Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Role of Reflection in Family Support Social Work and Its Possible Promotion by a Research-Supported Model
University West, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, Division of Psychology, Pedagogy and Sociology. (BUV)ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6267-5802
University West, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, Division for Educational Science and Languages. (BUV)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2999-5203
2019 (English)In: Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, ISSN 1543-3714, E-ISSN 1543-3722, Vol. 16, no 3, p. 322-345Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: There is a prevailing controversy over the use of evidencebased practice (EBP) within human-service organizations. Since it is argued that it is a threat to reflection, proven experience, and tacit knowledge, we wanted to investigate the impact of the research supported, family-centered model Family Check-Up (FCU) on practitioners' use of, and opportunities for, reflection. Method: Focus group interviews with family support social workers trained in FCU (n = 19) were conducted. Results: The significance of reflection for social work practice is clearly indicated. It is crucial for providing quality care: for making progress, processing cases, and effecting change in client-related work. Described as a coping-mechanism, it is also crucial for practitioners. Since various elements of FCU require practitioners' reflective ability, it was argued that it promotes both reflection and professional learning. Discussion: Rather than constituting a threat to reflection, FCU was seen as promoting it, indicating an inaccuracy in prevailing assumptions about research-supported models. This implies the need for revising the definition of such models to promote their potential use and benefits. Working with FCU, however, demands sufficient resources. Conclusion: With an increased focus on "production" leading to changes in priorities, it is argued that resources and opportunities for reflection decrease. As FCU and similar models seem to allow for the incorporation of reflection into ordinary tasks, we propose that they be used to prevent reflection from becoming even more difficult. However, to gain from the benefits of both reflection and research-supported models, various external factors need to be considered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2019. Vol. 16, no 3, p. 322-345
Keywords [en]
Reflective practice, EBP, social work, professional development, workplace learning, human service organizations, focus groups
National Category
Social Work
Research subject
Work Integrated Learning; SOCIAL SCIENCE, Social work; Child and Youth studies
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-13883DOI: 10.1080/26408066.2019.1606748OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hv-13883DiVA, id: diva2:1318268
Note

This research was partly funded by the Center for Progress in Children’s Mental Health, a unit within the public primary care provider Närhälsan, Sweden

Available from: 2019-05-27 Created: 2019-05-27 Last updated: 2019-06-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Ryding, JennieWernersson, Inga

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ryding, JennieWernersson, Inga
By organisation
Division of Psychology, Pedagogy and SociologyDivision for Educational Science and Languages
In the same journal
Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work
Social Work

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 15 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf