HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 1 Is there a difference between bungie jumping and field supervision? Ruth Webber Australian Catholic University, Melbourne In 1997 I was awarded a National Teaching Fellowship from the Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development to research ways in which University field education programs in youth work are structured and executed. The study that took place in 1998 included visits to 34 institutions including four peak and/or professional organisations, 14 Universities and two community colleges and 14 community organisations who supervise students. A range of programs were examined and compared eg. nursing, social work, psychology, sociology. Staff, students and field supervisors were interviewed either separately or in small focus groups. A critical issue that emerged was in reference to supervision of students while on placement. This paper will delineate a number of problems that were especially prominent. If human service providers are to receive adequate training, University programs need to provide appropriate, on site informal education for them. While recognising the need for skills training, course providers must not ignore the need to link skills with the crucial theoretical concepts that under-pinning the discipline and in a way that promotes reflectivity. A most effective way to achieve this is by providing well-organised and skilfully executed supervision sessions by trained staff with clear and well-documented guidelines. Is there a difference between bungie jumping and field supervision? Yes, bungie jumping is always well organised, ‘clients’ are fully briefed and supervisors must receive significant training before they can conduct a session and everyone knows the intended outcome. Unfortunately this is not always the case in field supervision. In many instances students fear field education more than they do bungie jumping. Fortunately some students have outstanding experiences in field supervision, which have a long lasting impact on their practice as a professional worker. There are a variety of terms used for experiential learning while on placement including field education, practicum, field placement and internship. For the purpose of this paper the term field education is used to cover each of these terms. In this paper, examples of excellent practice in the area of field supervision will be provided and some common short falls delineated. In 1997 I was awarded a National Teaching Fellowship from the Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development to study the field work component of the training of youth workers in England, United States of America and Canada (Webber, 1998). The study, which took place in 1998, included visits to 34 institutions including four peak and/or professional organisations involved in the setting of policy and standards. These included 14 Universities (19 separate programs), two community colleges (tertiary) who conduct field education programs for students, and 14 community organisations who accept students on placement. A range of programs from different professional groups was examined eg. nursing, social work, psychology, sociology. Interviews were conducted with directors of peak bodies, academics, placement officers, managers and/or coordinators of community organisations, field supervisors and students on placement. The manuals and course outlines for all 21 programs were analysed. The contents of the manuals and course outlines were compared with the actual practices that took place. A number of factors have been identified as necessary for conducting appropriate field education programs (Brennan 1982; Jeffs 1996; Martin 1996; Szirom 1995; Tash 1984;