Förändringar inom fältet - En kvalitativ analys av diskussionen kring evidens inom socialt arbete
(2013) SOPA63 20122School of Social Work
- Abstract
- The debate about evidence based practice has been going on for over twenty years in Sweden without any real conclusion. The purpose of this study was with Bourdieu’s theory about culture production and a discourse analytic approach, highlight the arguments in the debate and the beliefs and assumptions about the evidence based practices on which they are based. The aim was also to investigate the reasons why evidence based practice has become one of the most debated subjects within the field of social work science and what conclusion about the deployment of the field of social work you can take from the debate. I’ve focused on symbolic capital and how the authors of the articles position them self in the field to legitimate their opinions.... (More)
- The debate about evidence based practice has been going on for over twenty years in Sweden without any real conclusion. The purpose of this study was with Bourdieu’s theory about culture production and a discourse analytic approach, highlight the arguments in the debate and the beliefs and assumptions about the evidence based practices on which they are based. The aim was also to investigate the reasons why evidence based practice has become one of the most debated subjects within the field of social work science and what conclusion about the deployment of the field of social work you can take from the debate. I’ve focused on symbolic capital and how the authors of the articles position them self in the field to legitimate their opinions. The empirical data consisted of articles from Socionomen, a Swedish magazine for social workers and scientists. In my analyze I identified two different positions in terms of how the authors of the articles recognized the potential in the evidence based practice, the critical- and the advocating position. The critical position consisted primarily of arguments that are based on a ontological- knowledge theoretical perspective concerning knowledge within the field of social work. Regarding the best way to help clients the critical position arguments are inspired by humanistic psychology and that the relationship between the client and the professional is the most important factor. The advocacy position consisted of arguments based on a pragmatic utility maximization view inspired by the new public management movement and the medical field. Regarding the best way to help clients the advocacy position argues that a combination of evidence based methods, the client’s knowledge and the professional’s experience. On the basis of Bourdieu’s theory I found that the advocacy position possesses more symbolic capital and legitimate positions than the critical position which increases its ideas chances to breed within the field and history. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/3615960
- author
- Rosencrantz, Herman LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The times are changing – A qualitative analysis of the discussion concerning evidence within social work
- course
- SOPA63 20122
- year
- 2013
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Sweden, Debate, Social work, Evidence, Paradigm, qualitative analysis, Socialt arbete, Debatt, Kvalitativ analys, Evidensbaserad praktik, Evidens, Bourdieu, Diskusanalys
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 3615960
- date added to LUP
- 2013-03-22 10:05:49
- date last changed
- 2013-03-22 10:05:49
@misc{3615960,
abstract = {{The debate about evidence based practice has been going on for over twenty years in Sweden without any real conclusion. The purpose of this study was with Bourdieu’s theory about culture production and a discourse analytic approach, highlight the arguments in the debate and the beliefs and assumptions about the evidence based practices on which they are based. The aim was also to investigate the reasons why evidence based practice has become one of the most debated subjects within the field of social work science and what conclusion about the deployment of the field of social work you can take from the debate. I’ve focused on symbolic capital and how the authors of the articles position them self in the field to legitimate their opinions. The empirical data consisted of articles from Socionomen, a Swedish magazine for social workers and scientists. In my analyze I identified two different positions in terms of how the authors of the articles recognized the potential in the evidence based practice, the critical- and the advocating position. The critical position consisted primarily of arguments that are based on a ontological- knowledge theoretical perspective concerning knowledge within the field of social work. Regarding the best way to help clients the critical position arguments are inspired by humanistic psychology and that the relationship between the client and the professional is the most important factor. The advocacy position consisted of arguments based on a pragmatic utility maximization view inspired by the new public management movement and the medical field. Regarding the best way to help clients the advocacy position argues that a combination of evidence based methods, the client’s knowledge and the professional’s experience. On the basis of Bourdieu’s theory I found that the advocacy position possesses more symbolic capital and legitimate positions than the critical position which increases its ideas chances to breed within the field and history.}},
author = {{Rosencrantz, Herman}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Förändringar inom fältet - En kvalitativ analys av diskussionen kring evidens inom socialt arbete}},
year = {{2013}},
}