What Game Are We Playing? The Learning Relationship in Social Work Placement, Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 13(2), 283-310.

Recalling a famous book by Berne, Games People Play, the title of the article refers to the concept of “relational game” proposed by the author to def ine “an ongoing series of complementary ulterior transactions superficially plausible but with a concealed motivation” (1964, p. 84), which characterise human relationships. Previously, Bateson (1955) had addressed the theme of the game, elaborating the revolutionary concept of meta-communication to identify the communicative exchanges through which the interlocutors continuously define roles and power in the relationship. Crozier & Friedberg (1977) point out that full communication with the other is impossible: every relationship is strategic and involves a component of power, even if removed or sublimated. Accordingly, every time people activate repeated communicative exchanges they are participating in relational games, often unconsciously, and tend to respond to each other’s expectations by applying tacit and frequently collusive rules. Goffman points out that in the ritual of social interaction, in order to save the appearances, “each participant is allowed to play the role they have chosen for themselves” (1967, p. 11), without generally being challenged. Accepting that mode of communication or tacitly proposing new rules, i.e. other relational games, depends on each of the participants.The article presents the findings of a study carried out in Italy and aimed at exploring the learning relationship activated between supervisor and student in social work education placement. Through the analysis of some barriers and opportunities, the research aims to contribute to the debate on the topic and to improve future responses by all actors involved in the organisation of learning in the field (scholars, supervisors, students, university teachers, university tutors, social service organisations). Based on the scientific debate, the first part tackles some topics that make up the theoretical frame of reference useful to define the learning relationship and gives some contextual information on social work education in Italy. The second part presents the study design and the analysis of the answers to an online questionnaire administered in the last months of 2020. The survey was completed by a self-selected non-probabilistic sample of 487 supervising social workers, and responses are therefore not statistically representative of the whole population of Italian social workers, i.e. the 45,054 social workers registered in the Professional Register on 20 September 2020. The second part presents the study design and the analysis of the answers to an online questionnaire administered in the last months of 2020 to 487 social workers who served as placement supervisors. The survey was completed by a self-selected non-probabilistic sample of 487 supervising social workers, and responses are therefore not statistically representative of the whole population of Italian social workers, i.e. the 45,054 social workers registered in the Professional Register on 20 September 2020. The guiding research questions were the following: What are the risks for supervisors in the learning relationship? Are social workers aware of such risks? During the Covid-19 pandemic, when a distance learning placement was activated, did this condition change the learning relationship? If so, how? The online survey included 11 questions including a suitable tool composed by eight types of relational games in order to identify the risks of collusion encountered by supervisors. The third part, finally, concerns the discussion of the findings and final conclusions. The first point to highlight is that the research findings confirm that the learning process in practical traineeship is situated and co-constructed through the relationship between supervisor and student within a specific organisation. The second result is the discrepancy that many social workers revealed between the assumption of responsibility for supervision and improvisation in the exercise of the supervisor’s function, often in hostile organisational conditions. The third consideration that can be drawn from the research is that practical traineeship, considered as a “situated” phase of the university training pathway, is an essential part that should be supported, planned, and monitored like all other educational activities.