Evidence–based practice at the centre of paradigm shift in social work?
Abstract
Evidence-based practice in social work elicits a broad spectrum of reactions which reflect the dynamics of modern and postmodern approaches, where the traditional emphasis on empirical methods and objectivity confronts the challenges of postmodern skepticism and relativism. Drawing on Thomas Kuhn’s model of scientific development as a theoretical-analytical framework, this paper aims to analyze the debate between modern and postmodern approaches regarding evidence-based practice in social work. Using the methods of content analysis, comparative and narrative analysis, as well as synthesis, the paper focuses on the current debate as an expression of the crisis and conflict between these two paradigms, considering their fundamental ontological, epistemological, methodological, and axiological assumptions. The development of evidence-based practice through the succession of stages of normal science and crisis is presented, followed by the discussion of the main modernist and postmodernist arguments. This opens up the question of the implications of this conflict on the application and the further development of the evidence-based practice approach in social work. It is concluded that, despite the apparent irreconcilability of these approaches, their critical interaction, illuminated through Kuhn’s ideas on scientific paradigms, plays a key role in the development of evidence-based practice.
References
Bonaventure Chike, A. (2021). Karl Popper’s Critique of Thomas Kuhn’s Concept of Normal Science: An Evaluation. African Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Research, vol. 4 (3), 105–115. doi:10.52589/AJSSHR-NROPSRCB.
Burke, A. C., Early, T. J. (2003). Readiness to adopt best practices among adolescents’ AOD treatment providers. Health & Social Work, 28 (2), 99–105. doi:10.1093/hsw/28.2.99.
Doel, M., Shardlow, S. M. (2005). Modern social work practice. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing. Available at: http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/34735/1/1.pdf.pdf
Dominelli, L. (2007). The Postmodern ‘Turn’ in Social Work: The Challenges of Identity and Equality. Social Work and Society, 5 (3). Available at: https://ejournals.bib.uniwuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/144/513.
Drisko, J., Grady, M. (2012). Evidence Based Practice in Clinical Social Work. New York: Springer. Available at: http://educatererindia.com/wp–content/uploads/2021/01/2019_ Book_Evidence–BasedPracticeInClinic.pdf.
Dulmus, C. N., Karen M., Sowers, K. M. (2012). The Profession of Social Work: Guided by History, Led by Evidence. Hoboken: Wiley. Available at: https://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/1X/11181769/111817691X–178.pdf.
Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge, London. Humanities Press. Available at: https://monoskop.org/images/7/7e/Feyerabend_Paul_ Against_Method.pdf.
Firinci Orman, T. (2016). “Paradigm” as a Central Concept in Thomas Kuhn’s Thought. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6 (10), 47–52. Available at: https://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_6_No_10_October_2016/8.pdf.
Fischer, J. (1973). Is casework effective? A Review. Social Work, 18 (1), 5–20. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23712511.
Fischer, J. (1978). Does Anything Work?. Journal of Social Service Research, 1 (3), 215–243. DOI: 10.1300/ J079v01n03_01
Flexner, A. (1915). Is Social Work a Profession?. In: Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Correction at the Forty–second Annual Session Held in Baltimore (576–590). Chicago: Hildmann. Available at: https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/social–work/is–social–work–a–profession–1915/.
Foucault, M., Gordon, C. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books. Available at: https://monoskop.org/images/5/5d/Foucault_Michel_Power_Knowledge_Selected_Interviews_and_ Other_Writings_1972–1977.pdf.
Freshwater, D., Rolfe, G. (2004). Deconstructing Evidence–based Practice. London: Routledge. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203422311/deconstructing–evidence–based–practice–dawn–freshwater–gary–rolfe-
Gajić, M. (2022a). Individual and society from the point of view of the theory of empowerment in social work. In: Z. Kuburić, A. Zotova, Lj. Ćumura (eds.). Individuality and collectivity from the perspective of interdisciplinary research (425–446). Novi Sad: Centar za empirijska istraživanja religije (CEIR). Available at: http://www.ceir.co.rs/upload/2022/ZBORNIK%20–%20%20Individualnost%202022.pdf. [In Serbian]
Gajić, M. (2022b). About the position of Roma children in the social protection system in Serbia. Srpska politička misao, 1/2022, 29 (75), 267–289. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22182/spm.7512022.12. [In Serbian]
Gambrill, E. (2001). Social Work: An Authority–Based Profession. Research on Social Work Practice, 11 (2), 166–175. doi: 10.1177/104973150101100203.
Gambrill, E. (2006). Evidence–Based Practice and Policy: Choices Ahead. Research on Social Work Practice, 16 (3), 338–357. doi: 10.1177/1049731505284205.
Gambrill, E. (2008). Evidence–Based (Informed) Macro Practice: Process and Philosophy. Journal of Evidence–Based Social Work, 5 (3–4), 423–452. doi: 10.1080/15433710802083971.
Giacomucci, S. (2021). Creating an Evidence Base for Social Work, Group Work, and Psychodrama. In: S. Giacomucci, J. Becker–Ebel (eds.). Social Work, Sociometry, and Psychodrama. Psychodrama in Counselling, Coaching and Education (187–210). Singapore: Springer. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978–981–33–6342–7_10.
Gibbs, A. (2001). The Changing Nature and Context of Social Work Research. British Journal of Social Work, 31 (5), 687–704. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.5.687.
Goldenberg, M. J. (2006). On evidence and evidence–based medicine: Lessons from the philosophy of science. Social Science & Medicine, 62 (11), 2621–2632. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.031.
Gray, M., Joy, E., Plath, D. & Webb, S. A. (2013). Opinions about evidence: A study of social workers’ attitudes towards evidence–based practice. Journal of Social Work, 14 (1), 23–40. doi: 10.1177/1468017313475555.
Gray, M., Plath, D., Webb, S. A. (2009). Evidence-Based Social Work: A Critical Stance. London: Routledge. Available at: http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/5060/1/68.pdf.pdf.
Hasel, F. M. (1991). Scientific Revolution: An Analysis and Evaluation of Thomas Kuhn’s Concept of Paradigm and Paradigm Change for Theology, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 2 (2), 160–177. Available at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1522&context=jats.
Howard, M. O., McMillen, C. J., Pollio, D. E. (2003). Teaching Evidence–Based Practice: Toward a New Paradigm for Social Work Education. Research on Social Work Practice, 13 (2), 234–259. doi: 10.1177/1049731502250404.
Howe, D. (1994). Modernity, Postmodernity and Social Work. The British Journal of Social Work, 24 (5), 513–532. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a056103.
Hrnčić, J., Marčetić Radunović, G. (2018). Assessment of resources of children and youth in conflict with the community norms. Sociološki pregled, 52 (3), 985–1019. doi: 10.5937/socpreg52–18933.
Hrnčić, J., Polić, S. (2019). Assessment of aspects and effects of field practice realization by students of social policy and social work. Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka, XIII, 21, 9–36. UDC 378:304.2:364. Available at: https://rfpn.fpn.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/523/736.pdf. [In Serbian]
Hugman, R. (2003). Professional Values and Ethics in Social Work: Reconsidering Postmodernism?. The British Journal of Social Work, 33 (8), 1025–1041. doi:10.1093/bjsw/33.8.1025.
Kirk, S. A., Reid, W. J. (2002). Science and Social Work: A Critical Appraisal. New York: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/kirk11824.
Kuhn, S. T. (1974). The structure of scientific revolutions. Beograd: Nolit. [In Serbian]
Lakatos, I., Musgrave, A. (1970). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965 (pp. I–II). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171434.
Laudan, L. (1978). Progress and its problems: Towards a theory of scientific growth. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 32 (1), 57–71. Available at: https://fenix.ciencias.ulisboa.pt/downloadFile/1688987299217629/Laudan,%20Progress....pdf.
Marsh, D., Stoker, G. (2005). Theories and methods of political science. Zagreb: FPZ.
Masterman, M. (1970). The Nature of a Paradigm. In: I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave (eds.). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Proceedings of the 1965 International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, 4 (3 ed.), 59–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9781139171434.008.
McNeece, A. C., Thyer, B. A. (2004). Evidence–Based Practice and Social Work. Journal of Evidence–Based Social Work, 1 (1), 7–25. doi: 10.1300/J394v01n01_02.
Morago, P. (2006). Evidence-based practice: from medicine to social work. European Journal of Social Work, 9 (4), 461–477. doi: 10.1080/13691450600958510.
National Association of Social Workers (2021). NASW code of ethics. Available at: https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English.
Noble, C. (2004). Postmodern Thinking Where is it Taking Social Work?. Journal of Social Work, 4 (3), 289–304. doi: 10.1177/1468017304047747.
Nothdurfter, U., Lorenz, W. (2010). Beyond the Pro and Contra of Evidence–Based Practice: Reflections on a Recurring Dilemma at the Core of Social Work. Social Work and Society, 8 (1), 46–59. Available at: https://ejournals.bib.uni–wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/22/61.
Ogundele, E., Ogunyomi, A. (2020). A Critical Assessment of Thomas Kuhn’s Understanding of Scientific Progress. Caribbean Journal of Philosophy, 12 (2), 62–77. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362265925_A_Critical_Assessment_of_Thomas_Kuhn%27s_Understanding_of_Scientific_Progress.
Okpych, N. J., Yu, J. L.–H. (2014). A historical analysis of evidence–based practice in social work: The unfinished journey toward an empirically grounded profession. Social Service Review, 88 (1), 3–58. doi: 10.1086/674969.
Peile, C., McCouat, M. (1997). The Rise of Relativism: The Future of Theory and Knowledge Development in Social Work. British Journal of Social Work, 27 (3), 343–360. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjs.
Popper, K. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In: I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (eds.). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press. pp. 51–8. Available at: https://earthweb.ess.washington.edu/roe/Knowability_590/Week1/Normal%20 Science%20and%20its%20Dangers.pdf.
Porter, S., O’Halloran, P. (2009). The postmodernist war on evidence–based practice. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46 (5), 740–748. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.11.002.
Ramey, H. L., Grubb, S. (2009). Modernism, Postmodernism and (Evidence–Based) Practice. Contemporary Family Therapy, 31 (2), 75–86. doi: 10.1007/s10591–009–9086–6.
Richmond, M. (1917). Social Diagnosis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Available at: https://www.historyofsocialwork.org/PDFs/1917,%20Richmond,%20Social%20 Diagnosis%20OCR%20C.pdf.
Rodwell, M. K. (1998). Social Work Constructivist Research. New York: Garland. Available at: https://annas–archive.org/md5/e307003979ddc395984136e08cb5282f.
Rosen, A. (2003). Evidence-based social work practice: Challenges and promise, 27 (4), pp. 197–208. doi:10.1093/swr/27.4.197.
Scheffler, I. (1967). Science and Subjectivity. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, INC. Available at: https://ktxr.rs/d2/y/1699924798/31/u/annas-archive-ia-2023-06-acsm/s/sciencesubjectiv0000sche_c8d6.pdf~/vtSWXVptaTuj6LeKSorlWg/Science%20 and%20subjectivity%20--%20Scheffler%2C%20Israel%20--%201967%20--%20 Indianapolis%2C%20Bobbs-Merrill%20--%209780672511707%20--%207ce5744a-b3508b69c3d6db72503b6bf8%20--%20Anna%E2%80%99s%20Archive.pdf.
Shapere, D. (1964). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The Philosophical Review, 73(3), 383–394. doi: 10.2307/2183664.
Sheldon, B. (1998). Evidence based Social Services: prospects and problems. Research Policy and Planning, 16 (2), 16–18. Available at: http://ssrg.org.uk/wp–content/uploads/2015/10/Vol–16.–No.–2..pdf.
Strauss, E. S., Glasziou, P., Richardson, S. W., Haynes B. R. (2019). Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier. Available at: https://dl.icdst.org/pdfs/files4/0151c55f69e2fcd3a6d1f99b6430a288.pdf.
The Law on Social Protection of Republic of Serbia, Official Gazette of RS, no. 24/2011. Available at: https://www.minrzs.gov.rs/sites/default/files/2018-11/Zakon%20o%20socijalnoj%20zastiti.pdf. [In Serbian]
Vučinić Jovanović M. (2020). Historical development of group work: from movement to method in social work. Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka, XIV, 23, 299–317. UDC 36:316.45. Available at: https://www.fpn.bg.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/FPN-Godisnjak-23-2020.pdf. [In Serbian]
Webb, S. (2001). Some considerations on the validity of evidence–based practice in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 31 (1), 57–79. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.1.57
Wieringa, S., Engebretsen, E., Heggen, K., Greenhalgh, T. (2017). Has evidence–based medicine ever been modern? A Latour–inspired understanding of a changing EBM. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 23 (5), 964–970. doi:10.1111/jep.12752.
Williams, F. (1996). Postmodernism, feminism and the question of difference. In: N. Parton (ed.). Social Theory, Social Change and Social Work (61–76). London: Routledge. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/30830670/Social_Theory_Social_Change_and_Social_W_pdf.
Williams, L., Sewpaul, V. (2004). Modernism, postmodernism and global standards setting. Social Work Education, 23 (5), 555–565. doi: 10.1080/0261547042000252280.
Žegarac, N. (2014). Reflexivity and objectivity in decision–making. In: N. Žegarac (ed.). In the labyrinth of social protection: lessons learnt from research on children in care (64–66). Beograd: UB–FPN, Available at: https://www.unicef.org/serbia/sites/unicef.org.serbia/files/2018–08/U_lavirintu_socijalne_zastite.pdf. [In Serbian]
Žegarac, N., Vučinić, M., Milanović, M. (2014). Roma children in care within the social protection system in Serbia. In: N. Žegarac (ed.). In the labyrinth of social protection: lessons learnt from research on children in care, 219–250. Beograd: Fakultet političkih nauka – Centar za istraživanja u socijalnoj politici i socijalnom radu. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/serbia/sites/unicef.org.serbia/files/2018-08/U_lavirintu_socijalne_zastite.pdf. [In Serbian]