revista protectia copilului numar special...romania – dgaspc/ general directorate of social...

1

PROTECÞIA SOCIALÃ A COPILULUI – Revistã de pedagogie ºi asistenþã socialã - Anul XVII – nr. 1 (56)/2015

CUPRINS

MARGINALIZED YOUTH - MODELSOF INTERVENTION and EDUCATIONAL APPROACHES

1. Oana Moºoiu – A multidimensional perspective on current issues of marginalizedyouth (editorial) / O perspectivã multidimensionalã asupra temelor actuale privindtinerii marginalizaþi ......................................................................................................... 3

2. Oana Moºoiu – The project HEI HIP: HEI Inter-Professional module – co-createdby marginalized youth, practitioners and students / Proiectul HEI HIP: Modulinterprofesional co-creat de tineri marginalizaþi, practicieni ºi studenþi .......................... 5

3. Mark Taylor: Competence and Irish Social Care Practice: Divergent PolicyNarratives / Competenþe ºi practici în asistenþa socialã irlandezã: divergenþa discursurilorde politici ........................................................................................................................ 8

4. Martin Stam, Simona Gaarthuis: Co-creation in complexity. A plea for outreachresearch / Co-crearea în complexitate. Pledoarie pentru cercetarea de teren............... 19

5. Almudena A. Navas Saurin, Fernando Marhuenda Fluixá, Míriam Abiétar López, ElenaGiménez Urraco: “Wicked Problems” and Vulnerable Youth: Co-participative TrainingDesign for its development between university and social entities /”Problemele critice” ºitinerii vulnerabili: dezvoltarea proiectãrii formãrii prin co-participarea dintre universitãþiºi organizaþiile sociale .................................................................................................... 25

6. Gordon Vincenti: Service – learning as a framework for the co-creation of inter-disciplinaryand inter-organisational teaching modules / Învãþarea prin serviciu în comunitate – cadrude co-creare pentru predarea modulelor inter-disciplinare ºi inter-organizaþionale ....... 34

7. Martin Stam: Co-creation in methodology: Learning History and Cultural-HistoricalActivity Theory (CHAT). A plea for outreach research / Co-creare metodologicã:istorii de învãþare ºi teoria activitãþii cultural-istorice ...................................................... 49

8. Anouk Smeenk: Case study Amsterdam: MyCoach / Studiu de caz: MyCoach –Amsterdam ..................................................................................................................... 57

9. Jesper Kjær Jensen: The personal in the professional / Dimensiunea personalã înpracticarea profesiei ....................................................................................................... 60

2


3


A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON CURRENT ISSUESOF MARGINALIZED YOUTH

O PERSPECTIVÃ MULTIDIMENSIONALÃ ASUPRA TEMELOR ACTUALEPRIVIND TINERII MARGINALIZAÞI

EDITORIAL

Oana Moºoiu, PhDUniversity of Buchrest

This thematic issue of the Social Protection ofChild is hosting a number of articles that are theoutcomes of the Erasmus project HEI HIPpresented in the following pages. The efforts of10 partners (5 universities and 5 organisationsin the social field) to design a co-created modulefor interprofessional competence to be pilotedin the higher education institution has resultedin documenting and reflecting on the currentissues of wicked problems (as a characteristicof society) and marginalized youth (as a socialgroup).

The subject of marginalized youth is framed inthe context of wicked problems that every societyis facing and trying to overcome – either by asocial model to support different groups ofvulnerable people, either by the everyday workof practitioners and different professionals insocial field that address one-by-one cases,individuals, contextual situations of challengedlives.

The ideas expressed in the articles we are goingto introduce are mapping a Europeanperspective on how societies (represented byprofessional groups or state institutionsregulating occupations and functions ofpractitioners) and different institutions andorganisations acting in the respective fields areworking on responding to social issues / groupcharacteristics / individual situations. Theseextreme poles of action – social level, individuallevel – are offering a wide space of interpretationat local, contextual level, leading to designvarious ways of performing social interventionpractices. From these actions that can be seenas fragmented and causing very heterogenous

practices, innovation arises and this is a way toproduce changes and upgrades of theoreticalunderstandings, policy frameworks, regulatoryprocedures to the benefit of end-user: vulnerablegroups, marginalized and at-risk youth. So thereis a sense in encouraging interpretations andmodelling by practice of normative regulationswith maybe one condition: the right practitionerat the right time of the situation that thevulnerable individual is facing.

In the first paper, Mark Taylor is introducing theIrish society perspective on social professions.The issue is practicing a discourse that is notrefflected fully in the operational field of therespective profession (in this case, social carefield).

The co-creation model is widely presented from2 perspectives by the team from Hogeschool vanAmsterdam, University of Applied Sciences –Simona Gaarthuis and Martin Stam. Oneapproach is looking at the field, being there,sensing and presecing the cooperative way ofthinking on issues and choosing the rightapproach. The other one is supporting areflection on how practitioners are learning toget better in their way of intervention with casesthey deal with and it is framed by a set ofquestions that have been answered through afield research. The co-creation perspective isaccompanied by a study case also fromAmsterdam – the project MyCoach (authorAnouk Smeenk).

From Spain, we get the insight of a moreconcrete situation of intervention, in the form ofa training design piloted in the higher education

4


system. The innovative approach is partnershipbetween university and social organisations indesigning a fit-for-purpose training design toexpose the students learning social professions.The article is presented by University of Valencia- Almudena A. Navas Saurin, FernandoMarhuenda Fluixá, Míriam Abiétar López, ElenaGiménez Urraco.

The overview is enriched with a Danishperspective on two educational approaches atgrass roots, both of them in the higher educationvocational institution. One is about usingservice-learning as a practice task for studentsgetting qualified as social workers/socialpedagogues (Gordon Vincenti, VIA UniversityCollege) and one is getting to the bottom line oftraining social field practitioners – the humantouch, the personal development levelcontributing to give strengh and personal valueto the professional competence which is alifelong development process (Jesper Kjær

Jensen, ASV Horsens). These complementaryvisions on training professionals to get ready andaddress wicked problems in the day-to-daypractice life is the key message to be taken byanybody aiming to train anything anytime – mindthe context and the tasks where you perform andmind yourself for why and how you perform.

We hope that the picture we draw for our readerswill encourage them to see beyond perfectsocieties and perfect practitioners, perfect socialmodels and perfect support measures differentcountries have to respond to wicked problemsand vulnerable and marginalized groups.Instead, a co-created and co-designedperspective is offered to show that we aredeveloping ourselves as professionals andsociety as we go, think and reflect critically andget together in finding what is best for differentpeople in different contexts, still keeping the mindon the big framework.

5


THE PROJECT HEI HIP: HEI INTER-PROFESSIONAL MODULE –CO-CREATED BY MARGINALIZED YOUTH, PRACTITIONERS

AND STUDENTS

PROIECTUL HEI HIP: MODUL INTERPROFESIONAL CO-CREAT DETINERI MARGINALIZAÞI, PRACTICIENI ªI STUDENÞI

Oana Moºoiu, PhD,Project Coordinator - University of Bucharest

The project that frames the thematic issue of thisvolume is a Lifelong Learning Programmecentralized - Erasmus Multilateral Actionpartnership consisting of 10 organisations from5 countries.

The purpose of the partnership is to continueand add value with an intellectual output to aprevious Leonardo daVinci partnership projectthat was developed between 2011 and 2013.The partnership Strengthening Inter-Disciplinaryand Inter-Organisational Practice towards SocialInclusion in Europe created the opportunity ofgetting to know each other and discusspossibilities of cooperation between theparticipant organisations.

Working interdisciplinary and interprofessionallyin social professions was the focus of the projectand the partners have gathered informationabout how these competences are trained,developed, practiced and taught in innitial andcontinous training of practitioners in social field,as well as during the on-the-job training / in-service training in each country.

The work done in the Leonardo project andresearch on the topic show that:• there is a growing number of marginalized

youth with wicked problems all over Europe.EU statistics clearly shows that there is agrowing number of youth that are without ajob and/or education and in risk of exclusion

• no European country have found lasting andworking solutions for solving their wickedproblems

• problems with marginalized youth havemany of the same reasons in the Europeancountries e.g. socio-economic background;

lack of supporting networks and social skillsand not least lack of system adaptation toyouth with special needs, e.g. education ofsocial workers.

This suggested that a solution co-created in aEuropean context could be the answer. So theidea came up to design a specific modulededicated to train competences to practitionersthat will enable them to respond the professiondemands in working with marginalized youth andfacing wicked problems. It was planned thatthese competences should be included in theinnitial training of the future practitioners as itconsists the basis for acting as a social worker/social educator/social pedagogue andperforming in critical situations at work.

In this line, the Erasmus project was designedto continue the good partnership between theorganisations involved. The current compositionof the project is made up of 5 universities and 5practice partners - organisations active in socialwork that are also involved as practice partnersfor universities’ bachelor programmes. These“partnership couples” are- VIA University College, Denmark – ASV

Horsens- IT Sligo, Ireland - North Connaught Youth

Services, Ireland- Hogeschool van Amsterdam, University of

Applied Sciences Netherlands – BOOT-Community store for Education, Researchand Talent development

- University of Bucharest, Faculty ofPsychology and Educational Sciences,Romania – DGASPC/ General Directorate ofSocial Assistance and Child Protection Sector1, Bucharest, Romania

- University of Valencia, Spain – IniciativesSolidàries.

6


The aim of this new project is to improve theability of current and future practitioners(current students) in the social field to workinter-professionally and inter-sectorally sothat they can innovatively work towards newsolutions to wicked problems involvingmarginalized youth.

The project will design and pilot an inter-professional module concept for students byco-creation between marginalized youth,professionals in social field, students, academicteachers. The module will be accompanied by aGuide for Lecturers and an Anthology forstudents, other professionals, univeristyteachers to use be used as a content support inteaching and learning interprofessionalcompetence, understanding wicked problemsand marginalized youth issues. Also, a projectwebsite aims to present both the project andresources developed on the way, with a blog toshare project experiences to design andimplement the module.

1. The Module ConceptThe Module concept will contain different kindsof modules for teaching inter-professionalcollaboration in an innovative way that can beput together. The concept consist of threephases and those interested to plan a modulecan pick and choose the elements that fit theirparticular group of students and make it as longas it is possible for them to fit into their lessonplans. They will just need at least 1 day fromeach phase of the concept to create a module,so it will be possible to plan a module of only 3days or up to six weeks based on this concept.The number of participants that the modules canbe planned for will be flexible. The concept willlikewise be suitable for planning a module of 1-2 weeks for an international summer school andit can easily be used for in-service training aswell.

The three phases of the Module Concept are:

A. Theoretical approach:• Knowledge about different models of the

welfare state in European context

• Marginalized youth & “wicked problems”• Social innovation – what, why and how?• Ethics and values

B. Methodological approach:• Action research – all stakeholders are

involved in the process• How to facilitate innovative processesC. Reflections on education and practice:• How to implement innovative processes in

education and inter-professional work.

The concept will qualify students and currentpractitioners to work innovatively, inter-professionally and inter-organisationally with“wicked problems” for the benefit of social workwith marginalized youth. It will be co-created bySocial Service staff, marginalized youth,lecturers and students and when the specificmodules will be delivered all of thesestakeholders will participate. Many differentstakeholders from diverse countries will look atthe different “wicked problems”, work on themtogether and hereby bring innovative ideas forfinding new inter-professional solutions. Thedevelopment of the concept will focus on how tocreate an innovative environment – a practicescenario – where inter-professional skills(personal, professional and contextual) can betrained and facilitated and co-created solutionscan be formed in collaboration between theparticipants: students, lecturers, practitionersand youth.

2. Guide for LecturersThe Guide will guide lecturers from outside theconsortium who wish to plan a specific inter-professional module based on the ModuleConcept. It will consist of guiding principlesregarding theoretical and methodologicalapproaches and a presentation of very concretefacilitating tools combined with specific lessonplans from the modules that will be run by thepartners during the project as pilots of theconcept. The pilots will be of different duration.Potential users of the Guide need to find relevantparticipants and challenges and convert theconcept to a meaningful plan in the specific localcontext.

7


3. An AnthologyThis book will present the theoretical andmethodological background for both the ModuleConcept and the Guide for Lecturers. Lecturerscan use this as teaching material when theydeliver the finished modules. Furthermore theanthology can be used separately in curriculumsfor traditional teaching in innovative thinking andapproaches without the training part.

These results are achieved by a set of activitiesthat are now in progress:- a research study- developing the module concept – version 1- writing the Guide for Lecturers – version 2- writing the Anthology – version 2- piloting the module and evaluation- final versions of all products, dissemination

and exploitation of results.

The project has passed 2 years from the timeallocated: 2013 – 2016 and is currently finishingthe research activity which results are the basefor designing the module and the resourcesaccompaniying the concept.

Every country has been studying owncollaboration approach in the field of social work.The aim is to document the inter-professionalrelationships in the field of social work and socialeducation practice to substantiate the design ofthe Module Concept for students in initialprofessional training at HEI’s. The researchcreates the base to produce a concept whereboth practitioners and marginalized youth areinvolved in the creation of it and then implementit into the university curricula as an innovativeapproach to develop professional competenceto address current challenges in social work andsocial education.

The research will focus on identification of mainperspectives of subjects (students, marginalizedyouth and practitioners working in the field)about:• How are the conditions for marginalized youth

in Europe at the moment? (increase ofnumbers, increased difficulty to access jobs/education etc.). This is needed to put the

module concept into the relevant context thatit will be carried out in.

• How to involve service users/marginalizedyouth and practitioners in the co-creation ofthe learning space for students and how toinvolve these actors during the delivery of themodule for students? Everybody talks aboutinvolving them but how do you do it inpractice? There are many questions. Forinstance the power balance and powerrelations in a group of students, service usersand practitioners. For instance there arepower relations between service users andthe staff from the social services as the staffhas a huge say in the service users’ everydaylife. With what tools can you shift the powerbalance? These tools are part of what thepartner meetings will experiment with.

• What is the expected profile of a practitionerin the social education/work field? Whatcompetences and skills do practitioners andmarginalized youth expect the students tohave when they finish their studies?

• What is the learning potential for practitionersin the social field participating in the deliveryof the module? How do we make it attractiveenough for them to consider it as analternative to other in-service training offers?The delivery of the module is dependent onSocial Service institutions participating withstaff and service users.

The current issue of Social Protection of Childis dedicated to present part of the results theproject team has achieved so far: documentingrealities in partner countries about wickedproblems and how to work with marginalizedyouth facing them, models of intervention insocial institutions and organisations, approachesin education to teach and train futurepractitioners working with marginalized youth ina wicked problems context.

More about this project: http://www.viauc.com/projects/hip/Pages/hei-inter-professional-module.aspx

8


COMPETENCE AND IRISH SOCIAL CARE PRACTICE:DIVERGENT POLICY NARRATIVES

COMPETENÞE ªI PRACTICI ÎN ASISTENÞA SOCIALÃ IRLANDEZÃ:DIVERGENÞA DISCURSURILOR DE POLITICI

Mark Taylor, IT Sligo, Ireland

Abstract. The Irish State is creating regulatory frameworks for social professionals. A regulatoryframework for social workers was established in 2011; a framework for social care workers is expectedbefore 2017. The issue of competent social professional practice is a key element addressed withinthese frameworks. At the same time, the Irish State has already issued a policy framework settingout requirements for training competent social care workers. By analysing how competence isconstructed within frameworks regulating social workers and training social care workers, this paperexamines how the Irish State is likely to frame competence for social care work practice. Specifically,by considering regulatory and training frameworks as policy narratives, the paper suggests IrishState policies may offer divergent positions on the social status of social care workers and on themoral dimensions of the social care work role. In particular, this paper suggests that differentinstitutions of the Irish State formatting policy concerning social professional competence employdifferent conceptualisations of the socio-philosophical term ‘freedom’. Consequently, this differenceleads to different organs of the State mapping out quite different frameworks for what constitutescompetence in social professional practice.

Statul irlandez creazã cadre normative pentru profesioniºtii în domeniul social. Un cadru dereglementare pentru lucrãtorii sociali a fost stabilit în anul 2011; un cadru pentru asistenþii socialieste aºteptat înainte de anul 2017. Tema profesionistului competent în domeniul social constituieun element cheie care îºi gãseºte rãspuns în aceste cadre normative. În acelaºi timp, statul irlandeza emis deja un cadru de politici cuprinzând cerinþele de formare a competenþelor pentru asistenþiisociali. Analizând cum este construitã competenþa în conþinutul cadrelor de reglementare a profesiilorsociale ºi a formãrii aferente, articolul prezintã modul în care statul irlandez defineºte competenþapentru practicarea profesiilor sociale. Specific, considerând reglementãrile profesiei ºi cerinþele deformare profesionalã ca discursuri de politici, articolul sugereazã cã politicile statului irlandez se potsitua pe poziþii divergente privind statusul social al asistenþilor sociali ºi dimensiunile morale implicatede acest rol profesional. În mod particular, articolul sugereazã cã diferitele instituþii ale statului cestructureazã politici privind competenþele profesiunilor sociale angajeazã diferite conceptualizãriale termenului socio-filosofic de ”libertate”. În consecinþã, aceastã diferenþã implicã faptul cã diferiteorganisme ale statului vor proiecta diferit cadre pentru ceea ce constituie competenþa în practicareaprofesiunilor sociale.

Key words: Narrative Policy Analysis; Competence; Irish Social Care Policy and Practice; NarrativePositioning; Social Professions

Introduction

Two Irish state agencies are significantlymoulding our understanding of what constitutescompetent social care work practice. CORU –Ireland’s first multi-profession health and socialcare regulator – announced in spring 2014 the

creation of a regulatory framework for practisingsocial care workers. If CORU creates aframework similar to the one put in place forsocial workers (CORU, 2011), a Code ofProfessional Conduct and Ethics for Social CareWorkers is likely to emerge, with the issue ofcompetent practice constituting an important

9


element. Quality and Qualifications Ireland(QQI), an education and training awardsorganisation, is another Irish stage agencydetermining how competence in social care workpractice is framed: awards standards for socialcare work were published in 2010 (HigherEducation and Training Awards Council(HETAC), 2010) establishing general standardsof competence which must be achieved prior toqualifying as a social care worker. Ascompetence is a constitutive element of anysocial practice (Shove et al., 2012, p. 14) andas a regulatory framework for social careworkers is still to be finalised, it is therefore asuitable time to consider the State’s approachto competence in social care work, not leastbecause competence is a contested term.

The substantive aim of this paper is to examinehow the Irish State may frame competence forsocial care work practice, by analysing howcompetence is conceived within the regulatoryframework for social workers and the trainingframework for social care workers. As social carework is a profession which can empower andliberate service users (Lalor and Share, 2013,p.13), one of the paper’s theoretical aims is toexamine the State’s framing of competenceconcerning the kind of freedom promoted, interms of social care worker role parameters andthe impact of social care worker actions onservice users. The other theoretical aimexamines how the Irish State frames the socialstatus and role of social professionals in relationto competence. By social status I mean a sociallydefined aspect of an actor influencing the natureof her or her social relationships including theirrights and duties towards others (Eriksen, 2001,p.49). A role is defined ‘as the dynamic aspectof this status, that is, a person’s actual behaviourwithin the limitations set by the status definition’(Eriksen, 2001, p.50). In this regard recent policydebates (Taylor and Bogo, 2013) concerning themeaning of competence are relevant; speci-fically, competence within social professionalpractice may have more restrictive or expansivedimensions, echoing to some degree Berlin’s(1969) distinction between positive and negativefreedoms.

To address both the study’s substantive andtheoretical aims, a narrative analysis was

undertaken of CORU’s (2011) Code ofProfessional Conduct and Ethics for Social CareWorkers and HETAC’s (2010) AwardsStandards – Social Care Work. Esin (2011, p.92)notes that narrative analysis encompasses arange of approaches. The analysis undertakenfor this study considered three narrative aspectsof these policy documents: the positioning ofsocial professionals; the moral agency of socialprofessionals; the employment of masternarratives in relation to competence. Bamberg(1997, p.337) demonstrates various ‘positioning’strategies in narrative inquiry, one of whichconcerns examining the ongoing relationshippermutations between characters in a story (e.g.leader or follower; active or passive agent;protagonist or minor character). Specifically,what is of interest in this study is how do Irishpolicy documents situate social professionalsand competence in relation to other stake-holders, in particular service users. Narrativeanalysis also provides an opportunity tounderstand how stories locate individuals asmoral social beings. In this regard, Sarbin (1986)suggests that stories offer a guiding principle forhuman action in that narrative structuresinfluence our understanding of the social worldand our making of moral decisions. Of interestin this study is what moral identities do Irish policydocuments propose for competently acting Irishsocial professionals. Finally, if the positioningand moral identities of social professionals canbe located in policy documents, it is also likelythese constructions can be located withinbroader master-narratives (Gray, 2001). Suchmaster-narratives may not be explicitlyacknowledged or even recognised by policydevelopers, but at the same time may denotethe socially available narratives employed bythem to represent their understanding of ideassuch as development or freedom in society. Ofinterest in this study are the master narrativesemployed by policy makers which set out thetype of freedom advanced by competentlyperforming social professionals in Ireland.

In summary, three research questions areconsidered in this paper:

How do Irish policy frameworks position thesocial status of the social professional?

10


How do policy frameworks frame socialprofessionals as moral agents?

What master narratives do these policies employin relation to social professional competence andfreedom?

In the next section I review some current issuesconcerning competence and the socialprofessions, before introducing the Irish State’spolicy on competence in social professional workas set out in training and regulatory frameworks.I then examine the narrative analysis vis-à-vispositioning. Thereafter, I present the answersto these three research questions beforediscussing the findings.

Competence and Social Professions

As there has been little analysis to dateconcerning how the Irish State constitutescompetence within Irish social care work, Iexamine how the concept has been consideredin social work in UK, Canada and USA.Competence is a complex concept; its meaningand impact on social work training and practicecontinues to evolve. O’Hagan (1996, p.5)suggests definitions ‘range from the unhelpful…to the slightly more helpful’, but at its centre liesa notion that competence ‘involves the ability todo something successfully or efficiently’ (OxfordEnglish Dictionary Online, 2014). O’Hagan(2007, p.14) advances that theories related tobehaviourism and functional analysis influencedthe framing of competence-based education andtraining (CBET) in modern US and UK socialwork programmes. For example, the EducationalPolicy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS)govern the competency-based approach tosocial work education in the USA; competencesare viewed as education outcomes, specified inparticular behaviours which can signify variationsin performance levels (Taylor and Bogo, 2013,p.6). Holloway et al. (2009, p.4) note the intentionof EPAS is to ensure ‘the public is clearlyinformed about what social workers can beexpected to know how to do’. Illeris (2014, p.114)suggests that competence’s current mani-festation stems from a 1970s North Americanapproach to human resource management. Heproposes that competence has replacedqualifications, to ‘highlight the human factor of

the workplace’ (Illeris 2014, p.114). This view ofmanagement draws heavily on functionalanalysis, an approach - sympathetic tobehaviourism - which concerns itself withspecifying the purposes and tasks oforganisations and occupations. The presenceof functional analysis can, for example, bewitnessed in the creation of UK’s NationalOccupational Standards in social work. In thisregard, Taylor & Bogo (2013, p.6) suggest thefocus in UK social work education ‘has been onthe process of selecting competencies andrelated specific behavioural or practice indicatorsand developing effective methods ofassessment’. Such a perspective can be seenas an attempt to classify what social workers doand to quantify the impact of their actions, aprocess very much in-synch with newmanagerialism and work-measurementframeworks. Or in the words of O’Hagan (1996,p.13), ‘output, the quality of output, and, themeasurement of output, are primary goals inmanagerial technical rationality’.

A number of tensions nevertheless remainconcerning the meaning of competence, its useand assessment. There is disagreement over thearea of analysis for competence: should thefocus be on job-related and/or person-relatedareas of competence (Woodruffe, 1991)? Thereis disagreement over judgements concerningcompetence: is it a ‘binary concept’ in the sensethat a practitioner’s actions are/are notcompetent (Eraut, 1994, p.118) or should it beseen as a developmental phenomenon, rangingfrom basic ableness to excellence in performingroles and tasks (Cheetham & Chivers, 2005,p.54), which corresponds with a view thatpractitioners become more experienced overtime? These two perspectives are evident withincompetence frameworks for social workers inEngland. On the one hand, the Standards ofProficiency, developed by the social workregulator, Health & Care Professions Council(HCPC), outline ‘what a social worker in Englandshould know, understand and be able to do whenthey complete their social work training’ (Health& Care Professions Council (England) website,2014). On the other hand, the College of SocialWork in England created the ProfessionalCapabilities Framework (PCF), which delineatesthe capabilities needed by social workers at

11


different levels of their careers. There is alsodisagreement concerning the best way to assesscompetence. Knight and Page (2007) suggesttwo alternatives. On the one hand, assessorscould design complex assessment models suchas the Canadian Objective Structured ClinicalExamination model which can assessmeta-competences (e.g. higher-order thinkingand reflective capacity) and proceduralcompetences (e.g. skills needed to carry outbasic tasks). On the other hand, assessors maybe more interested in ‘wicked competencies’which are context-driven, difficult to define, withdifferent assessors placing value on differentkinds of knowledge and skills. Finally, there isdisagreement on the constitutive elements ofcompetence. On the one hand, the CanadianObjective Structured Examination modelidentifies skills needed to perform proceduralcompetences or tasks. On the other hand, theIrish State regulator of education and trainingprogrammes delineates between knowledge,skill and competence in its guidance frameworkfor training social professionals. In this paper, Iprimarily focus on the issue of understanding andanalysing the Irish State’s conceptualisation ofcompetence.

Competence in Social Care Work - IrishPolicy Context

The Irish State has created two policyframeworks to direct our understanding ofcompetent social professional practice. Aframework for training competent social careworkers is outlined in Awards Standards forSocial Care Work (2010). The Irish State hasstill to produce a regulatory policy framework forpractising social care workers that addresses theissue of competence. For the purposes of thispaper I therefore consider the State’s framing ofcompetence for practising social workers, whichis outlined in Code of Professional Conduct andEthics for Social Workers (2011).

Competence and the Education and Trainingof Social Care Workers

The Qualifications (Education & Training) Act1999 led to the creation of National QualificationsAuthority of Ireland (NQAI) and the Irish HigherEducation and Training Awards Council

(HETAC). These bodies devised award-makingpolicies and criteria for education and trainingprogrammes, and identified general standardsof knowledge, skill and competence for studentsto acquire before receiving an award. HETACdeveloped generic and discipline-specific awarddescriptors for programmes as diverse asscience, art and design, nursing and midwifery,and architecture. Award-level indicators andaward-type descriptors (NQAI, 2003) informedhow standards were devised. HETAC publishedAwards Standards for Social Care Work(AWARDS) in 2010, and these identified generalstandards of competence, skill and knowledgethat students must acquire before receiving asocial care work degree. Achieving minimumintended learning outcomes on social care workdegree programmes signifies that students haverealised these general standards. No specificguidance, however, was provided by HETAC onthe assessment of standards or learningoutcomes in social care work education. Qualityand Qualifications Ireland (QQI) replacedHETAC in 2012. QQI makes awards based onHETAC standards, while it develops its ownaward standards and processes.

Competence and Regulation in Irish SocialProfessional Work

CORU was created as a result of the Health andSocial Care Professionals Act 2005. It consistsof the Health and Social Care ProfessionalsCouncil and a range of professional registrationboards. CORU’s role ‘is to protect the public bypromoting high standards of professionalconduct, education, training and competencethrough statutory registration of health and socialcare professionals’ (CORU Website, 2014).CORU announced in 2014 the creation of aregistration board for social care workers. Thesocial care work registration board is likely todevelop a Code of Professional Conduct andEthics for Social Care Workers. The code isexpected to lay down standards of ethics,conduct and performance expected of registeredsocial care workers. While no code yet existsfor social care workers, a Code of ProfessionalConduct and Ethics for Social Workers (CODE)was created in 2011 by the Social WorkersRegistration Board at CORU. The term

12


‘competence’ is chiefly mentioned in two differentways within this Code. First, it is listed as one offive social work values (i.e. ‘Competence isprofessional practice’) (CODE, 2011, p.4)informing the code. Second, the Code lists 23social work duties, and competence is primarilylinked with performing two professional practiceduties: duty 22 where social workers act ‘withinthe limits of professional knowledge, skills andexperience’ and duty 23 where social workers‘keep professional knowledge and skills up todate’.

Considering brevity, the following acronymshave been created for this paper: AWARDS(2010) signifies Awards Standards for SocialCare Work; CODE (2011) signifies Code ofProfessional Conduct and Ethics for SocialWorkers.

Research Design and Methods

Narrative inquiry was the methodologicalapproach employed to consider the Irish State’sframing of competence for social care work.Willig (2012, p.153) suggests that all narrativeresearch is based on the theoretical premise thattelling stories is fundamental to humanexperience: by constructing narratives peoplemake connections between experiences andcome to understand these experiences in a waythat becomes meaningful for them. From thisperspective can policy frameworks, such asCORU’s (2011) Code of Professional Conductand Ethics for Social Care Workers andHETAC’s (2010) Awards Standards – SocialCare Work, be considered as stories? Are theynot just a set of principles and administrativeprocedures devised by bureaucrats? However,if the policy frameworks such as the ones underreview can be understood as narratives, theypermit us to focus ‘on the centrality of narrativesin understanding policy issues, problems, anddefinitions’ (McBeth et al., 2007, p.18). Arguably,social policies can be considered as narrativesbecause they can share a similar structure. Forexample, O’Connor & Netting (2011, p.2) viewsocial policy analysis as a process involving thedetermination and review of social problems andactions to resolve them; this perspective findssympathy in Yorke’s (2013, p.x) thesis that every

narrative shares a unifying structure inpresenting three issues (i.e. problem arises;journey to overcome problem; resolution ofproblem). At a more technical level, Stone (2002)has looked at the role played by devices suchas characters, plots, metaphors, and rhetoric inpolicy narratives to ascertain the nature of socialrelationships between actors, including changesover time in the make-up of power coalitions.

To address the paper’s three research questionsI drew on Bamberg’s (1997, p.337) account ofvarious ‘positioning’ strategies in narrativeinquiry. First, narrative inquiry can reveal anarrator’s position in relation to other characterswithin a story (e.g. leader or follower; active orpassive agent; protagonist or minor character)and these positions can change over time. Giventhat a primary concern of this paper is to analysehow competence is constructed in Irish Statepolicies for social care work, considering policiesas narratives in relation to this positioningstrategy allows for an examination of howpolicies position social care workers in terms ofdesignating their rights, duties and actionstowards others. Or put another way, my narrativeexamines how two policy documents are likelyto shape the social space in which social careworkers operate. Second, Bamberg (1997)suggests positioning can be examined in termsof how the narrator wants to position themselvesto a direct or indirect audience. In this regardBamberg’s (1997) perspective finds resonancewith Riessman and Lee (2005, p.394) insofaras stories are communicative practices and canconvey how individuals perform their identitiesand for how they want to be known. The focusof this type of narrative analysis centres on ‘whoan utterance may be directed to, when, and why,that is, for what purposes?’ (Riessman, 2008,p.105). One way of considering how people wantto be conveyed is in terms of the moral identitythey wish to convey to others through narratives,as narrative structures offer a way to guide ourunderstanding of the world and our moraldecision-making (Sarbin, 1986). While AWARDS(2010) and CODE (2011) reveal respectively themoral identities of HETAC and CORU aseducation and practice regulators, of interest inthis paper are the moral identities which theseagencies wish to construct for socialprofessionals. In other words, AWARDS (2010)

13


and CODE (2011) can be seen as narrativeswhich mould the moral identities of socialprofessionals to act/not act in certain ways. Ofinterest is whether these policy frameworkscreate similar or different visions of socialprofessionals as moral agents. Bamberg (2010,p.10) suggests different narrative analyticapproaches can be combined to paint thesepictures. And these approaches can be revealedthrough a structural examination of stories(Mishler, 1986), a key aspect of which is todistinguish ways in which authors employnarrative devices to make stories convincing.Third, Bamberg (1997) suggests that positioningcan be analysed in terms of how narratorsemploy public discourses to justify actions whichare undertaken. While these public discoursescan be viewed as social or cultural discourses,Somers (1994) distinguishes these types ofdiscourse from even broader ‘meta-narratives’such as those of progress, human rights orfreedom which are generated by societies. Inturn these meta- or master narratives (Gray,2001) are drawn down by individuals in personalstories to account for their actions and serve theirsubject positions and moral identities. What isof interest in this paper are the types of masternarratives employed by CORU and HETAC toconstruct the positions and moral identities ofcompetent social professionals.

Findings

How Do Irish Policy Frameworks Position TheSocial Status And Role Of The SocialProfessional?

The range of knowledge which socialprofessionals need to have at their disposal is akey attribute defining the nature of their socialstatus and role. AWARDS (2010) and CODE(2011) agree that certain kinds of knowledgeunderpin competent social professional practice,but disagree on the constituents of thisknowledge. Given this variability, it is notsurprising that both frameworks proposedifferent types of actions which competent socialprofessionals can perform. The AWARDS’(2010) approach to training competent socialcare workers was guided by NQAI (2003), whichset out four domains of competence. NQAI(2003, p.22) defined competence as ‘the process

of governing the application of knowledge to aset of tasks and is typically acquired by practiceand reflection’, with its unique feature being theeffective execution of knowledge and skill inhuman situations. NQAI (2003) acknowledgedthat competent practitioners draw on differentkinds of knowledge, including procedural,declarative and self-knowledge (e.g. awarenessof attitudes, emotions and values; self-efficacy).While procedural and declarative knowledge canbe learnt, it is recognised that competentperformance also depends on ‘innatecharacteristics’ of practitioners, an aspect ofperformance which may not necessarily betaught. CODE (2011), in contrast, markscompetent social workers as agents with a morelimited range of knowledge at their disposal. TheCODE (2011) sees declarative and proceduralknowledge informing social work competence.Social workers, for example, need to understandprocedures dealing with referrals. The CODE(2011) does not refer to practitionerself-knowledge or knowledge acquired throughreflective practice, thus suggesting a limitednarrative of professional learning and practice.

Not surprisingly, as the AWARDS (2010) andCODE (2011) envisage competent practitionerswith different kinds of knowledge defining theircapacity to act, both frameworks offer differentaccounts in terms of the range of actions whichcompetent practitioners can undertake. TheAWARDS (2010, p.5) proposes that social careworkers may have to act ‘effectively andautonomously in complex, ill-defined andunpredictable situations or contexts requireshigher levels of learning’. In contrast, the CODE(2011, p.10) suggests a more conservativeapproach in that social workers ‘should onlypractise in fields in which you [they] haveeducation, training and experiences’. Therefore,it is reasonable to argue that the AWARDS(2010) position the role of the social professionalin a more dynamic, autonomous and creativeway than the CODE (2011) envisages. Arguably,the AWARDS (2010) create a more tolerant storyof social professional work.

How Do Policy Frameworks Frame SocialProfessionals As Moral Agents

14


As CORU’s remit is ‘to protect the public’, it isnot surprising that this goal influences CORU’sperspective on practitioner competence and onhow practitioners should behave. Riessman(2005, p.5) suggests if narratives are understoodas communicative practices, they can beanalysed to ascertain how their narrators wantto be known. Arguably what CORU is trying topicture through the CODE (2011) is its own moralidentity as a regulatory agency and the moralidentity of competent social workers at practice.Bamberg (2010, p.10) suggests differentnarrative analytic approaches can be used todo this work, and in constituting the moralidentities of competent social workers throughthe CODE (2011), CORU utilises structural andperformance narrative features.

Structural examinations of narratives can takedifferent forms (Mishler, 1986), but a key aspectis to distinguish ways in which authors employnarrative devices to make stories convincing.CODE (2011) employs particular syntacticalstylistic devices to tell the reader how socialworkers should act. By exercising language asa series of prescriptive commands, Sections 22and 23 of the CODE (2011) spell out theelements of competent social work practice,covering areas such as inter-professionalrelationships, service users’ rights, socialworkers’ knowledge limits and supervisionarrangements. In both sections, social workersread language in the form of directives withrepetitious sentence clause structures: ‘Youmust act…’; ‘You should only practise...’; ‘Youmust meet…’ and ‘You must seek…’ Thesesyntactical devices taken together evoke thepower of the regulatory agency to dictate howcompetent social workers should behave. By notfollowing the prescriptions outlined in Sections22 and 23 of CODE (2011), social workers willnot perform as competent practitioners, runningthe risk that they could harm service users andso act in immoral ways. CODE (2011) creates amoral framework for social workers to adoptthrough issuing a series of commands.

HETAC, in contrast, pitches a different moralcompass for competent social care work. TheAWARDS (2010) are less concerned with therelationship between social professional practiceand harming service users. Instead the focus is

on creating competent social care workerscontinuing to develop in their moral identities aspractitioners. This vision is achieved in theAWARDS (2010) through forging a sophisticatedcompetence framework. Specifically, compe-tence is broken down into four sub-strands withinthe AWARDS (2010): context; role; learning tolearn and insight. Each sub-strand contains bothgeneric (i.e. common across all disciplines) anddiscipline -specific elements. Competence is firstoutlined in the ‘context’ sub-strand, where it isacknowledged that competence cannot beseparated from practice contexts. The morecomplex and less routinized the practiceenvironment, the greater the need for social careworker to engage with ‘higher levels of learning’(AWARDS, 2010, p.5). Becoming professionallycompetent in the ‘role’ sub-strand addresses theimportance of social spaces and involves thelearner joining and participating in groups. Thisrequires the learner to apply social skills,understand group tasks and play multiple roles.The ‘learning to learn’ sub-strand highlights theimportance of developing critical thinkingstrategies, with the learner coming to understandthe limits of their own knowledge and the valueof learning processes. The final sub-strand‘insight’ recognises the importance of workersreflecting on internal and external experiencesto develop new insights to aid them in theperforming their work role. The AWARDS (2010)offer an in-depth mapping of what constitutescompetent social care work practice across anumber of domains and across a number ofeducation and training levels. While thesub-strands are open to interpretation, theAWARDS (2010) position the social care workeras a more autonomous and less procedure-driven professional than the CODE (2011)allows. The intricacies which individuals needto come to terms with within the sub-strandssuggest the AWARDS (2010) picture a socialprofessional determining and more in control ofhis moral identity than the vision on offer in theCODE (2011).

What Master Narratives Do These PoliciesEmploy In Relation To Social ProfessionalCompetence And Freedom?

A meta-narrative concerning the upkeep offreedom is present in AWARDS (2010) and

15


CODE (2011), but subtle differences emergeregarding whose freedom is emphasised and thetype of freedom promoted. CORU’s goal, asoutlined in CODE (2011, p.3), is ‘to protect thepublic by fostering high standards of professionalconduct and professional education, training andcompetence among registered social workers’.The framing of competence within the CODE(2011) appears aligned with a meta-narrative ofsafeguarding the general public’s negativefreedom in the sense of protecting people fromthe harmful actions of others or the State (Berlin,1969). The constituents of competent social workpractice, as outlined in Sections 22 and 23 ofthe CODE (2011), prescribe competent practiceactions which need to be performed by socialworkers to safeguard these negative freedoms.So while the CODE (2011) directs a socialworker’s social status, role and moral identity, itdoes so with the general public primarily in mind,namely protecting the general public from socialwork malpractice.

The AWARDS (2010), by contrast, offer adifferent representation of freedom, thesubstance of which can be located within thefour sub-strands addressing competence:context; role; learning to learn and insight. Whatwe find there is a more nuanced representationof freedom. Instead of viewing service users ina decontextualized abstract or a nebulous otherin need of protection, the ‘context’ sub-strandacknowledges that competence cannot beseparated from practice contexts, in that themore complex and less routinized the practiceenvironment, the greater the need for social careworker to engage with higher levels of learning.The AWARDS (2010) vision of competentpractice is one where the practitioner effectivelyand creatively demonstrates and deploysknowledge and skills through interactions withothers. This work sometimes occurs inunpredictable situations, with practitionershaving opportunities to develop as a result ofinteracting. The focus in the AWARDS (2010) isvery much on producing competent social careworkers, yet there is an implicit sense that socialprofessionals as a result of acting competentlywill benefit society and service users. TheAWARDS (2010) therefore appear aligned witha meta-narrative primarily promoting the positive

freedom (Berlin, 1969) or capabilities (Taylor,2012) of practitioners to flourish within their socialpractices. These actions in turn promote thepositive freedom or capabilities of individuals orgroups to flourish within society.

Discussion

The findings suggest Irish State policies offerdifferent stories concerning what constitutescompetent social professional work practice. TheCODE (2011) proposes that social workers needto be able to perform a limited number offunctions to ensure the general public isprotected from harm; taken together thesefunctions, informed by declarative andprocedural knowledge which needs to be learnt,constitute the elements of competent practice.In contrast, the AWARDS (2010) map out asophisticated set of generic and discipline-specific competencies, expressed across arange of cognitive, social and pedagogicaldomains, which values knowledge as a catalystaiding practitioners to become more competent.The CODE (2011) and AWARDS (2010)ultimately adopt different stances on the valueof knowledge in social professional practice, adifference finding resonance in otherjurisdictions. Moriarty et al. (2011, p.1351), forexample, found UK employers, universities andregulatory agencies distinguished ‘betweenthose who view qualifying education [for thesocial professions] as a development processand those who view it as an end product’.

The CODE (2011) and AWARDS (2010)propose different narratives for what constitutesthe ‘moral’ social professional. While CORU’sposition appears laudatory in that its primaryemphasis is safeguarding service users fromabusive social professional practices, it also, atthe same time, through the CODE (2011) limitsthe role of social professionals to a set offunctional tasks, a positioning which is open tocriticism. For example, Munro (2011, p.137)argued that too much prescription for socialworkers not only diminishes professionalresponsibility, it also reduces job satisfaction. Incontrast, the AWARDS (2010) recognise thatsocial professionals work ‘in complex, ill-definedand unpredictable situations or contexts’ andacknowledge that discretion and autonomy form

16


part of competent social care work practice. Ifthis is the case, moral social professionalpractices are informed by individuals makingautonomous and discrete decisions - not just byactors following social institutional rules andprocedures. Drawing on Smith (2005), ittherefore could be argued that the AWARDS(2010) prioritise competence arising fromprofessional discretion, leading to increasedindividual expertise and professional confidence,whereas the CODE (2011) favours competencearising from procedural systems, underminingindividual expertise and professional confidence.

CORU and HETAC draw on differentmaster-narratives of human freedom. The CODE(2011) aligns itself with a meta-narrative wherethe negative freedom of people is protected fromsocial workers, most of whom work for statutoryagencies. The AWARDS (2010) tell alife-affirming story about nature and benefitssocial care work in which the capacity of socialcare workers to develop and flourish in theirpractice to aid others is encouraged. TheAWARDS (2010) bear witness to ameta-narrative involving a positive freedom –explicit for the social care worker, implicit for theservice user. The AWARDS (2010) focus moreon facilitating the capabilities of socialprofessionals to perform a range of tasks for andwith service users. The distinction at play here

aligns with Eraut’s distinction betweencompetence and capabilities. Eraut (1994,p.118) suggests competence can be seen as ‘abinary concept – one is or is not competent in arange of roles and tasks’. A close examinationof CORU’s prescriptions on competences canbe seen in this regard. On the other hand, Eraut(1994, p.118) also suggests that competencecan be viewed in terms of a practitioner’scapability to develop and potentially act overtime, a perspective more in line with AWARDS(2010).

Conclusion

The CODE (2011) and AWARDS (2010) conveydifferent stories of what constitutes a competentsocial professional. They draw on differentmaster narratives of freedom to inform differentrepresentations of a competent socialprofessional. These representations emphasisedifferent capacities to act, differentresponsibilities and roles, and different moralidentities for social professionals. By creating theCODE (2011) and the AWARDs (2010), the IrishState has therefore devised inconsistent policyframeworks to direct competent socialprofessional practice.

The author would like to thank Professor CorinneSquire, University of East London, for readingan earlier draft of this paper.

REFERENCES

1. Bamberg, M. (2012). Narrative Analysis. In H. Cooper (Ed.), APAhandbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Researchdesigns: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological and biological(pp. 111-130). Washington: American Psychological Press.

2. Bamberg, M. G. (1997). Position ing between structure andperformance. Journal of narrative and life history, 7(1-4), 335-342.

3. Berlin, I. (1969). Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

4. Cheetham, G., & Chivers, G. E. (2005). Professions, competenceand informal learning. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

5. CORU. (2011). Code of Professional Conduct and Ethics for SocialWorkers. Retrieved from: http://www.coru.ie/uploads/documents/typeset_Social_Worker_ Code_Feb_2010.pdf

6. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge andcompetence. London: Falmer Press.

7. Eriksen, T. H. (2001). Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction toSocial and Cultural Anthropology (2 ed.). London, UK: Pluto Press.

17


8. Esin, C. (2011). Narrative Analysis Approaches. In N. Frost (Ed.),Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology: Combining CoreApproaches. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

9. Gray, D.E. (2001). Accommodation, resistance and transcendence:Three narratives of autism. Social Science & Medicine, 53(9),1247-1257.

10. Higher Education and Training Awards Council. (2010). AwardsStandards - Social Care Work. Retrieved from: http://www.qqi.ie/Downloads/Standards/HET%20Awards%20Standards/Social%20Care%20Work%20-%20Award%20Standards.pdf

11. Holloway, S., Black, P., Hoffman, K., & Pierce, D. (2009). Someconsiderations of the import of the 2008 EPAS for curriculum design.Retrieved from: http://www.lincoln.edu/assessment/papers/epas.pdf

12. Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative Learning and Identity. Abingdon,Oxon, UK: Routledge.

13. Knight, P., & Page, A. (2007). The assessment of‘wicked’competences: a report to the practice-based professionallearning centre for excellence in teaching and learning in the OpenUniversity Vol. 22. Retrieved from: http://www.open.ac.uk/ opencetl/resources/pbpl-resources/knight-p-and-page-2007-study-the-assessment-wicked-competencies-final-report

14. Lalor, K., & Share, P. (2013). Understanding Social Care. In K. Lalor& P. Share (Eds.), Applied Social Care: An Introduction for Studentsin Ireland (Third ed., pp. 1-18). Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan.

15. McBeth, M. K., Shanahan, E. A., Arnell, R. J., & Hathaway, P. L.(2007). The Intersection of Narrative Policy Analysis and PolicyChange Theory. The Policy Studies Journal, 35(1), 87-108.

16. Mishler, E. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative.Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.

17. Moriarty, J., Manthorpe, J., Stevens, M., Hussein, S., Sharpe, E.,Orme, J., and Crisp, B. (2010). A depth of data: Research messageson the state of social work education in England. Research, policyand planning, 28(1), 29-42.

18. National Qualifications Authority of Ireland. (2003). NationalFramework of Qualifications: Policies and criteria for the establishmentof the National Framework of Qualifications Retrieved from: http://www.nqai.ie/publication_ oct2003b.html

19. O’Connor, M. K., & Netting, F. E. (2011). Analyzing social policy:Multiple perspectives for critically understanding and evaluating policy.Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

20. O’Hagan, K. (1996). Social Work Competence: An HistoricalPerspective. In K. O’Hagan (Ed.), Competence in social work practice:A practical guide for professionals. London, UK: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

21. O’Hagan, K. (2007). Competence in social work practice: A practicalguide for students and professionals. London, UK: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

22. Oxford English Dictionary Online. (2014). ‘Competence’. The OxfordEnglish Dictionary. Retrieved from: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ english/competence

23. Patterson, W. (2008). Narratives of events: Labovian narrative analysisand its limitations. In M. Andrews, C. Squire, & M. Tamboukou (Eds.),Doing Narrative Research (pp. 22-40). London: Sage.

24. Riessman, C. K. (2005). Narrative Analysis. In N. Kelly, C. Horrocks,K. Milnes, B. Roberts, & D. Robinson (Eds.), Narrative, Memory &Everyday Life (pp. 1-7). Huddersfield: University of Huddersfield.

25. Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences.London, UK: Sage.

18


26. Riessman, C. K., & Quinney, L. (2005). Narrative in social work acritical review. Qualitative Social Work, 4(4), 391-412.

27. Sarbin, T. R. (1986). Narrative psychology: The storied nature ofhuman conduct. New York, USA: Praeger Publishers/GreenwoodPublishing Group.

28. Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of SocialPractice: Everyday Life and How It Changes. London, UK: Sage.

29. Smith, C. (2005). Understanding trust and confidence: Two paradigmsand their significance for health and social care. Journal of AppliedPhilosophy, 22(3), 299-316.

30. Somers, M. R. (1994). The narrative constitution of identity: A relationaland network approach. Theory and Society, 23(5), 605-649.

31. Stone, D. A., & Norton, W. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of politicaldecision making (2 ed.): WW Norton & Co., New York USA.

32. Taylor, I., & Bogo, M. (2013). Perfect Opportunity~ Perfect Storm?Raising the Standards of Social Work Education in England. BritishJournal of Social Work, bct077. Retrieved from: http://bjsw.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/11/12/ bjsw.bct077.full.pdf+html?sid=2a6ef8a6-629a-4bf3-b4d4-6f0dac287a0d

33. Taylor, M. (2012). Social Policy. In M. Mhic Mhathúna & M. Taylor(Eds.), Early Childhood Education and Care. An Introduction forStudents in Ireland. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan.

34. Willig, C. (2012). Qualitative Interpretation and Analysis in Psychology.Maidenhead: Open University Press.

35. Woodruffe, C. (1991). Competent by any other name. PersonnelManagement, 23(9), 30-33.

36. Yorke, J. (2013). Into The Woods: How Stories Work and Why WeTell Them. London: Penguin UK.

19


CO-CREATION IN COMPLEXITYA PLEA FOR OUTREACH RESEARCH1

CO-CREAREA ÎN COMPLEXITATEPLEDOARIE PENTRU CERCETAREA DE TEREN

Martin Stam, Simona Gaarthuis,University of Applied Science HvA, Amsterdam

Abstract. The Dutch social welfare state is about to change from a ‘the nanny state’, which hasproven to undermine important capacities of citizens, into a new concept of individual responsibilityin a participatory society. The transition from a welfare state to a participatory society is a complexprocess: professional institutions will have to learn new ways of working, private enterprise willenter the social domain, neighbourhoods will reinforce social democracy by developing tailor-madesolutions that are suited to their life world, representative democracy will have to learn to deal withthese expressions of the will of the people. In this article, we have presented the two-sided researchdesign that we developed for answering the question about how and what professionals and otherparticipants of outreach social work practices learn from innovating their own practices. Wedistinguished five strengths the representatives of which all have to learn to play new roles in orderto improve democratization and enabling the citizenship of citizens in vulnerable situations. Withoutoutreach research, it would not have been possible to expose the connection between the learningof representatives of these strengths and other transformation processes on an individual, team,and systemic level. This underlines the importance of outreach research for successful innovationsin the social field. In our opinion, our two-sided research design is a precondition for the co-creationof these relative autonomous strengths and the connectedness of each of these three levels.

Statul olandez al bunãstãrii este pe cale sã se schimbe din „stat-bonã”, care a dovedit cã submineazãcapacitãþi importante ale cetãþenilor sãi, într-un nou concept al responsabilitãþii individuale într-osocietate participativã. Tranziþia de la stat al bunãstãrii la societatea participativã este un procescomplex: instituþiile profesionale sunt nevoite sã înveþe noi modalitãþi de funcþionare, întreprinderileprivate vor intra în domeniul social, cartierele vor reinstaura democraþia socialã prin dezvoltarea desoluþii personalizate particularitãþilor vieþii lor, democraþiile reprezentative vor avea de învãþat sãrãspundã voinþei poporului. În acest articol este prezentat designul dublu-faþetat al unei cercetãridesfãºurate pentru a rãspunde unor întrebãri despre cum ºi ce învaþã profesioniºtii ºi alþi participanþila munca de teren din domeniul social din inovarea propriilor practici. Au fost identificate cincicapacitãþi pe care reprezentanþii tuturor (organizaþiilor n.t.) vor trebui sã le înveþe pentru a practicaroluri noi, astfel încât sã îmbunãtãþeascã democratizarea ºi cetãþenia activã a persoanelor aflate însituaþii vulnerabile. Fãrã cercetarea în teren nu ar fi fost posibilã identificarea conexiunilor întreînvãþarea acestor capacitãþi ºi alte procese transformaþionale la nivel de individ, echipã, sistem.Este relevatã astfel importanþa cercetãrii în teren pentru succesul inovaþiei în domeniul social. Înopinia autorilor, designul dublu faþetat al acestei cercetãri este o pre-condiþie pentru co-creareaacestor relativ autonome capacitãþi ºi puncte tari, precum ºi în interconectarea celor trei niveluri.

1 This article is based on the article about the research design of a multi case study of four educational cases I wrotefor International Journal Of Qualitative Studies in Education (2013b). This research design also formed the basis fora multi case study of six social work cases (published as ‘Geef de burger moed’ (2012)) and of three social quarterteams (is still ongoing). Both publications were used as a pad for my lecture for NOSMO, HvA en Andragogenkringin 2013. The article presented here elaborates on the findings of the social work and social quarter team casestudies.

20


Context: research method, problem and goalsetting

As researchers at the WMO workplace atAmsterdam University of Applied Sciences(hereafter referred to as HvA) we are partlyfinanced by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfareand Sport. It finances thirteen WMO workplacesall over the country. They study all together morethan a hundred practices in which this transitionto a participatory society is taking place. TheAmsterdam WMO workplace focuses onoutreach work practices. Outreach social worktries to improve the lives of citizens in vulnerablesituations by starting from their capabilities,perceptions and needs. We study outreachsocial workers who – according to new policy(the Social Support Act, 2007) anddecentralizations in the social domain since 2012- are trying to deal with the changingcircumstances and use them as opportunitiesfor innovating their workplaces. We meet serviceusers, customers and clients, together withpeer-experts and volunteers, professionals,organizations and governments that are tryingto innovate their practices by stimulating people’s‘own strength’, self-reliance and social andeconomic participation (Stam et al 2011; Stam2012). These citizens in vulnerable situations livein the five most deprived city districts ofAmsterdam, officially earmarked as belongingto the forty most deprived city districts (theso-called ‘Vogelaarwijken’) in the Netherlands.Six of our studies are about social work practiceswith young mothers, former homeless people,people with mental health problems, peoplesuffering from addictions, loitering youths andthe lonely elderly (2009–2012); three studies areabout social community teams in deprived citydistricts with clients suffering from poverty andsocial exclusion, domestic violence, rearingproblems etc. (2012–2015). The last threestudies have not yet been completed. Becauseour research focuses on the capabilities,perceptions and needs of the people involvedwe refer to it as outreach research. The goal ofour studies is to answer the question: How andwhat do outreach social workers and otherparticipants learn from innovating their ownpractices? For more theoretical informationabout the methology see other article in thisissue.

In one of the five work conferences about themethodology of practice-based research (atHvA, autumn 2013) we presented our outreachresearch design which captured the complexityof innovations in the social domain and thelearning of the participants in these innovativepractices (organized by NOSMO, HvA and thecircle of adult educational theory). Themethodological question which accompaniesthis goal is: How can outreach researcherscapture the complexity of these learning anddevelopment processes? This research designand some of the outcomes are presented here.

What we encountered contradicted the usualcategorization of success factors. This wasunderstandable because of the transformationof social work practices that had taken place, inwhich many uncertainties and surprisesoccurred. In such circumstances, it does notmake sense to give the primacy to the outcomesof theory in the research. We had to give theprimacy to the practice. This meant that wefollowed the course of events and theexperiences of the people involved in thesepractices. Studying complex innovationsrequires divergent inductive thinking, whichcherishes the unique and that which has not yetbeen categorized. Acknowledging the uniqueand uncategorized as a source of knowledgecreation requires a research design whichembraces uncertainty and surprise. It shouldenable us to capture ongoing processes ofinventing, correcting, adjusting and transformingpractices.

Such explorative research – based onuncertainty - should focus on what improvesprocess competencies such as reflecting,coaching, connecting, and transforming (Kruiter& Kruiter, 2013). The design should match thedynamics of a complex process. This is quitedifferent from complicated processes, which areintricate but the course and termination of whichcan be predicted. In the practices we wanted tostudy, new principles are shaped and inventedalong the way. The way this happens cannot berepeated and be placed in a zero position as ifthey started at a beginning (which distinguishesthem from complicated processes). We agreewith Kahane (2004) who says that complexprocesses are complex in three ways:

revista protectia copilului numar special...romania – dgaspc/ general directorate of social...

Documents