This chapter will draw on recent literature and practice experience to discuss the nature of field education in Aotearoa New Zealand. Social work education in this country is provided by academic institutions that are approved by the Social Workers Registration Board. The field education curriculum is therefore shaped by both the regulatory body and the tertiary institutions. Significant numbers of students undertake field education annually which places pressure on industry and raises concerns as to the quality of student experience. Although the importance of field education is undisputed it remains poised in a liminal space between the tertiary education and social service sectors where it is not sufficiently resourced by either. This affects the provision of practice placements as well as the establishment of long-term cross-sector partnerships. Significant events such as the 2010 and 2011 Christchurch earthquakes and recent terrorist attacks have exposed students to different field education experiences signalling the need for programmes to be responsive. Examples of creative learning opportunities in diverse environments, including in indigenous contexts, will be described. Drawing upon recent research, we comment on student and field educator experiences of supervision in the field. Recommendations to further develop social work field education in Aotearoa New Zealand relate to resourcing, infrastructure and quality, support for field educators, and assessment.
Wellington is located on a fault line which will inevitably, one day be impacted by a big earthquake. Due to where this fault line geographically sits, the central city and southern suburbs may be cut off from the rest of the region, effectively making these areas an ‘island’. This issue has absorbed a lot of attention, in particular at a large scale by many different fields: civil engineering, architecture, infrastructure planning & design, policymaking. Due to heightened awareness, and evolved school of practice, contemporary landscape architects deal with post-disaster design – Christchurch, NZ has seen this. A number of landscape architects work with nature, following increased application of ecological urbanism, and natural systems thinking, most notably at larger scales. To create parks that are designed to flood, or implement projects to protect shorelines. A form of resilience less often considered is how design for the small scale - people’s 1:1 relationship with their immediate context in exterior space - can be influential in forming a resilient response to the catastrophe of a major earthquake. This thesis intends to provide a response to address the shift of scales, as a paradigm for preparation and recovery. After a large-scale earthquake, state and civic policies and agencies may or subsequentially not go into action. The most important thinking and acting will be what happens in the minds, and the immediate needs, of each and every person; and how they act communally. This is considered in general social terms in state and civic education programmes of civil defence, for example, but much less considered in how the physical design of the actual spaces we inhabit day-to-day can educate us to be mentally prepared to help each other survive a catastrophe. Specifically, the identification of design of typologies can provide these educative functions. Typology inherently a physical form or manipulation of a generic and substantial prototype applicable in contexts is something that exists in the mind. Working with the physical and social appearance and experience of typologies can also/will change people’s minds. Socially, and economically driven, the community-building power of community gardening is well-proven and documented, and a noticeably large part of contemporary landscape architecture. The designs of this thesis will focus on community gardening specifically to form typologies of resilience preparation and response to disaster. The foundation will remain at the small scale of the local community. The specific question this thesis poses: Can we design local typologies in landscape architecture to integrate community gardens, with public space by preparing for and acting as recovery from a disaster?
