Applications to social work programmes in England: students as consumers?

Jill Manthorpe, Jo Moriarty, Shereen Hussein, Martin Stevens, Endellion Sharpe, Joan Orme, Gillian MacIntyre, Pam Green Lister, Beth R. Crisp

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    8 Citations (Scopus)
    5 Downloads (Pure)


    One of the most resounding impacts of the introduction of the new social work degree in England in 2003 has been an increase in the number of applications to social work courses. However, the processes used by applicants to reach decisions about where to study social work are little understood. This article reports data from six preparatory focus groups and four interviews (n = 38), 17 focus group interviews with first year students (n = 112) from nine social work programmes run in six universities, and 2,606 responses to three online surveys administered to first year students, which were collected as part of the national Evaluation of the New Social Work Degree in England funded by the Department of Health. They show that students use a range of sources to find out about social work education, with rising reliance on electronic media as an information resource. Although the majority cites convenience of location as the chief reason for selecting a particular university, academic reputation appears to be growing in importance. Observations from these data are discussed in the context of consumer behaviour in higher education and in social work education at a time when universities are developing marketing strategies to compete for students.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)584-598
    Number of pages14
    JournalSocial Work Education
    Issue number6
    Early online date6 Oct 2009
    Publication statusPublished - 2010


    • admissions
    • evaluation
    • higher education
    • staff training
    • development
    • students


    Dive into the research topics of 'Applications to social work programmes in England: students as consumers?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this