Critical elements in evaluating and developing practice in social work

Ilse Julkunen

doi:10.1921/swssr.v15i1.509

Authors

Ilse Julkunen

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1921/swssr.v15i1.509

Keywords:

evaluation practice, social work, development, reflexivity, deliberation, co-evolution

Abstract

Evaluation research deals with practical questions of how practice is being carried out, how it can be studied and evaluated and how the outcomes can be communicated with the practice. In this article critical elements in evaluation practices are scrutinized from an evolutive perspective. It draws attention to the role of the researcher, the knowledge production and dissemination phases and how these have changed. It highlights the importance on practice connectedness and how this challenges the knowledge production processes. And concludes by stating that to be able to learn from practice, evaluation needs to evolve towards a more deliberative approach and have an active role both in science and society.

References

Alasoini, T., Korhonen, S-M., Lahtonen M., Ramstad E., Rouhiainen N., Suominen K. (2006): Tuntosarveja ja tulkkeja. Oppimisverkostot työelämän kehittämistoiminnan uutena muotona. Helsinki: Tykes raportteja 50.\nArnkil, R. (2006): Hyvien käytäntöjen levittäminen EU:n kehittämisstrategiana. In Seppänen-Järvelä, R. & Karjalainen, V. (eds) Kehittämistyön risteyksiä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nBurbules, N. (1993): Dialogue in Teaching. Theory and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.\nChen, H. (2005): Practical Program Evaluation. Assess and Improve Program Planning, Implementation and Effectiveness. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\nConnolly W.E. (2006): Political Science & Ideology. Atherton Press.\nDahlberg, M., Vedung, E. (2001): Demokrati och brukarutvärdering. (Democracy and user evaluation) Lund: Studentlitteratur.\nDonaldson, S.I., Scriven M. (2003): Evaluating Social Programs and problems: Visions for the New Millenium.\nEnnals R. (2005): Rapid restructuring of European working life – likely health effects and options for preventive action. Paper presented at the Anglo-Swedish High Level Seminar on Promoting Occupational and Public Health, Stockholm, October 2005.\nFook, J. (2002): Social work. Critical theory and practice. London: Sage Publications.\nGadamer H-G. (1981): Reason in the age of Science. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.\nGadamer, H-G. (1989): Truth and Method. New York: Continuum.\nGustavsen, B. (1985): Workplace Reform and Democratic Dialogue. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 6 (4) pp. 461-479.\nGustavsen, B. (1996): Action research, democratic dialogue and the issue of ’critical mass’ in Change. Qualitative Inquiry 2 (1) pp. 90-103.\nGustavsen, B. (1998): From experiments to Network Building: trend in use of research for reconstructing working life. Human Relations 1 (3) pp. 431-448.\nGustavsen, Björn, Finne, Håkan & Oscarsson, B. (2001): Creating Connectedness. The role of social research in innovation policy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.\nHakkarainen, K. (2001): Aikuisten oppiminen verkossa. In Sallila, P. & Kalli, P. (eds), Verkot ja teknologia aikuisopiskelun tukena. Aikuiskasvatuksen 42. vuosikirja (pp. 16-52). Jyväskylä: Gummerus.\nHammersley, M. (1992): Deconstructing the qualitative-quantitative divide. In Brannen J (ed.) Mixing Methods: qualitative and quantitative research, Aldershot: Avebury.\nHammersley, M. (1995): The Politics of Social Research. London: Routledge.\nHildrum, J., Liavåg Strand G.L. (2007): Overcoming challenges in Writing about Action Research. The Promise of the Development Story. Springer Netherlands.\nHirsikoski R. (2007) In Hänninen Kaija, Julkunen Ilse, Högnabba Stina, Thomassén Tarya (eds) (2006) Asiakkaat oppimisen käynnistäjinä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nHänninen K., Julkunen I., Högnabba S. & Thomassén, T. (2006): Asiakkaat oppimisen käynnistäjinä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nHögnabba, S., Julkunen, I., Kainulainen, S., Korteniemi, P., Lindqvist T., Peitola, P. (2005): Steps into Realistic Evaluation in Social Work in Finland. In Peter Sommerfeld (ed.) Evidence-Based Social Work - Towards a New Professionalism? Bern: Peter Lang.\nHögnabba, S. & Paananen, T. (2007): In Hänninen Kaija, Julkunen Ilse, Högnabba Stina, Thomassén Tarya (eds) (2006) Asiakkaat oppimisen käynnistäjinä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nJackson, M.C. (2005): Systems thinking. Creative holism for managers. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.\nJenkins, B. & Grey A.(1992): Codes of Accountability in the new public sector.\nJulkunen, I., Strandell, H., Kangas, H. (eds) (2000): Kunnon elämä…Olisi hyvä jossain. SSKH Skrifter 12/2000.\nKarvinen-Niinikoski, S. (2005): Research orientation and expertise in social work /challenges for social work education. European Journal of Social Work, 8 (3) pp. 259-271.\nKrogstrup, H. (2004): User Evaluation in Practice. In Julkunen, I. (ed.) Perspectives, models and methods in evaluating the welfare sector - a Nordic approach. FinSoc Working Papers 4/2004.\nKrogstrup, H. (1996): Brugerinddragelse i kvalitetsvurdering af sociale indsatsområder. (User involvement in quality assessment within the social sector) Nordisk Socialt arbejde 2/1996. Scandinavian University Press, pp. 114-129.\nKrogstrup, H. (1997): User Participation in Quality Assessment. Evaluation, 3 (2) pp. 205-224. Sage Publications.\nLofland, J., Lofland L. (1995): Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Wadsworth: Belmont.\nMönkkönen, K. (2007): Vuorovaikutus. Dialoginen asiakastyö. Helsinki:Edita.\nPawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997): Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.\nRajavaara, M. (2007): Vaikuttavuusyhteiskunta. Sosiaalisten olojen arvostelusta vaikutusten todentamiseen. Helsinki: Kansaneläkelaitos.\nReason, P., Torbert W. (2001): Toward a transformational science: a further look at the scientific merits of action research.\nSchwandt, Thomas (2002): Evaluation practice reconsidered. Peter Lang Publishing.\nSeppänen-Järvelä, R., Karjalainen V. (eds) (2006): Kehittämistyön risteyksiä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nShaw, Ian (2006): Practitioner Evaluation at Work. American Journal of Evaluation 27 (1) pp. 44-63.\nShotter, John, Gustavsen Björn (1999): The role of dialogue conferences in the development of learning regions: Doing from within our lives together what we cannot do apart. Stockholm: Centre for Advanced Studies in Leadership, Stockholm, School of Economics.\nShotter, John (1999): Must we work out how to act jointly? Theory and Psychology 9, pp. 129-133.\nShotter, John (2004): Goethe and the refiguring of intellectual inquiry: from aboutness-thinking to withness-thinking in everyday life. University of New Hampshire.\nSvensson, Lennart, Göran Brolin, Per-Erik Ellström, Örjen Widegren (2002): Interaktiv forskning - för utveckling av teori och praktik. Stockholm: Vetenskaplig skriftserie för Arbetslivsinstitutet.\nThomasén T (2007): In Hänninen Kaija, Julkunen Ilse, Högnabba Stina, Thomassén Tarya (eds) (2006) Asiakkaat oppimisen käynnistäjinä. Stakes: Helsinki.\nVedung, Evert (2004): Utvärderingens bölja. Stakes: Helsinki.\nWenger, E. (1998): Communities of Practice. Learning as a Social System.\nWhite, S. (2001): Auto-ethnography as reflexive inquiry: the research act as self-surveillance In Qualitative social work research: method and content. Sage, London.\nWittgenstein, L. (1980): Culture and Value. Oxford: Blackwell.\n