Running head: 1

Joseph A. Cerniglia

University of South Carolina

2

Joseph Cerniglia listened carefully to his site supervisor, Cassandra Marbury, thinking

about the contradictory directions she was giving. How do I serve my clients and student

colleagues within a school system that seems to oppose every effort I make and a lack of

effective, professional supervision? What implications was this field experience going to have on

my continued education throughout the BSW program and, later, in the MSW program? I’m

worried not getting the experience that I need!

GREENSBORO COMMUNITY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP (GCSP)

Freedman Elementary School (FES), in Greensboro, North Carolina was one of five sites

in the city with which GCSP hosted student achievement coordinators and undergraduate social

work interns. GCSP was a non-profit agency which worked with students and families in schools

with high rates of academic underachievement, behavioral incidences, or poor attendance.

Specifically, FES received referrals from parents, teachers, administrators, and students for a

caseload of 65 students.

GCSP was run by an Executive Director, Tracy Johnson, under whom the five Student

Achievement Coordinators operated. Cassandra Marbury was the Student Achievement

Coordinator for FES. She had fifteen years of experience as a Teaching Assistant prior to coming

to GCSP where she had been for the past 2 years. Although she held no formal degree, and had

no supervisory experience, she was, nevertheless, tasked with managing three social work interns

at FES.

FREEDMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

FES had a student population of 648 students predominantly made up of African-

American students from low-income households in an area facing economic downturn. Not only

3

were 89% of the students African-American, but also 89% of the school’s students were eligible

for the Federal Free or Reduced Price Lunch Program. Joseph made note of these statistics prior

to beginning his work at FES and hoped he could focus some of his attention on the macro-level

changes needed to provide an environment conducive to educational achievement. FES had been

undergoing a dramatic influx of transient students whose families had been forced into the area

by economic conditions. The main thoroughfare was filled with pawn shops, title loan providers,

fast food restaurants, and Walmart.

FES did not seem particularly interested in having GCSP at its school. The 4 team

members were placed in a single office wedged in between the Guidance Counselor and School

Psychologist. After that, the social work interns moved to the Multi-Purpose room but were

shortly evicted due to the space being needed by the Reading Interventionist Team. Thereafter,

the social work interns moved into the library, but this, soon, became unworkable because the

library was often used for classes, testing, and other purposes. Finally, the social work interns

were able to make use of a small reading cove in the corner of the cafeteria that was being

unused. Once a small table and chairs were placed in the cove, Joseph thought there’s not much

room left for the students!

JOSEPH CERNIGLIA, CASE MANAGEMENT INTERN

Joseph Cerniglia had never considered working with children and when he was first

assigned to complete his field education at FES, he was anxious. How do I apply what I’ve

learned in classes to working with children? The only thing I know about children is what I

learned from being one. In fact, Joseph’s real interest was in macro policy and advocacy work.

He resolved to keep an open mind, however, and to use this experience to expand his level of

experience.

4

SENIOR YEAR – FALL SEMESTER

Joseph was also hopeful to explore ways to mitigate the risk factors facing students at

FES within his field practicum seminar class led by Professor Corbina. Due to a clerical delay

with GCSP, Joseph’s field placement wasn’t going to start for three weeks after the semester

began.

The first major challenge Joseph faced was building a caseload of students. There were

four GCSP team members and because of the GCSP contract requirement of a 10% caseload, Ms.

Marbury tasked Joseph with developing a caseload of, at minimum, sixteen 5th-grade students.

Initially, Joseph was excited about the opportunity to develop this caseload on his own and set

out to make contact with the four teachers to seek referrals for students in need of intervention.

One teacher offered a list of four students for Joseph to work with, but the remaining teachers

offered no suggestions.

Joseph was pleased to have at least four students to target for intervention and set out to

seek informed consent from their parents or guardians. He immediately began to put together an

enrollment packet explaining GCSP, its services, and the types of interventions that took place.

He contacted those parents or guardians for whom he could get in touch with by phone and let

them know to expect the packet. For those parents and guardians he couldn’t make contact with,

he sent the packet home with the student along with a hand-written note asking them to call him

at their convenience.

In his next supervision meeting, Joseph explained his difficulty in building his caseload

when Ms. Marbury suggested, “Why don’t you go into the classrooms and observe students you

think might need intervention?” Joseph thought I’m really not comfortable doing that. My

5

presence would really only serve as a distraction from the instruction, and the teachers already

seem unwilling to let me in.

Joseph brought this issue up in Professor Corbina’s class, making mention of the lack of

access to students, the seemingly obstructive attitudes of the teachers and administration, and

Ms. Marbury’s suggestion that contradicted Joseph’s understanding of effective case

management. Professor Corbina made several suggestions:

1. Gain allies among the teachers by catering to some of their specific needs.

Joseph immediately called to mind his Generalist Social Work Practice with

Groups class and the theory of a mutual aid model he had learned. I could do

my group project proposal on a teacher support group and actually submit it

to the principal for approval!

2. Sign up to work with the afterschool program at the school, maybe there the

teachers have less pressures placed on them by federal and state guidelines.

3. Start a voluntary club for students during Saturday hours.

Joseph liked some of these ideas, but felt like Professor Corbina wasn’t taking the issues

seriously. However, he discussed them with Ms. Marbury. She declared, “Our school is closed on

Saturdays, so the club idea won’t work. But you have my permission to work on the other two.”

Joseph knew these ideas were going to take some time and work so he decided to, also, meet

with each teacher individually to offer a better explanation of the types of services he could offer,

specifically his goal to not intrude on their instruction and that whatever interventions took place,

he would be very careful not to distract from their goals.

At the same time, Joseph was very glad to at least have four students on his caseload and

set out to conduct an initial assessment. In preparation for these meetings, Joseph asked Ms.

6

Marbury to provide him with the grades, testing scores, attendance records, and behavioral

reports for these students. Ms. Marbury responded by saying, “We don’t have access to the

school’s database yet, you’re going to have to hold off on meeting with your kids for now.”

Joseph was infuriated: It’s already two months into my field placement and I haven’t even met

with a single student.

After two more weeks, Ms. Marbury was able to obtain the requested information and

Joseph began his work. One of the students that was supposed to be on his caseload had already

transferred to another school, but Joseph was ready to begin with the three students he did have.

For the rest of the semester, Joseph was able to meet with these 3 students once a week for thirty

minutes. He offered them services such as academic assistance and tutoring, and what Joseph

saw as a break from the monotonous routine of elementary school. Each of the students showed

academic gains.

Joseph also worked on developing a proposal for a teacher support group following the

mutual aid model. Joseph worked with his student colleagues on developing an evidence-based

proposal but, on submission to the school’s principal, the proposal was rejected. As the end of the

semester approached Joseph summarized I may not be making the macro-level impact I was

hoping to make on this school, but I am clearly having a positive effect on these three students.

SENIOR YEAR – SPRING SEMESTER

Two weeks into the semester Ms. Marbury offered a harsh critique: “You have got to

build your caseload and spend less time sitting around doing nothing. I need you to stop making

excuses and get in those classrooms.” Joseph initially thought, she’s afraid of losing her job and

she’s lashing out at me. But, Joseph decided to use her words as an opportunity for introspection.

What ways have I fallen short in my advocacy for my students and those other students in need

7

of services? Joseph resolved to honestly appraise his efficacy and develop a plan to overcome his

limitations.

Joseph was sure the climate of the school was the main barrier to his success. For

example, on one occasion when Joseph attempted to gain access to a student, he was met with

this scenario from that classroom’s teacher:

Joseph visited the classroom and asked to see “Johnny.” Johnny’s teacher asked,

“What for?” After Joseph explained his purpose, the teacher informed the entire

classroom, “Johnny, Mr. Joseph is going to help you because you’re doing so

poorly in class. You’ll meet with him every Wednesday for 20 minutes.” Johnny’s

classmates cackled as Johnny retreated to his desk in embarrassment. This wasn’t

the first time one of Joseph’s students faced bullying because of his work with

them. Joseph thought, I’ve got to find a better way to meet with my students so

they don’t feel so ostracized.

By the midpoint of the second semester, Joseph still only had 4 students he was working

with, and despite significant gains on the part of each student, he felt demoralized and burned

out. I have failed to develop a caseload that meets the expectations of my agency. I have learned

many of the practice skills demanded of my academic program, but I’ve also learned that I never

want to work in a school again!

PROBLEM STATEMENT

The central problem faced by Joseph was threefold:

First, Joseph lacked supervision from a qualified field instructor and the field instructor

he did have had no managerial experience and a fundamental lack of knowledge about the field

of social work. Ms. Marbury was passionate and motivated, to be sure, but failed to give clear,

8

reasonable guidelines by which Joseph could be expected to adhere. Joseph faced the dilemma of

addressing these issues with the Executive Director at GCSP, but that could result in her being

fired or punished.

Second, the environment of this particular elementary school was unappreciative of and

unwilling to permit Joseph’s working with students on an efficient, effective, or consistent basis.

Joseph had become burned out due to the complete lack of cooperation on the part of the

teachers, staff, and administration.

Third, Joseph did not see a means or an opportunity for intervention by his field liaison at

the College and the multifactorial barriers to his success sapped him of the motivation to seek out

change. Professor Corbina, in Joseph’s assessment, was overwhelmed with her workload. She

appeared to be uninterested in taking Joseph’s concerns seriously. Joseph didn’t know who to

turn to for help.