ABSTRACT

During the developing process of social work education of mainland, it is inevitably for us to compare it with social work education in Hong Kong and Taiwan, which is also a heated research field the scholar circle is interested in. Mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan all belongs to Chinese social culture, however, the development of social work is completely different. Based on the questionnaire, field investigation and document collecting on social work education in mainland, the paper develops around a key problem, namely, what are the similarities and differences of social work development in mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan? And how does such comparison enlighten the social work education in mainland? The main body is divided into six chapters as following.

Chapter 1: It is the introduction dealing with the theories and documents relative to the modes of social work education at home and abroad, the logic and reasons for the research and its analyzed frame. Besides, the object of research, research methods, the value of research and the questionnaire are also defined in this charter, which lays the foundation for the following narration and discussion.

Chapter 2: It discusses the respective history and features of social work development in mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan. By comparison, it discovers that the social work education in Hong Kong and Taiwan starts with professionalization and college study. However, in mainland, it doesn't have the background of professionalization, which limits its development to a great extent. In terms of the mode of specialty development, it is in a process of divorcing from the sociology to pursuit its independence. It is hard to predict whether it would further break up or not like Taiwan's after it separates from the sociology.

Chapter 3: It conducts a comparison on the training mode, core curriculum, teaching mode of practical training of social work education in mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Speaking of its core curriculum, it just offers eight main courses in mainland, it doesn't offer any other courses on social service, human behaviors and welfare policy like in America and Taiwan. In terms of practical training, the mainland can learn Hong Kong to arrange fulltime supervisors to keep contact with institutions for practical training and to establish a set of scientific evaluating system for these supervisors, which is an effective way to solve the problems in its practical training.

Chapter 4: It makes a comparison on the relationship between social work education and government in mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan. It also discusses the similarities and differences of the government influences on social work professionalization and specialization in three places. The social worker job qualification in mainland is just the initial step for its profession verification. We can benefit from the practice of voluntary and compulsory registration in Hong Kong, business license in Taiwan and America. At present, there are only institutional regulations to standardize its development in mainland, having no special laws of higher level for it. Therefore, the Regulations for Social Workers Registration of Hong Kong, Social Workers Laws of Taiwan and other relative laws can be beneficial to its legalization.

Chapter 5: It deals with the globalization and localization of social work education in mainland together with its comparison in the above three places. In the trend of globalization, remaining its core value, the social work education curriculum planning should display its multiculturalism and pluralism. Besides, its learning content should be based on various topics and international comparison. Localization has been the heated topic in these three places, however, we fail to find any specific solutions and strategy. In addition, under the wave of globalization and localization, should the social work education in mainland keep up the world trend, stick to its localization or combine these two trends?

Chapter 6: It is the summing-up of the study. Based on its comparison with those in Hong Kong and Taiwan, it reflects how to develop the social work education in mainland. The article maintains that the key problem challenging the social work education in mainland of China is not the strong diffusion of globalization and lack of experience, but is lack of communication between localization and globalization, leading to the lost of key to social work education. The best chance for the further development of social work education in mainland of China is to transform its developing model under the pressure of globalization, namely to adopt loalization, laying a good foundation for its new development.

There are some new points in the study. Firstly, it may make some breakthroughs in the comparison on history, factors, conditions and advantages of social work education among mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Secondly, based on such comparison, it can show its different history, features and developing modes in three places, which can offer some reference for those who want to study on crossregional comparison research. Thirdly, we can have a deeper insight into ideas and feelings of students and teachers, which is helpful to improve its teaching level and offer some reference to educational circle.

Key Words: social work education teaching mode core curriculum offering practical training teaching globalization localization