Repositioning documents in social research

In matters of social research sociologists and other social scientists have tended to view documents primarily as sources of evidence and as receptacles of inert content.The key strategies for data exploration have consequently been associated with various styles of content or thematic analysis. Even when discourse analysis has been recommended, there has been a marked tendency to deal with records, files, and the like, primarily as containers - things to be read, understood, and categorized. In this article, however, the author seeks to demonstrate that by focussing on the functioning of documents instead of content, sociology can embrace a much wider range of approaches to both data collection and analysis. Indeed, the adoption of such a programme encourages researchers to see documents as active agents in the world, and to view documentation as a key component of dynamic networks rather than as a set of static and immutable 'things'.

Exploring Innovative Methodologies in time and place to analyze child protection documents as elements of practice

This paper aims to demonstrate how a derived approach to case file analysis, influenced by the work of Michel Foucault and Dorothy E.Smith, can offer innovative means by which to study the relations between discourse and practices in child welfare. The article explores text-based forms of organization in histories of child protection in Finland and in Northern Ireland. It is focused on case file records in different organizational child protection contexts in two jurisdictions. Building on a previous article (Author 1 & 2: 2011), we attempt to demonstrate the potential of how the relations between practices and discourses –a majorly important theme for understanding child welfare social work – can be effectively analysed using a combination of two approaches This article is based on three different empirical studies from our two jurisdictions Northern Ireland (UK) and Finland; one study used Foucault; the other Smith and the third study sought to combine the methods. This article seeks to report on ongoing work in developing, for child welfare studies, ‘a history that speaks back’ as we have described it.