Module 4- (250 words)

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cswe20

Social Work Education The International Journal

ISSN: 0261-5479 (Print) 1470-1227 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cswe20

A Broadened Horizon: The Value of International Social Work Internships

David Engstrom & Loring P. Jones

To cite this article: David Engstrom & Loring P. Jones (2007) A Broadened Horizon: The Value of International Social Work Internships, Social Work Education, 26:2, 136-150, DOI: 10.1080/02615470601042631

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470601042631

Published online: 22 Feb 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 436

View related articles

Citing articles: 22 View citing articles

A Broadened Horizon: The Value of International Social Work Internships David Engstrom & Loring P. Jones

Globalization demands that social work educators initiate educational programs that

promote understanding of global problems and country-specific interventions to address

transnational problems. Moreover, the global movement of peoples means that social

workers must be increasingly adept at working with different cultural groups. This paper

outlines an international social work internship jointly sponsored by San Diego State

University and Thammasat University in Bangkok, Thailand. The internship program

sought to expose students to social work and social welfare practices different than those

in the United States and to the impact of problems such as AIDS and child abuse in a

different culture. Moreover, the internship program focused on cultural learning and

promoted the development of ethnorelativism, a perspective that incorporates another

culture’s world view. The paper outlines the creation of the internships, student activities

and learning, and skills gained.

Keywords: International Social Work; Internships; Thailand

Introduction

Social work educators share the consensus beliefs that practitioners must be able to

work within the context of other cultures, and that the profession must be able to

help the larger society to understand different cultures. Profound demographic

change, the emergence of geographical mobility, and new communication

technologies have all drawn our world closer together. The demographic shift the

country is undergoing has two sources. The first source is the differential birth rates

among the nation’s many ethnic groups; the second is a result of large scale

immigration into the US from countries around the world (Krajewski-Jaime et al.,

1996). Today 10.4% of the US population is foreign born (US Census Bureau, 2001).

Correspondence to: David Engstrom, School of Social Work, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Drive, San

Diego, CA 92182-4119, USA. Email: [email protected]

David Engstrom & Loring P. Jones, San Diego State University.

Social Work Education Vol. 26, No. 2, March 2007, pp. 136–150

ISSN 0261-5479 print/1470-1227 online # 2007 The Board of Social Work Education DOI: 10.1080/02615470601042631

These global demographic changes have made these professional beliefs even more

relevant and important for today’s practice. Social workers now more than ever need

an international perspective. As much as social workers have always needed

sensitivity to the culture and customs of others around the world, they must also

know how these cultures are unique. There is also a need to understand the

international issues that are contributing geographic mobility and interdependence.

Social work values would argue for a need to adapt practice technologies to serve

these new entrants by integrating the international perspective into social work’s

intervention repertoire.

Obtaining this world view is difficult when educational preparation is aimed at

preparing practitioners for specific problems mandated by their own society

(Kendall, 1996). Such a restricted approach to education may result in a narrower,

more culture-bound view of the world limited to local realities rather than a broader

world view. Garland & Escobar (1988) suggest that effective practice requires social

workers to understand their own culture and to be able to make a shift to

‘ethnorelativism’. Ethnorelativism is defined ‘as the ability not only to accept and

understand cultural differences, but to have the empathic ability to share another

culture’s world view’ (Krajewski-Jaime et al., 1996, p. 16). Sanders & Peterson (1984)

asserted that an international experience as part of social work education would

expand students’ knowledge base by exposing them to other cultures, social welfare

policies, and to different ways of approaching and solving practice issues. The

international perspective would enable students to make that shift to ethnorelativism

by freeing them from what Sanders & Peterson call cultural myopia. This myopia is

the tendency to view social problems from no other than their own cultural

perspective.

The study of international issues offers much to enhance domestic practice and

knowledge (Healy, 1988). Five areas of potential gain for student knowledge are listed

below.

(1) Culture and Behavior. Students learn about the uniqueness of their home culture

through exposure to another culture. Students learn how a national culture affects

human behavior and service delivery.

(2) Experiencing of Being Different. If the international content has a study abroad

component that piece provides social workers with an empathetic experience

necessary for developing ethnorelativism. The most important reason for providing

a study abroad component is to provide students with learning not available in a

domestic classroom (Reichert, 1998). For many of the students, study in a foreign

country, particularly a non-Western country, will be the first experience they will

have at being different from the majority in a country. This experience is important

for social workers because many of their future clients will have different

backgrounds than their own. They can learn what it is like to be a new arrival in a

strange and different land, which increases their ability to empathize with new

arrivals.

(3) Comparative Views of Social Welfare. Examining social services in other country

allows social work students the opportunity to see how different values, traditions,

Social Work Education 137

and history have resulted in a similar yet different social welfare system as is

generally understood in the United States. Exposure to another social welfare

system makes students aware that there are alternative and perhaps more effective

solutions to social problems. The inadequacies of US social welfare policies become

evident when the social welfare systems of countries with comparable levels of

economic development are examined (Lane et al., 2003). In less developed

countries students can learn about the development of social welfare institutions

within a context of rapid change and resource constraints.

(4) Global Responses and Local Responses. Learning about the relationship between

global and local conditions prepares practitioners to intervene or advocate at home

more effectively with transnational issues like adoption, trafficking in people and

drugs, immigration, and refugee resettlement (Healy, 1988). Students can also learn

about how the policies of the developed world have consequences for less

developed regions. Sensitizing students to these issues is the first step toward

advocacy for social and economic justice as a worldwide goal (Asamoah, 2003).

(5) Different Contexts and Social Work Practice. International programs present an

added opportunity for preparing US students for practice in their own country.

Social workers can expect to work with worldwide migrants who are often not

fluent in English. In working with these diverse populations social workers need an

understanding of their cultural and geographic roots, and as such they provide

social workers with knowledge and skills for working with diverse populations

(Hokenstad, 2003). Also, students learn that acceptable practice in one context may

not be transferable to another, and that ethical and effective practice requires a

thorough understanding of local values (Traub-Werner, 2000). They may also learn

that social work has evolved different practice strategies. Examining these strategies

provides students with new ways to approach practice. They may find that clinical

work or practice is less prevalent in many countries than it is in the US. These

countries may use community development or organization as intervention

strategies. These strategies are underutilized in the US by social workers. In

underdeveloped countries students can learn about working under conditions of

severe resource constraints, about the pressures of international migration, and

working with clients experiencing absolute deprivation (Forte, 1994). Reichert

(1998) suggests that an overseas component to the curriculum gives students a

chance to directly experience social work in another culture; students can gain

insight into the universal values held by their counterparts.

International content in social work programs includes: (1) specialized course-

work; (2) integrating international content into other courses; (3) providing

opportunities for study abroad; (4) recruiting foreign students to study in the

program; and (5) utilizing faculty from other countries to teach courses (Johnson,

1996).

This paper reports on the study abroad component of the international program at

San Diego State University (SDSU). Eight SDSU MSW students completed an

internship for course credit in social agencies in the Kingdom of Thailand in the

summer of 2002. Information describing student activities, learning, and perceptions

was drawn from student internship journals, process papers, learning plans, and the

field notes of SDSU faculty. Students were given guidelines for recording data. For

138 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

example, they were told to identify behaviors and concrete specifics that underpinned

any of their observations on Thai culture or Thai social work practice. The students

met regularly as a group, and individually with SDSU faculty to discuss their

recordings and ensure the quality of data and comparability with other students. A

qualitative analysis that was heuristic in nature was conducted with these documents

that involved identifying basic concepts and themes inductively from open-ended

responses. Quotes from student field logs were selectively used to highlight the

learning that occurred.

Context of Study

The study abroad component was completed in partnership with Thammasat

University located in Bangkok, Thailand. This university is the second oldest

institution of higher learning in the country and is oriented around the social sciences

and professional education. Its students, faculty, and graduates have been leaders in

advocating democratic change and in the creation of a civil society in Thailand.

The Faculty of Social Administration at Thammasat University runs the largest

social work program in South East Asia. The structure of its curriculum resembles the

model used in the United States that includes policy, research, direct practice, and

human behavior course work.

Thailand provides students and faculty with an excellent platform to understand

and grapple with the effects of globalization, urbanization, industrialization, and the

consequences of economic depression in a newly industrialized country.

Traditionally an agricultural producer, the focus of economic growth during the

1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s was on expanding Thailand’s manufacturing

capabilities. During the latter part of that period, Thailand had the fastest growing

economy in the world (Phongpaichit et al., 1996). Literally millions of Thais left the

countryside to find work in Bangkok and other regional manufacturing centers.

Urbanization and industrialization brought significant changes to Thai society from

the creation of widespread ‘wage earners’ to political reforms to changes in family

structure and relations. The collapse of the Thai currency in late-1996 brought about

a sharp economic downturn, with which the country is still dealing. Since 1996,

Thailand has grappled with widespread unemployment, underemployment, increas-

ing poverty and homelessness, and other social problems created or exacerbated by

the economic depression (Montesano, 2001).

Several years before the economic crisis, Thailand fashioned a Social Security Act

that largely followed a Western model of social welfare programming but adapted to

the circumstances of Thailand. While the Thai Social Security Act has mitigated some

want and need, key provisions such as unemployment insurance have yet to be fully

implemented and thus the safety net remains incomplete (Siriphant & Engstrom,

1999). The economic crisis has severely strained the Thai social service system that is

separate from the country’s Social Security programs (Social Development in

Thailand, 2000). Non-governmental organizations, community agencies, and mutual

aid societies have attempted at the grassroots level to assist people and to broaden the

Social Work Education 139

array of services offered to the Thais. Additionally, many international relief and aid

organizations have offices in Bangkok and run projects in other parts of Thailand.

Implementation of the SDSU/Thammasat MSW Internship Program

Prior to departure, the SDSU students underwent an extensive orientation that

focused on language classes, meetings with Thai students at SDSU to learn more

about Thai culture, general material on living abroad, and readings on Thailand.

Additionally, the students developed a fund raising campaign to offset some of the

costs of the internship. Orientation and fund raising activities fostered strong group

cohesion.

The eight SDSU MSW students had one week of orientation in Bangkok. The

orientation consisted of presentations by Thammasat University faculty on Thai

culture, language, and social welfare services and approaches and tours of social

service agencies. Towards the end of the orientation week, the students met with their

respective Thai supervisors and Thammasat University Faculty of Social

Administration (FSA) liaisons to discuss the roles and responsibilities of the

internship and to begin the process of mapping out learning objectives. Securing

housing and learning the ins and outs of the Bangkok public transportation system,

including river taxis, were the other major tasks of the first week.

The length of the internship varied from five to seven weeks. The internship was a

five-day a week, 40 hour experience. FSA and SDSU faculty worked together prior to

the arrival of students to identify internships that had a supervisor with English

language skills and which corresponded with student interests. A financial

honorarium was given to supervisors to recognize and provide some measure of

reciprocity for their efforts. The internships used the same agencies and supervisors

that the FSA used for its student field placements. This meant that supervisors had an

understanding of how to structure internships to serve educational needs. All the

supervisors had considerable social work or human service work experience in

Thailand. The Thai supervisors were responsible for assigning tasks and

responsibilities for the SDSU interns and monitoring their performance. FSA and

SDSU faculty were available as consultants and trouble-shooters.

A close working relationship between SDSU and FSA developed over the nearly

year-long planning process before the beginning of the internships. That process was

facilitated by interest in developing student exchange programs and efforts to

programmatically link the two social work programs. Prior to the start of the

internship, SDSU had sponsored an FSA doctoral student for a five-month internship

and study trip. Several visits by SDSU faculty to Thailand and FSA faculty to the

United States provided the foundation for the internships. An SDSU faculty member

who had held visiting professorships at FSA was on-site for the entire duration and

served as a visiting professor at Thammasat University where he taught doctoral

classes and guest-lectured in a number of masters and bachelor-level social work

classes. A second SDSU faculty member traveled to Thailand for part of the program

and also provided a series of guest lectures. Over the course of the internship, a

140 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

memorandum of agreement between the two programs was developed and signed to

encourage subsequent exchanges. These activities were structured to make sure that

both programs benefited from the internships.

Once in their internships, the students met regularly with the SDSU faculty

member for supervision and to process and share their experiences. At the mid-point

of the internships, FSA and SDSU faculty met with the students and their supervisors

to review learning objectives and to monitor the quality of the internship. At the end

of the internships, all students presented a summary of their internship experience in

a half-day seminar with FSA faculty and internship supervisors. The seminar afforded

the social work faculty and supervisors the opportunity to see how US social work

students understood Thai social conditions and social interventions. For the students,

the seminar allowed an exchange of ideas to take place and to have Thai educators

reflect with them concerning their experiences. The seminar also provided the venue

for students to honor and thank their supervisors and liaisons by presenting them

with garlands made of jasmine flowers, a culturally appropriate form of acknowl-

edgement.

Student Activities

The short duration of the internship coupled with limited Thai language skills

necessitated that the MSW students, on the whole, participate more in studying Thai

service delivery approaches and issues and less on direct practice interventions.

Nevertheless, all of the students had the opportunity to talk with clients served by

their social service agencies; some were able to participate in psycho-social support

groups, home visits, child abuse investigations, and counseling for individuals

undergoing STD tests. One student placed in an NGO that advocated on behalf of

trafficked women and children assisted in collecting information for and planning the

content of a regional conference.

To understand more about the agency and the population it served, the students

observed social work activities mostly by shadowing their supervisors or other

designated workers. Shadowing allowed students to participate in agency work in a

relatively unobtrusive way while it afforded them opportunities to see Thai social

worker/client interactions and to ask questions about interventions. For example,

students involved in HIV/AIDs prevention work were able to first observe a seasoned

social worker conduct AIDS education sessions with sex workers and later to play more

active roles in the educational sessions. Placed in the child protective service non-

governmental agency, another student traveled three hours by car with a worker to

conduct an initial investigation interview with a family in their home that took another

hour or more. The Thai social work supervisors also requested that the SDSU students

attend team meetings and staffings. Indeed, several students participated in staff

development retreats. Students attended seminars, conferences and lectures sponsored

by their agencies, many of which had a mixture of Thai and English presentations.

As a group and as individuals, the students visited government agencies and non-

governmental organizations, communities in and outside of Bangkok, cultural

Social Work Education 141

institutions such as Wats (temples) that provide important social services, and the

homes of clients. Two important group visits involved meeting with Thammasat

University MSW students in an extension program in the North Eastern part of

Thailand and touring a prison for female drug offenders near the city of Korat. The

prison tour included in-depth meetings with officials from the Thai Department of

Corrections who explained the Thai corrections system and answered questions

about correction practices. Some visits to communities focused on those that had

innovative community programming around economic development. Other visits

focused on exposing students to the grinding poverty of urban slums in Bangkok.

Two students spent considerable time studying the role of certain Wats in providing

care to those terminally ill from AIDs. Students involved in child welfare internships

had the opportunity to participate in home visits that marked the beginning of child

abuse investigations and monitored the safety of children returned to their homes.

Ostensibly at their internship to learn, students also contributed through formal

presentations and informal activities. One student presented on US mandatory child

abuse reporting laws to mid-level administrators at the Department of Public Welfare

(a recently passed law in Thailand will require mandatory reporting). Another

student presented on US juvenile justice policy to a law class. That same student also

conducted a review of English professional terminology with staff from her agency.

Through research for their Masters theses, two students involved staff from the Office

of Primary Health Care at the Ministry of Public Health in understanding the type of

care provided to people with AIDS in temples located in the south, north, and

northeast of Thailand.

Knowledge and Skills Gained

This section follows the outline of potential gains for students of international study

identified earlier in the paper.

Culture and Human Behavior

Students had an opportunity to learn about the uniqueness of their own culture.

While the majority of the students had traveled internationally, only two of them had

effectively lived in another culture. The internship program emphasized immersion

as a salient tool for conveying cultural learning. On a day-to-day basis, students dealt

with the mundane but yet crucial interactions that ground culture. Because they lived

in Thai neighborhoods, students interacted with Thais over such things as groceries,

food at restaurants, laundry, housing, movies, and transportation. Living in non-

Western areas gave them a sense of the rhythm of urban Thai life. It also forced them

to test their language and cultural understanding on their own, without the safety-net

of Thai supervisors or English-speaking colleagues.

The students had repeated reminders that while Thailand has Western features, its

root or core culture is significantly different than that of the United States. For

example, unlike the United States, Thailand has not embraced a more informal

142 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

approach to work relations, dress, and interactions. One student commented, ‘I had a

difficult time with the formality. I also felt severely underdressed, wherein if I were in

the United States, I wouldn’t have felt so out of my element’. Professional Thai work

settings emphasize formal dress, an adherence to hierarchy, and more formal and

symbolic interactions with superiors. The formality of work and how that

complemented or reflected Thai valuations of status and role required students to

keep an open mind about the social structure of work. At the same time, students

confronted the paradox that Thais tended to work informally among peers. They

came to appreciate that the frequent breaks for snacks or coffee had much to do with

recognizing the importance of group relations and harmony. Indeed, the Thai

orientation around small groups contrasted with a more individualistic approach in

the United States.

Other cultural differences also manifested in the work setting. To confront

someone directly about a work problem or to discuss something that might cause

discomfort goes against the Thai value of saving face. More used to ‘straight talk’,

students, at first, considered such behavior as avoidance or denial. Most came to

realize that their Thai colleagues were willing to deal with unpleasant circumstances

and social conditions, but tended to do so in a less direct manner by working around

the margins of the problem. One student concluded, ‘The psychological results of

saving face could potentially lead to better results. I have had to look at the potential

consequences but also the benefits of image, and how important it is’. Finally

students worked with the Thai values that not everything is under one’s control—

fatalism—and not everything must be task-oriented and done today (which is best

captured by the Thai phrase mai pen rai). Task-work was often secondary to social

obligations and hospitality to visitors (both Thai and non-Thai). These values

challenged the task and change-oriented approaches with which most students had

been socialized.

Much of the learning centered on the students developing a better understanding

of their own US culture. To begin with, they struggled with language and

miscommunication. As one intern noted, ‘Miscommunication was a daily

occurrence’. Most had never thought much about nor had experienced being a

linguistic minority and how that can influence life on a minute-to-minute basis. For

example, one student had a medical emergency while in Bangkok. Because a Thai

colleague scheduled the appointment and went with her to translate, the experience

was not frightening. ‘This would not have been my experience if I were alone’, she

concluded. Simple tasks such as getting directions or purchasing groceries were made

complicated by their limited capacity to speak Thai. The students also dealt with their

own internal ethnocentrism. Working and living in another culture brought home

the reality that much of the world thinks, believes, and acts differently. In the words

of one student

Living in Thailand really clarified for me what ‘‘American Culture’’ and ideals are all about. I feel that you have to be outside of it for a while to really be able to look in with a different perspective, or outsider frame of reference.

Social Work Education 143

At the same time, their exposure to Thai culture led them to value aspects of US

culture that had been underappreciated before the internship. Some came to better

appreciate the openness and diversity of American society while others valued the

directness in which problems are discussed. Finally, they had the opportunity of

seeing how people from another country viewed US culture, politics, and power. The

students found themselves explaining aspects of American culture distorted by mass

media and being asked to justify US policy when, ironically, they had profound

disagreement with it. Aside from hearing alternative perspectives on the United

States, these types of encounters brought home the experiences that many minorities

have when they are asked to serve as de facto spokespersons for their entire race or

ethnicity. In effect, students dealt with the international equivalent of ‘why do you

people think/act/feel/behave that way’.

The Experience of Being Different

Students constantly experienced and had to process what it is like to be different, a

component of cultural learning. As noted before, their limited Thai language skills

marked them as different. Commenting on that point, a student stated, ‘I felt as if I

did not have control over my environment, making me feel vulnerable’, but even

more so, they did not look nor could they pass as Thai. Except when they went to

areas in Bangkok with a large Western foreign presence, they physically stood out.

Students mentioned discomfort over the fact that they could not ‘blend in’ and were

subjected to attention and stares. At the same time, these experiences made them

empathize more with the experiences of racial and ethnic minorities in the United

States who are frequently subject to the same type of scrutiny and discrimination

(Myers, 2003). As one student observed

I usually do not pay attention to others doing it to people who have recently come to the US. I am now much more aware, and will intervene if necessary. I would hate for anyone to feel as self conscious as I did in Nonthaburi just walking down the streets.

Indeed, the language barriers and ‘otherness’ experienced by students was the most

significant learning feature of the internship and life abroad because it enhanced their

capacity to empathize with oppressed groups in the United States. ‘The time I spent

in Thailand allowed me to experience some of the barriers that immigrants face, as

they enter a foreign country, not familiar with the culture or the language’, said one

intern. Their experiences brought the theory and abstractions of the classroom and

made them real.

Comparative Views of Social Welfare and Social Work

The internships afforded the MSW students the opportunity to observe and work

within the Thai social welfare system and to contrast it with that of the US. Health

care provided one of the most fertile venues for comparison. Thailand has recently

144 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

instituted a universal health care program that allows Thais to receive comprehensive

healthcare for less than a dollar per visit. In group and individual discussions the

students noted that Thailand, a country with considerably fewer resources than the

United States, has nevertheless managed to extend health care to all of its

population—something the United States has yet to do. At the same time, students

learned that many professional Thais expressed concern that demand for health care

would soon exceed the resources available to pay for it. Students working in health

care related agencies saw close parallels between Thai and US public health

approaches. However, the implementation of public health strategies differed. While

the United States relies extensively on public advertising and mass media to

disseminate public health strategies, Thailand emphasizes face-to-face interactions.

For example, students interning at the Office of Primary Health Care saw staff

coordinating the activities of thousands of village health volunteers whose role is to

educate local populations on healthy behaviors and practices.

The students also learned that while Thailand had social security and public

assistance programs, it also placed great weight on social development. For most of

the students, social development represented a new form of social welfare; visits to

communities and regions where development projects were underway gave them first

hand exposure to efforts to expand and strengthen local economy. Visiting one such

project, a student noted,

I was able to witness one of the Thai government’s cash aide programs at work. What began as one woman obtaining cash aide to start up her own business grew into 30 women in this community working together in an occupational group making jasmine garlands to sell outside the community.

They also heard lectures on the innovative village credit fund sponsored by the Thai

government that provides micro-enterprise loans to rural villages.

Learning about Global Problems and Local Responses

The internships allowed students to compare social attitudes and responses to

problems that exist in both countries. The problem of AIDS provides perhaps the

best case in point because five of the students had internships that dealt directly with

it. Those students saw similarities in the stigmatization of people with AIDS. They

heard statements that attributed the spread of AIDS to immoral behavior and that

scarce resources should not be wasted on AIDS victims—a vantage point that a

section of the US population holds. More importantly, the students witnessed first

hand how intervention used in the US such as anti-retroviral medications were

unavailable to most Thais because of the cost. Because Thailand relies on the family

to care for those with chronic illness it has not developed alternative institutions such

as hospices or nursing homes to assist AIDS patients. Indeed, several students came

to see how those institutions are based on Western norms. As one student observed,

‘A hospice was very much NOT a part of Thai culture. A hospice would indicate a

lack of a family’s ability to care for their own relatives, thus not living up to the

Social Work Education 145

societal standard’. Nevertheless, the students witnessed how the AIDS epidemic has

overwhelmed traditional care structures and saw the consequences for those AIDS

patients whose families either were unwilling or unable to care for them when they

became acutely ill. Commenting on that point, a student observed:

The most difficult aspect of my time interacting with AIDS patients was witnessing the family separation caused by the fear of the disease. Every single person we interviewed [wanted] to be with his or her family members. Yet all of them acknowledged that separation from the family was better because they did not want their other family members to suffer [from the stigma of AIDS].

At the same time, they learned how traditional institutions such as Wats had assumed

untraditional roles of caring for AIDS patients most often at the point of near death

in the actual temple complex.

A second problem that merits examination comparison is the sex trade and the

trafficking of women and children to support this business. While students were

aware of the problem in the United States, its visibility and scale made it more

apparent in Thailand. Visiting the seaside resort of Pattaya and areas in Bangkok such

as Patpong associated with the sex trade brought home one of the dark sides of

globalization—sex tourism. Tour groups from Western and Asian countries are

entirely organized around visiting brothels and nightclubs in those areas. After a

request to tour Pattaya, the students were visibly shaken and upset by the scale of the

sex trade and the exploitation and debasement of sex workers. While ostensibly illegal

in Thailand, prostitution operates openly by under-the-table payments to police and

officials. In their interviews with sex workers and public health officials, they

discovered that sex workers in Thailand generally come from the poorest regions of

the country and neighboring countries and some are trafficked. Efforts to combat

trafficking are complicated by police corruption and the lack of a consensus

definition of trafficking. They also found that sex work in Thailand did not have the

same level of social stigma that it does in the US. Thai interventions focused more on

instilling the need for ‘safe sex’ practices among sex workers, rehabilitation of victims

of trafficking, and the elimination of child prostitution than on efforts to ban the sex

trade altogether.

Thai Context and Social Work Practice

Students also experienced that Thais drew relatively broad professional boundaries,

much more so than in the United States. Thai social workers became more involved

in the lives of their clients and more direct in their interventions, sometimes almost

treating clients as members of their own extended family. This again reflected the

Thai emphasis on interpersonal relations. In the words of one student,

An American social worker would never be able to function within Thai society unless they grasped the culture because of how intimate it is. If the social worker maintained their rigid boundaries, he or she would never build the rapport with the clients that Thai social work stresses.

146 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

Thai social workers have fewer resources to offer their clients than American social

workers and their supervisors demonstrated and taught them how much could be

done with the resources at hand. As one student commented,

As I learned from the experience in Thailand, even with limited resources, I can still make a difference in others’ lives. The experience in Thailand taught me to not stop trying to help even though there is a limitation for things I can do to change the component of a social issue.

Additionally, students found that the emphasis is not on direct practice or clinical

work as it is in the United States but rather on macro interventions such as

community development to create community support for problem solving.

Lessons Learned

The following is a discussion of some factors that made this program successful.

These are discussed as an aid to schools that might be contemplating similar efforts.

(1) Previous involvement of a key SDSU faculty member with Thammasat University

and Thailand was a crucial factor in the program’s success. Not only were

relationships established before hand, but students could be taught about Thai

culture prior to departure for Thailand, by someone with first hand knowledge of

the culture. In addition, the visit to Thammasat University in the year before the

internships gave SDSU faculty an opportunity to deepen relationships in Thailand

that would service the internships in the future.

(2) Student and faculty participants had become more aware of the limitation of the

US ambivalence about multilingualism, and recognized the need to expand their

language skills in order to truly become global citizens. Students and faculty found

their Thai counterparts, for the most part, able to converse in English. On the other

hand, the SDSU participants could not interact in Thai on more than a basic level.

While it is probably not possible to provide enough language instruction to make

students case carrying social workers in Thailand, more language instruction is

needed so they can understand everyday mundane Thai social interactions.

(3) More time was needed for debriefings after critical events, incidents, and

unexpected developments to maximize learning. The block placement, the size of

Bangkok, and the city’s legendary traffic jams made group meetings with students

difficult. However, when these debriefings occurred students were able to trade

learning experiences and support. Especially crucial is to provide debriefings upon

return to the United States, not only to reach the student while learning and

experience is fresh, but also to help them with issues related to cultural reentry.

(4) Prior preparation for the practicum was essential. Students met weekly with SDSU

faculty and had several days of intensive orientation prior to departure, but also

included their first week in Thailand. This preparation included not only language

instruction, but instruction in Thai culture, history, and basic survival skills.

Avoiding Professional Imperialism

Exchanges between schools of social work in countries with differing levels of

economic development raise the potential of professional imperialism—that the

Social Work Education 147

benefits of such activities are one-directional and flow to the more powerful (Cemlyn,

1995). In the FSA/SDSU exchange program care was taken to minimize the risk at

several levels. Internship planning was interactive and done in a climate of mutual

respect. The signing of a memorandum of agreement in the summer of 2002 clearly

specified that FSA and SDSU were equal partners and equally benefited from the

exchange. While the SDSU student cohort was the first one involved in the exchange,

plans were also made to have SDSU host FSA social work faculty and students.

Indeed, SDSU hosted approximately 50 FSA faculty and students in San Diego for a

one-day social welfare conference in the spring of 2003. Subsequent planning calls for

a cohort of FSA BSW students to participate in San Diego-based internships in the

fall of 2005.

At a more micro-level, SDSU students were encouraged to be active learners,

careful observers, and not to assume that US social work and social welfare were

superior to those of Thailand. Based on program evaluations, Thai internship

supervisors and FSA internship liaisons reported that the students displayed

appropriate curiosity and avoided statements like ‘in the US we do it this way and

it is better’ or emphasizing the US value of efficiency as more important than the

Thai values of relationship and process.

Implications for Social Work Education

Social work has long valued experiential and hands-on learning as a way to ground

theory—indeed, the field practicum is the best exemplar of that tradition. So, too, has

the profession long valued cultural competency and the need to develop mechanisms

to teach students how to effectively work with people from different cultures. Indeed,

the multicultural nature of US and other Western countries suggests that social work

and cultural competency must be wholly fused together. This is no easy task and the

profession has struggled to work effectively and meaningfully with diverse

populations. While by no means a panacea, international student exchanges and

internships offer social work a significant tool to foster cultural competency and

address the effects of globalization. Specifically, international student internships

build on the experiential learning tradition of social work while at the same time

promoting cultural competency by putting students in settings that immerse them in

the values, norms, and institutions of another culture.

The experiences of the SDSU MSW interns in Thailand highlight and reinforce the

value of international internships. All eight MSW students noted that the Thailand

internship program provided them with among the most, if not the most, important

learning experiences of their professional education. They learned to live in a culture

not their own, gained insight into their own cultural assumptions, and began to

embrace a more ethnorelativistic position. Moreover they had the experience of being

‘other’. The internships offered different approaches to social work practice and a

different structure to and set of social welfare institutions. These social work practices

were taught by their seasoned Thai social work supervisors who explained and

processed with students what they were seeing and doing. The students saw that

148 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones

certain social work practices are culturally bound and not readily transferable. They

gained knowledge of global problems that have relevance to practicing in the US.

Finally, their cultural radar was enlarged and enhanced by their internships at Thai

social welfare agencies and living in Thai society. To a student, all believed that the

internship program greatly developed their skills and competency in dealing with

diverse populations.

Enhancing the ability to work across cultures and to work with those who share

different cultural assumptions has the greatest implication for social work education.

Students found that interning in Thailand challenged their often-latent monolithic

assumption of an Asia culture. One student commented that her understanding of

cultural variation was enhanced by the internship and noted, ‘This knowledge helps

me every day in the field to look for and try to understand even the slightest cultural

differences in people and how this may affect their experience of being in a hospital

for example’. Another student commented that the internship made him appreciate

how little he knew about grasping another culture. In his words,

I was a bit overconfident about my understanding of culture, e.g. you learn what someone eats, their customs, the roles their family play and you understand them totally. The [internship] taught me that there are some aspects of other cultures that I will never understand and I am now comfortable with that.

At the same time, the students were able to draw links between Thai culture and

other cultures of Asia, especially those with Buddhist traditions. This awareness

broadened the experience for them and had direct bearing on their social work

practice once back in San Diego because of the city’s large population of South East

Asians. One student noted, ‘I continue to be more sensitive when working with

clients from Thailand or from other South East Asian [countries]’.

The experiences the SDSU students had in broadening their view of social work

and expanding their awareness of their own cultural values and norms are not easily

gained in the classroom. Even field placements generally cannot offer the learning

opportunities and experiences that international internships can. While not for

everyone, expanding the number and scope of international internships offers

educators a powerful means to prepare social workers to practice effectively with

diverse populations and in an increasingly interconnected world.

References

Asamoah, Y. (2003) ‘International collaboration in social work education: an overview’, in Models of International Collaboration, eds L. Healy, Y. Asamoah & M. C. Hockenstad, Council of Social Work Education, Alexandria, VA, pp. 1–14

Cemlyn, S. (1995) ‘Social work in Russia and the UK: what are we exchanging?’, Social Work Education, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 77–93.

Forte, J. A. (1994) ‘Around the world with social group work: knowledge and research contributions’, Social Work with Groups, vol. 17, no. 1/2, pp. 143–162.

Garland, D. R. & Escobar, D. (1988) ‘Education for cross cultural practice in social work’, Journal of Social Work Education, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 229–241.

Healy, L. (1988) ‘Curriculum building in international social work: toward preparing professionals for the global age’, Journal of Social Work Education, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 221–228.

Social Work Education 149

Hokenstadt, M. C. (2003) ‘Global interdependence and international exchange’, in Models of International Collaboration, eds L. Healy, Y. Asamoah & M. C. Hockenstad, Council of Social Work Education, Alexandria, VA, pp. 133–142

Johnson, H. W. (1996) ‘International activity in undergraduate social work education in the United States’, International Social Work, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 188–199.

Kendall, K. A. (1996) ‘The challenge of internationalism in social work: past, present, and future’, in The Global–Local Link: International Challenge to Social Work Practice, ed. L. Healy, School of Social Work, University of Connecticut, pp. 3–11.

Krajewski-Jaime, E. R., Brown, K. S., Zeifert, M. & Kaukfman, E. (1996) ‘Utilizing international clinical practice to build inter-cultural sensitivity in social work students’, Journal of Multi- Cultural Social Work, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 15–29.

Lane, T., Langsted, O. & Staples, L. (2003) In Models of International Collaboration, eds L. Healy, Y. Asamoah & M. C. Hockenstad, Council of Social Work Education, Alexandria, VA, pp. 61–70

Montesano, M. (2001) ‘Thailand in 2000: shifting politics, dragging economy, troubled border’, Asian Survey, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 171–180.

Myers, J. (2003) Dominant–Minority Relations in America, Allyn Bacon, Boston. Phongpaichit, P., Piriyarangsanan, S. & Treerat, N. (1996) Challenging Social Exclusion: Rights and

Livelihood in Thailand, International Labor Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. Reichert, E. (1998) ‘The role of a study abroad course in undergraduate social work education’, The

Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 61–71. Sanders, D. S. & Pedersen, P. (1984) ‘Developing a graduate social work curriculum with an

international cross-cultural perspective’, in Education for International Social Welfare, eds D. S. Sanders & P. Pedersen, University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

Siriphant, T. & Engstrom, D. (1999) ‘Economic crisis and social welfare policy: a comparative discourse on policy formulation and reform in Thailand and the USA’, paper presented at the meeting of the Asia–Pacific Association of Social Work Education and the Regional International Federation of Social Workers Conference, Brisbane, Australia, September.

Social Development in Thailand (2000) National Report for the Session of the General Assembly on the Implementation of the Outcome of the World Summit for Social Development, Geneva, Switzerland, 26–30 June.

Traub-Werner, B. (2000) ‘Continuing education across boundaries: exploring the international exchange of social work knowledge and practices’, Professional Development, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 5–8.

US Census Bureau (2001) Profile of the Foreign-born Population in the United States: 2000, (Current Population Reports, P23-206), US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Accepted January 2005

150 D. Engstrom & L. P. Jones