Suchergebnisse

Practical training is essential while preparing for a career in social work. The quality of the practical training available depends on the providers, especially mentors in the field (also known as field mentors, instructors or field supervisors, hereafter referred as mentors). The satisfaction of a mentor is not only important for good mentoring but also for making them willing to mentor another social work student. Secondary quantitative data from the Centre of Practical Study at a Faculty of Social Work were obtained and analyzed using linear regression and structural models to answer the research question concerning what influences the satisfaction of mentors. The research showed that mentors are satisfied with the social work practice. Overall satisfaction rises with both the number of motives associated with the school and a better assessment of the student involved. Where satisfaction with elements of practice is an independent variable, overall satisfaction is best explained by satisfaction with the content of the practice, student motivation, self-initiative, and the mentor's collaboration with the school. Understanding what makes mentors satisfied with a practical placement is important for improving the quality of practical training provided in social work. Satisfaction on a higher level can add to a mentor's motivation to participate in the training of social work students. The sub-optimal (no financial and other compensation) system of mentoring in social work means that the factors to which social work schools in this area must pay attention are the content of the practice itself and the quality of the students. Key words quantitative research; field supervision; social work practice; social work education; skills teaching

Stakeholder participation has become an important driving force in policy decision-making and implementation, particularly in the nature conservation sector, where complex interactions and conflict of interest between stakeholders are common. A stakeholder analysis, which was complemented with a social network analysis, was used to examine the cooperation and conflict network between stakeholders, their institutions, and sectors in the case of the formulation of the Natura 2000 Management programme in Slovenia for the period 2015-2020 (PUN). Using data from a web survey (n = 167), cooperation and conflict networks were analysed while using degree centrality, indegree centrality, betweenness centrality, and blockmodeling. The results of the stakeholder analysis showed that the highest number of stakeholders that are involved in the participatory process of PUN was from the forestry and hunting sector, followed by the agriculture and nature conservation sector. The results of the cooperation network showed that the network is highly centralized, with only few institutions taking a central position in the PUN process (Institute for Nature Conservation, Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, and the Slovenian Forest Service). Moreover, the nature conservation sector was, on average, a sector with the highest concentration of power. In addition, in the cooperation network, which was fragmented across sectors, there were institutions that belonged to the same sector, which tended to cooperate with each other. The analysis of the conflict network showed that institutions with a central position in the cooperation network also had a central role in the conflict network. In addition, conflicts between institutions more frequently appeared among institutions from different sectors. The exceptions were institutions from the fishery and water sector, as this sector seemed to have many conflicts within it. Based on a blockmodeling, four groups of institutions were identified according to their cooperation network (core institutions, semi-core institutions, semi-periphery institutions, and periphery institutions). Our finding suggested that the participatory process of formulating PUN needs to be improved in such a way that in the future various stakeholders, especially excluded local ones, are more actively involved and a balance of the power between the stakeholders involved achieved.