Theorising in the social care sector: conceptualising theory development by frontline workers as they mobilise knowledge to improve outcomes

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Journal of Childrens Services Pub Date : 2021-07-08 DOI:10.1108/JCS-12-2020-0077
Heather Morris, C. Blewitt, Amanda O’Connor, H. Skouteris
{"title":"Theorising in the social care sector: conceptualising theory development by frontline workers as they mobilise knowledge to improve outcomes","authors":"Heather Morris, C. Blewitt, Amanda O’Connor, H. Skouteris","doi":"10.1108/JCS-12-2020-0077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe aim of this paper is to discuss how theories and practitioner-led theorising allow frontline workers to iteratively co-construct solutions that work in the real world.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper addresses the authors’ aim by proposing a social care theorising model\n\n\nFindings\nThis study adopts a socio-ecological and epistemological lens when describing theorising and unpacks what this means when frontline workers adapt their practice and programs to work effectively with individuals and families. As frontline workers move towards a grand theory that determines their overarching theoretical perspectives through which they interpret their “social work” world, leadership, organisational culture and governance become crucial in supporting their use of discretion. This support is mostly manifested as supervision and coaching, and the authors argue here that a “researcher in residence” narrows the barriers to embedding research and evidence into practice. Discretion implies the choice of a practitioner to deliver program components in a way that fits the family, which may not align with rigid program protocols, and this calls in to question how to measure fidelity and compensate for adaptation. Furthermore, it highlights the limitations of some research methods and suggests that rapid data collection and analysis may be useful during this theorising process.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper conceptualises how frontline social care workers theorise in their practice, the ways these theories are shaped and suggests an option to narrow the research–practice gap.\n","PeriodicalId":45244,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Childrens Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Childrens Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-12-2020-0077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this paper is to discuss how theories and practitioner-led theorising allow frontline workers to iteratively co-construct solutions that work in the real world. Design/methodology/approach This paper addresses the authors’ aim by proposing a social care theorising model Findings This study adopts a socio-ecological and epistemological lens when describing theorising and unpacks what this means when frontline workers adapt their practice and programs to work effectively with individuals and families. As frontline workers move towards a grand theory that determines their overarching theoretical perspectives through which they interpret their “social work” world, leadership, organisational culture and governance become crucial in supporting their use of discretion. This support is mostly manifested as supervision and coaching, and the authors argue here that a “researcher in residence” narrows the barriers to embedding research and evidence into practice. Discretion implies the choice of a practitioner to deliver program components in a way that fits the family, which may not align with rigid program protocols, and this calls in to question how to measure fidelity and compensate for adaptation. Furthermore, it highlights the limitations of some research methods and suggests that rapid data collection and analysis may be useful during this theorising process. Originality/value This paper conceptualises how frontline social care workers theorise in their practice, the ways these theories are shaped and suggests an option to narrow the research–practice gap.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
理论化在社会护理部门:概念化理论发展的一线工人,因为他们调动知识,以改善结果
本文的目的是讨论理论和实践者主导的理论化如何使一线工作者迭代地共同构建在现实世界中工作的解决方案。设计/方法/方法本文通过提出社会关怀理论化模型来解决作者的目的。研究结果本研究在描述理论化时采用了社会生态学和认识论的视角,并揭示了当一线工作者调整他们的实践和计划以有效地与个人和家庭合作时,这意味着什么。随着一线工作者走向一个宏大的理论,这个理论决定了他们解释“社会工作”世界的总体理论视角,领导力、组织文化和治理在支持他们使用自由裁量权方面变得至关重要。这种支持主要表现为监督和指导,作者在这里认为,“常驻研究员”缩小了将研究和证据纳入实践的障碍。自由裁量意味着从业者以适合家庭的方式交付项目组件的选择,这可能与严格的项目协议不一致,这就提出了如何衡量保真度和补偿适应性的问题。此外,它强调了一些研究方法的局限性,并表明快速数据收集和分析可能在这一理论化过程中有用。原创性/价值本文概念化了一线社会关怀工作者在实践中如何理论化,这些理论是如何形成的,并提出了缩小研究与实践差距的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
“Friendly, local and welcoming” – evaluation of a community mental health early intervention service From “intimate-insider” to “relative-outsider”: an autoethnographic account of undertaking social work research in one’s own “backyard” Effective child well-being practices, barriers and priority actions: survey findings from service providers and policymakers in 22 countries during COVID-19 Child First and the end of ‘bifurcation’ in youth justice? Why are there higher rates of children looked after in Wales?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1