEs. PEs complete the Practice Educator evaluation form either independently or with the support of a Stage 2 accredited PE (Assessor). A plan is developed as to how existing evidence will be provided and how outstanding evidence will be provided including timescale. PE provides evidence to Assessor in either written and/or oral format who reviews and makes decision as to whether requirements are now met. This process could be repeated several times if requirements are not met. Panel meets to endorse decision of Assessor. As before, the composition of the panel is a matter for the local partnership but, unlike for the first tranche, could now include Stage 2 accredited PEs. If agreement is to endorse/reaccredit, certificate is issued to PE. If agreement is not to endorse/reaccredit the PE is offered the option of undertaking further activity to meet gaps. Discussion and decision recorded. 9. Certification At the time of writing, options for certification are being considered. Placement provider organisations or local partnerships could develop certification relevant to their own organisation or partnerships. The development of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) for the East Midlands is being considered to which all placement providing organisations and universities could be asked to be signatories. The MOA will state signatories commitment to this regional guidance for the reaccreditation of PEs and willingness to recognise the transferability of reaccreditation across the region providing the guidance has been adopted in the reaccreditation process. This would enable individual placement provider organisations to issue their own certification and refer, on the certification, to the MOA. 10. Placement provider organisations without learning and development infrastructures A small number of organisations who have PEs who are eligible and willing to be reaccredited may not have the infrastructure to be able to undertake the processes described independently, for example small voluntary sector organisations that employ social workers. It is proposed that local partnerships consider organisations to which this applies and develop supporting arrangements to ensure that PEs are able to undertake reaccreditation. This may include Stage 2 accredited PEs employed by larger organisations or acting as independent PEs undertaking the assessment of PEs in those smaller organisations. 11. Reaccrediting independent PEs (IPEs) IPEs are commonly contracted by universities or placement provider settings to undertake practice education. The PEPS state that independent PEs should be accredited to Stage 2 and that it is the responsibility of the organisation contracting the IPE to be satisfied that the IPE is competent and suitable to carry out their responsibilities. Whilst the guidance in this document can be easily applied in the situation of reaccrediting IPEs who are contracted by placement provider organisations, the guidance is less easily applied where the IPE is contracted by a university. In particular it is unlikely that there would be a Stage 2 PE amongst the usual university staff. It is recommended that local partnerships consider this matter and develop collaborative arrangements to ensure that IPEs contracted by universities who are eligible for reaccreditation at Stage 2 are able to become so. 12. Next Steps As referred to in section 1.4, the PEPS make it clear that decisions about the meeting of the standards, supply and training of PEs lies with partnerships of universities and employers. It is recommended, therefore, that this guidance is considered in partnership meetings and agreement reached about whether to adopt. Conclusion and summary The supply, training and continued development of practice educators is crucial to realising the ambitions of the Social Work Reform Board and the College of Social Work. Without enough high-quality practice educators the reforms to social work qualifying training and to continuous professional development of social workers cannot be fully realised. This guidance and the associated practice educator evaluation form are intended to be helpful tools for universities and placement providers in the East Midlands region, working in partnership to achieve those aims and we hope that you will be able to make best use of them to support practice education activity. Produced by: Claire Torkington Area Officer Midlands May 2012 The organisations who participated in developing this guidance were: Enable Care and Support Framework Student Placement Coordination Service Derby City Council Derbyshire County Council Leicester City Council Northamptonshire County Council Nottingham City Council Nottinghamshire County Council Lincolnshire County Council Midlands De Montfort University Nottingham Trent University Open University East Midlands University of Derby University of Leicester University of Lincoln University of Northampton University of Nottingham Appendix 1 Reaccreditation of Practice Educators Practice Educator Evaluation Form Name Work/Business Address Email Phone Please indicate stage of accreditation preferred (delete which does not apply) Stage 1/Stage2 1. a. Date qualified as a social worker (month and year) b. Length of relevant work experience c. Are you registered with the GSCC/HCPC? (delete which does not apply) Yes/No 2. Which of the following types of training to undertake the practice educator role have you undertaken? Please give date of completion (month and year) Practice Teacher Award Higher Specialist Practice Education Award PQ Enabling Others module PQ6 In-house 4/5 day training Other - please give details None (please tick if this applies) 3. Questions for Practice Teacher Award and PQ Higher Specialist Practice Education Award holders only a. When did you last hold full responsibility for a social work student placement? (month and year) b. If you have not taken a student in the last two years, have you contributed to practice education in other ways? Yes/No If Yes, please describe c. Please describe how you have retained and developed your skills, knowledge and value base in practice education Please now sign at the end of the form. You do not need to answer any other questions 4. Questions for those holding qualifications other than the PTA and HSpPEA or no qualification a. When did you last hold full responsibility for a social work student? (month and year) b. If you have not held full responsibility for a social work student placement in the last two years, have you contributed to practice education in other ways and retained and developed your skills, knowledge and value base in practice education? (delete which does not apply) Yes/No If Yes, please give details Please now continue with all remaining questions 5. The following are the learning outcomes for practice education which are new in the Practice Educator Professional Standards and this section asks you about evidence to meet them. Please tick one box only for each learning outcome a. Outcomes relevant to both Stage 1 and Stage 2 complete if seeking either Stage 1 or Stage 2 reaccreditation New learning outcome for Stage 1 and Stage 2Tick here if you believe you could evidence this by written or oral means without any teaching inputTick here if you believe that you would require mentoring/ teaching input before being able to evidence thisTick here if you believe that you would need to take another social work student placement to be able to evidence this A2 Devise an induction programme B1 Teach the learner using contemporary social work models, methods and theories relevant to the work, powers and duties, and policy and procedures of the agency, demonstrating the ability for critical reflection B2 Agree available learning opportunities including multi-professional contexts B4 Devise and deliver an appropriate, cost-effective teaching programme B9 Support the learner in gathering evidence according to programme requirements C14 Demonstrate the ability to make difficult assessment decisions around areas of development, which may include marginal or failing learners  b. Outcomes relevant to Stage 2 only only complete if seeking Stage 2 reaccreditation New learning outcome for Stage 2 onlyTick here if you believe you could evidence this by written or oral means without any teaching inputTick here if you believe that you would require mentoring/teaching input before being able to evidence thisTick here if you believe that you would need to take another social work student placement to be able to evidence thisB10 Apply an appropriate range of supervisory models, roles and skills, which recognise the power dynamics between practice educator and learner C15 Demonstrate the ability to mark learners academic and/or assessed work C16 Demonstrate an ability to use a range of assessment methods including recording, reports, and the feedback of people who use services and carers, professionals and other colleagues D1. Critically reflect upon and evaluate own professional development and apply learning to subsequent practice education experience using a range of methods. D2. Demonstrate critical reflection on own development as practice educator including the use of feedback from direct observations, colleagues and HEI tutors and other assessment sources D3. Demonstrate knowledge of current HEI quality assurance systems and ability to liaise and negotiate HEI processes D4. Maintain information and data relevant to the development of practice D5. Demonstrate an applied knowledge of contemporary issues in research, policy, legislation and practice including agency policy, procedures and practice. D6. Demonstrate an ability to transfer practice educator skills, knowledge and values to new roles in mentoring, supervision, teaching and/or assessment D7. Establish and maintain effective resources for your own support and supervision in respect of the practice educator role and demonstrate the ability to consult and work with others in contentious and challenging contexts such as failing learners and formal appeals and complaints.  6. a. How many times have you been directly observed teaching, supervising or assessing a social work student against professional or occupational standards? b. How many times have you been directly observed teaching, supervising or assessing a learner, who was not a social work student, against professional or occupational standards? 7. Have you contributed to the completion or review of a QAPL or equivalent audit/profile of your placement setting? (delete which does not apply) Yes/No 8. Have you completed a QAPL or equivalent practice educator feedback/evaluation form for your last student placement? (delete which does not apply) Yes/No I understand that the information I have supplied in this form will be used for the purposes of evaluating my application to be reaccredited as a practice educator and may be shared with other representatives of the local social work education partnership as part of this process. Practice educators signature.. Date. Thank you for taking the time to complete this form. Please now return to: Insert the name and email/address of the person responsible in the organisation     PAGE  Final version June 2012  PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1 #&R S p q   < E Z 6_`mo*+>@nq | !","ỳÕ}vnhA?hP5 h?hPhaShP5hC2hP6h%xhP5hALhP6 hThP h hPh{hP6h[lhP5h:hP5 hP6h!'hP0JjhPUhThP5hPh(BhP5CJaJhP5CJaJ hP5+#$% r s hipqmnK^Kno+,>?@no !!."/""" & F,""""""*#-#########$$$$$%%,,0u1v15X6Y6Z6[688x8@@@@SAAAA*C+C0CACeCfCDhhP5 h@hPh@hP6hThP5 hP6hOhPOJPJQJ^Jh!6hP5h9`hP5hALhP6 hA?hP hkhP h?^<hPh{]hP5h?^<hP5 hP5h[hP5hP2"*####$$&&''**++H-I---P.C/ 000v1w122^3 & F & F^3_34455Z6[6x8y8;;==>>??@@@@A+,-ڰ$$$EEɳIIIII01KKLL;kMk#$d%d&d'dNOPQjjjjjj kOkwkkkkkkkllllll`mn-nnnnnooooEpVpOqqrrs ss)sttttuuuuBvCvvv,w-wwxxyyyyzz9{<{@{A{||*|;|<|{|||||m}n} ~ ~ hP5\ hP\hPCJaJhPCJOJPJQJaJhXahP5 hP5hPQMkNkOkkkkklllllllllllmmmm8m9m:m;m^m_m 0^`0`_mmm,n-nnnnnnnnnnn;oo?o@oAoBoCooo#$d%d&d'dNOPQooooVpWptqqqqqqqqqqqqrrr's(s)sVs$If#$d%d&d'dNOPQVss(ttttttttWkd$$Ifl\ 5$BBBB t0644 lBaytP$If ttuuuuu`ZZZZZ$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytPuuuuuuu`ZZZZZ$Ifkd:$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytPuu>v?v@vAvBv`ZZZZZ$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytPBvCvvvvvv`ZZZZZ$Ifkdn$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytPvv(w)w*w+w,w`ZZZZZ$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytP,w-w.wwwwxxx`^^^XXXX$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 5$ t0644 laytPxxyyyyy]WWWWW$Ifkd<$$Ifl\C I$BBBB t0644 lBaytPyyyyyyy`ZZZZZ$Ifkd$$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytPyyzzzzz`ZZZZZ$Ifkdv$$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytPzz;{={>{?{@{`ZZTTT$If$Ifkd$$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytP@{A{{{{|]WQQQ$If$Ifkd$$Ifl\C I$B t0644 lBaytP||w|x|y|z|{|]WQQQQ$If$IfkdJ$$Ifl\C I$B t0644 lBaytP{||||||||`ZTTTT$If$Ifkd$$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytP||i}j}k}l}m}`ZTTTT$If$Ifkd$$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytPm}n}~ ~ ~ ~ ~`ZTTTT$If$Ifkd $$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytP ~ ~+,-./`ZZTTT$If$Ifkd $$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytP ~/0-zʃ˃̓΃ЃуӃԃփ׃݃ރ߃õ h+XhPjhPUmHnHuhD-mHnHu hP0JjhP0JUjhPU hP6 hP5hPCJOJPJQJaJhP/0123456789`^^^^^^^^^kdR $$Ifl\C I$ t0644 laytP 9:;,-.́́΁ρ-.yzʃ̃̓σЃ҃Ӄ`ӃՃփ߃  $h]hh]h&`#$ <P1h:pP. A!"n#S$S% Dp$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ BytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#vc #v#v#v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ BytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ BytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ BytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP$$If!vh#v #v#vQ #v:V l t065/ ytP^  666666666vvvvvvvvv666666>6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH L`L Normal$CJOJPJQJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D Default Paragraph FontVi@V 0 Table Normal :V 44 la (k (No List : @: Footer$ 9r a$FoF  Footer CharCJOJPJQJ^JaJ2)`2  Page Number^JF'`!F Comment Reference CJ^JaJB@2B  Comment Text$a$CJaJJoAJ Comment Text CharOJPJQJ^JLj@12L Comment Subject$a$ 5\h{x\oa\ Comment Subject Charh{x5OJPJQJ\^JR@rR  Balloon Text$a$CJOJPJQJ^JaJBoB Balloon Text CharCJ^J:: Header$ 9r a$FoF  Header CharCJOJPJQJ^JaJfof Default 7$8$H$1B*CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH 6U`6  Hyperlink >*B*phF@F List Paragraph$^a$JJ@J Subtitle$<@&a$OJPJQJ^JJoJ  Subtitle CharCJOJPJQJ^JaJPK![Content_Types].xmlN0EH-J@%ǎǢ|ș$زULTB l,3;rØJB+$G]7O٭V$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3N)cbJ uV4(Tn 7_?m-ٛ{UBwznʜ"Z xJZp; {/<P;,)''KQk5qpN8KGbe Sd̛\17 pa>SR! 3K4'+rzQ TTIIvt]Kc⫲K#v5+|D~O@%\w_nN[L9KqgVhn R!y+Un;*&/HrT >>\ t=.Tġ S; Z~!P9giCڧ!# B,;X=ۻ,I2UWV9$lk=Aj;{AP79|s*Y;̠[MCۿhf]o{oY=1kyVV5E8Vk+֜\80X4D)!!?*|fv u"xA@T_q64)kڬuV7 t '%;i9s9x,ڎ-45xd8?ǘd/Y|t &LILJ`& -Gt/PK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 0_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!0C)theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] | OOOR,"Dj ~CFJPen"^3gCR;Zg1h3jMk_moVstuuBvv,wxyyz@{|{||m} ~/9ӃDEGHIKLMNOQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdfghRp|X 1IKR!!8@0(  B S  ?Rpq{{{{{{{{{{{{|||  )#-#((w))33AA K KNNOOEWHW\\ccf!fffFhKhPiViwizijjVk{{{||333333333333333333333{{{||lfvylfuylftylfsyh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJohp^p`OJQJo(hHPJh@ ^@ `OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJoh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJohP^P`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJohp^p`OJQJo(hHPJh@ ^@ `OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJoh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJo(hHPJh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHPJohP^P`OJQJo(hHPJ^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJopp^p`OJQJo(PJ@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJo^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJoPP^P`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJopp^p`OJQJo(PJ@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJo^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJ^`OJQJo(PJoPP^P`OJQJo(PJlflflflfD-P{{@|@UnknownG*Ax Times New Roman5Symbol3. *Cx Arial5. .[`)Tahoma7@Cambria?= *Cx Courier New;WingdingsACambria Math"hyA'yA'['yQi?yQi?!Sx4{{ KQHX  $PFV<:!xx !RegGuidReaccreditPEsJune2012FinalMr Chris HedgesChristopher Hedges    Oh+'0x  ( 4 @ LX`hp$RegGuidReaccreditPEsJune2012FinalMr Chris Hedges Normal.dotmChristopher Hedges2Microsoft Office Word@@SG@BxW@BxWyQi՜.+,D՜.+,D   &?{ "RegGuidReaccreditPEsJune2012Final Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSAHd|http://www.collegeofsocialwork.org/uploadedFiles/TheCollege/_CollegeLibrary/Reform_resources/Practice-EducatorProfessional(edref11).pdf  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghiklmnopqstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F}@@Data j1Tabler>-WordDocument>SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjr  F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qOh+'0`L    ,4<D| Normal.dotmChristopher Hedges2Microsoft Office Word@@SG@BxW@BxWyQi Jo SteeleRegional guidance