The Development of Social Work as a Speciality and the Profession in Estonia

For Estonia and its people social work is one of the vitally important fields that had to be built up from almost nothing since independence was regained in 1991. During Soviet times social work and social workers did not receive the necessary attention. Severe social problems were denied and kept hidden since according to official communist ideology, life in the Soviet Union was the best in the world and getting better all the time. Social workers did not receive specialised education and their functions were to be carried out by the workers of trade unions and the party, by teachers and by the workers of the personnel departments. In the 1990s big changes, having also an effect on social life, took place in the development of Estonian society. Concepts such as social work and social worker were rediscovered in Estonia. There are certain prerequisites for the success of any activity (including social work). One of the most important ones is being a professional, a worker with thorough preparation. Social work as an occupation requires specialised academic education, which is based on theoretical knowledge and practical skills that have been acquired through theoretical knowledge. Specialised knowledge is a foundation for attaining a specialised qualification. However, at the same time one has to keep in mind that social work as an occupation is constantly changing, there is no absolute knowledge - everything is relative, dynamic and changing (Tamm, 1998). The changing nature of the activity requires reflection by a social worker, who also has to be able to evaluate his/her work and its basis and learn from experiences. Academic specialised education implies also the development of a new professional identity and higher levels of competence. This underlines the necessity of specialised education.

Skehill, Caroline: History of the Present of Child Protection and Welfare Social Work in Ireland

This unique book has at least three significant strengths. First, it offers an interesting angle on Irish social history and how social work and child protection and welfare services have been developed from the 1860s to the 1990s. Secondly, the author uses the 'history of the present' method of Michel Foucault in a promising manner, incorporating his concepts of archaeology, genealogy and discourse. Most of all she has succeeded in further developing Michel Foucault's concepts and strategies of writing. Although this is a national history, she has made a remarkable contribution to social work research. Her conceptual and methodological innovations are undoubtedly fully applicable to other social and societal contexts. This book is recommendable to those who want to implement genealogical analysis in their own research. Thirdly, her skill in writing and the way she renders the difficult language and concepts of Michel Foucault accessible means that here is a book that can also be read with ease by those whose mother tongue is not English. From the viewpoint of women and women's research the focus in this book is minor but if you are interested in social work history and genealogical analysis, this is a book you have to read!

Social Work and a New Social Order - Challenging Neo-liberalism's Erosion of Solidarity

The world in which social work operates today is a very different world from that in which most of us took their social work training, and the changes we are facing are profound. This paper argues that these changes are not merely a regime change in social policy but that they are essentially about a re-ordering of social relationships and attempt to model them on neo-liberal ideas. In view of these pressures it is understandable that social workers often try to ignore those changes and withdraw into a private world of therapeutic relationships in which the methods they trained in are made to be still valid, or they simply go along with new service delivery designs without asking too many questions. Both reactions fail to question what the "social" can still mean in the light of these changes and how social workers can fulfil their mandate to be responsible for the social dimension of public life. Nothing less than a head-on challenge of the basic presuppositions of neo-liberalism (Willke 2003) and their manifold applications to social service delivery systems will thereby suffice.

Social Work and the Quality of Life Politics - A Critical Assessment

The feature of this paper is a critical assessment of the current discourses about quality of life (QoL) and their implications for Social Work. At first it pictures some major historical backgrounds of the discussion on the improvement of life quality as an aim of societal development. In particular three crucial shifts in the politics of QoL - its 'individualisation', its 'informalisation' and its 'culturalisation' - and their implications for Social Work are critically examined theoretically and empirically referring to the results of an own community-study. The paper concludes with an alternative suggestion reflecting the idea of an 'autonomy-based' approach of democratic equality.

Social work and the Bologna Process

As social work training in Europe is characterized by progressive 'academisation' it is directly affected by the changes in university structures triggered by the Bologna Process. This means, however, simultaneously that all the ambiguities surrounding social work education, such as the level and rank it has achieved as an independent academic discipline, the relationship between theory and practice and the duality of training patterns at university and non-university institutions, are becoming more starkly apparent and need to be addressed with renewed urgency in practically all countries that have subscribed to the transformation initiative.

Book Review of “The Origins of Social Work: Continuity and Change”. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, by Malcolm Payne

Malcolm Payne’s latest work proposes to survey the continuity and change in social work from its inception and origins, up until the present day. In order to do justice to the theme, its author could have concentrated on developing a narrative of a national enterprise, or restricted himself to a regional analysis (Western European Social Work) or opt instead for a more narrowly focused cultural exploration, White Anglo-Saxon Social Work (WASSW). One can only infer that limiting himself in this fashion would have struck the author as parochial, or rather, that only a truly global enterprise could satisfy his capacious mind. One is left to marvel at the invocation of Darwin’s great work and wonder what was the process of the author’s “natural” selection of this material.

Landscapes of Education and the New Role of Social Work International Models of How to Combine Formal, Non-formal and Informal Education

Landscapes of education are a new topic within the debate about adequate and just education and human development for everybody. In particular, children and youths from social classes affected by poverty, a lack of prospects or minimal schooling are a focal group that should be offered new approaches and opportunities of cognitive and social development by way of these landscapes of education. It has become apparent that the traditional school alone does not suffice to meet this need. There is no doubt that competency-based orientation and employability are core areas with the help of which the generation now growing up will manage the start of its professional career. In addition and by no means less important, the development involves individual, social, cultural and societal perspectives that can be combined under the term of human development. In this context, the Capability Approach elaborated by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum has developed a more extensive concept of human development and related it to empirical instruments. Using the analytic concept of individual capabilities and societal opportunities they shaped a socio-political formula that should be adapted in particular to modern social work. Moreover, the Capability Approach offers a critical foil with regard to further development and revision of institutionalised approaches in education and human development.

Beyond the Pro and Contra of Evidence-Based Practice: Reflections on a Recurring Dilemma at the Core of Social Work

Currently, social work is witnessing a quite polarized debate about what should be the basis for good practice. Simply stated, the different attempts to define the required basis for effective and accountable interventions in social work practice can be grouped in two paradigmatic positions, which seem to be in strong opposition to each other. On the one hand the highly influential evidence based practice movement highlights the necessity to base practice interventions on proven effectiveness from empirical research. Despite some variations, such as between narrow conceptions of evidence based practice (see e.g. McNeece/Thyer, 2004) and broader approaches to it (see e.g. Gambrill, 1999, 2001, 2008), the evidence based practice movement embodies a positivist orientation and more explicitly scientific aspirations of social work by using positivistic empirical strategies. Critics of the evidence based practice movement argue that its narrow epistemological assumptions are not appropriate for the understanding of social phenomena and that evidence based guidelines to practice are insufficient to deal with the extremely complex activities social work practice requires in different and always somewhat unique practice situations (Webb, 2001; Gray & Mc Donald, 2006; Otto, Polutta &Ziegler, 2009). Furthermore critics of evidence based practice argue that it privileges an uncritical and a-political positivism which seems highly problematic in the current climate of welfare state reforms, in which the question ‘what works’ is highly politicized and the legitimacy of professional social work practice is being challenged maybe more than ever before (Kessl, 2009). Both opponents and proponents of evidence based practice argue on the epistemological, the methodological and the ethical level to sustain their point of view and raise fundamental questions about the real nature of social work practice, so that one could get the impression that social work is really at the crossroads between two very different conceptions of social work practice and its further professional development (Stepney, 2009). However, this article is not going to merely rehearse the pro and contra of different positions that are being invoked in the debate about evidence based practice. Instead it aims to go further by identifying the dilemmas underlying these positions which - so it is argued – re-emerge in the debate about evidence based practice, but which are older than this debate. They concern the fundamental ambivalence modern professionalization processes in social work were subjected to from their very beginnings.

What is Practice Research in Social Work - Definitions, Barriers and Possibilities

Practice is subject to increasing pressure to demonstrate its ability to achieve outcomes required by public policy makers. As part of this process social work practice has to engage with issues around advancing knowledge-based learning processes in a close collaboration with education and research based perspectives. This has given rise to approaches seeking to combine research methodology, field research and practical experience. Practice research is connected to both “the science of the concrete” – a field of research oriented towards subjects more than objects and “mode 2 knowledge production” – an application-oriented research where frameworks and findings are discussed by a number of partners. Practice research is defined into two approaches: practice research – collaboration between practice and research – and practitioner research – processes controlled and accomplished by practitioners. The basic stakeholders in practice research are social workers, service users, administrators, management, organisations, politicians and researchers. Accordingly, practice research is necessarily collaborative, involving a meeting point for different views, interests and needs, where complexity and dilemmas are inherent. Instead of attempting to balance or reconcile these differences, it is important to respect the differences if collaboration is to be established. The strength of both practice and research in practice research is to address these difficult challenges. The danger for both fields is to avoid and reject them.

Book Review of “Indigenous Social Work around the World. Towards Culturally Relevant Education and Practice”, 2008, edited by Mel Gray, John Coates and Michael Yellow Bird

One could be seduced into a critique of this volume that focuses on its potential to overstate the momentum for a shift in Western social work ideology when faced with the conundrum of cultural difference. One could posit that the discussion is too broad, the topics covered too numerous, the opportunity for detail missed, the urgency of the messages unnecessarily exaggerated, the “proof” not beyond anecdote and so forth. I reject this temptation to conform to the dominant professional dynamic most emphatically and offer that what Gray, Coates and Yellow Bird have presented to the social work field in this volume is the first tangible step towards an alternative paradigm for an occupation afflicted with unsustainable hypocrisy and thus at the brink of irrelevancy.