The Role and Nature of Evidence: A Systematic Review of Social Workers' Evidence-Based Practice Orientation, Attitudes, and Implementation

Scurlock-Evans, Laura; Upton, Dominic

doi:10.1080/15433714.2013.853014

Cited by 39 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, with limited time for working with the model, benefits like these are at risk of being lost. Thus, a lack of sufficient time, aligned with other factors like a dearth of resources and negative or skeptical attitudes, are possible hindering factors, that are also described in previous research (Gray, Joy, Plath, & Webb, 2014;Heiwe et al, 2013;Pope, Rollins, Chaumba, & Risler, 2011;Scurlock-Evans & Upton, 2015). Another possible consequence of limited time is practitioners' choice to work from experience and tacit knowledge, instead of basing choices on evidence, since this requires less effort in comparison (Muskat, Mishna, Farnia, & Wiener, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…However, since it is argued that EBP makes practitioners less reflective, concerns have been raised as to whether EBP restrains social work practice (e.g. Avby, 2015;Scurlock-Evans & Upton, 2015). Clearly, prevailing trends are affecting the practitioners, presumably placing them in the dilemma of trying to balance organizational demands and client needs.…”

Section: Reflection In Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Reflection in Family Support Social Work and Its Possible Promotion by a Research-Supported Model

Ryding

Wernersson

2019

Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 researchsupported, 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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Reflection In Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Reflection in Family Support Social Work and Its Possible Promotion by a Research-Supported Model

Ryding

Wernersson

2019

Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These may be considered foundation elements underlying much, if not all, aspects of social work (certainly that related to work with service users). Their status as key foundations for social work is evident from the separate literatures devoted to the intellectual-critical thinking and the interpersonal-relationships (Coleman et al, 2002;Brown and Rutter, 2009;Hennessy, 2011;Ruch et al, 2010) and indeed the proficiencies required of qualifying practitioners (HCPC, 2016). Their centrality in social work is widely recognised.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter-Personal and Critical-Thinking Capabilities in Those about to Enter Qualified Social Work: A Six-Centre Study

Sheppard¹,

Charles

Rees

et al. 2018

The British Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 'Process' of intervention is understood to be fundamental to social workevident in, for example, the literature on reflexivity. Little work though has focused on the detailed excavation of the cognitive processes of reasoning in decision making. This is widely recognized as requiring considerable analytic and critical abilities. Although this is long-established, its importance is contemporarily apparent at policy level from the rationale underlying current initiatives such as Frontline. However, it is also long understood the reasoning capabilities underlying these processes cannot, be considered in isolation from the interpersonal-emotional, encapsulated in a longterm theoretical concern for both Heart and Head. Furthermore terms like 'capability' or 'proficiency' in professional qualification imply some standard to be reached in practice. This invites measurement. This novel study seeks to bring together three dimensions of the (1) measurement of (2) the interpersonal-emotional and (3) critical thinking-measurement of key facets of both Head and Heart. A six-centre, six-University collaboration it focuses on those at a crucial point: where individuals are about to enter qualified practice. The findings show they score highly on most interpersonal measures (with room for improvement), but show huge variability in Critical Thinking Capabilities. The implications of this are discussed Interpersonal and Critical Thinking Capabilities in those about to enter qualified social work: a six-centre study How social workers think-the cognitive processes of decision making-is an issue at least as important as what they should know. The latter is the subject of the much more prominent focus on Evidence Based/Informed Practice (Scurlock-Evans and Upton, 2015). How practitioners make sense though is an issue of meaning, but that 'making of meaning' is also a cognitive-reasoning process (thinking about something logically): What are the key facets of reasoning involved? What are the mental processes (rather than, say situational characteristics) by which they decide a course of action? How can they ensure the maximum rigour when conducting practice? How can error be minimized? and so on. These are all-from a cognitive perspectiveissues of reasoning rather than knowledge. This focus on reasoning processes is at the heart of judgement and decision making. However, compared with, say medicine (Patel et al, 2005), there has been little focus on these reasoning processes in social work research. This does not mean that process as a whole has not been of interest in social workreflexivity, with its myriad meanings, multiple theoretical positions and, at times combination of situational factors with process in part does (D'Cruz et al, 2007). But the contribution specifically-of process reasoning has been little examined. Where it has, this has primarily been through theoretical considerations or critical analysis rather than research-based (Munro, 1999; Taylor and White, 2006) Equally, the issue of measurement is at the heart of...

show abstract

“…Research on frontline practitioners' attitudes and utilisation towards EBP suggests that one of the major issues with EBP is the confusion that surrounds it. This confusion is due to a lack of clarity about the concept, especially in terms of how it should be understood in relation to social work practice (Avby et al, 2014;Bergmark & Lundström, 2011;Björk, 2016;Grady et al, 2018;James et al, 2019;Knight, 2015;Scurlock-Evans & Upton, 2015;van der Zwet et al, 2019). One explanation for the confusion might be the unclear distinction between empirically supported treatments and EBP.…”

Section: Previous Research On Evidence-based Practice and Knowledge Umentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies show that education, workshops, and training courses facilitate the use of EBP (Aarons et al, 2006;Edmond et al, 2006;Ekeland et al, 2019;Gromoske & Berger, 2017;Parrish & Oxhandler, 2015;Parrish & Rubin, 2011;Scurlock-Evans & Upton, 2015). Social work field instructors and supervisors have been shown to play an important role (Edmond et al, 2006;Parrish & Oxhandler, 2015;Tennille et al, 2016;Wiechelt & Ting, 2012).…”

Section: Previous Research On Evidence-based Practice and Knowledge Umentioning

confidence: 99%

Social workers use of knowledge in an evidence-based framework: a mixed methods study

Finne¹,

Ekeland²

2020

European Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1990s, evidence-based practice has become part of social work, grounded in the notion that social work should be a research-based profession. However, recent studies show that social workers struggle with bridging research and practice. This study analysed Norwegian social workers' use of knowledge in their daily practice, drawing on data from a survey consisting of 2060 social workers in different practice fields as well as qualitative interviews with 25 social workers from social services and child welfare services. Analyses of the quantitative data revealed that clients, work experience, and colleagues were the three most common sources of knowledge among the social workers. The use of knowledge could be divided into two subgroups: (a) theory-oriented and (b) practice-oriented. The qualitative interviews revealed that social workers valued work experience, colleagues, supervisors, and clients as their main sources of knowledge. Lack of time was identified as the main barrier for engaging in research. The findings in this study are contextualised with theories on knowledge production and translation in social work, arguing that field instructors, supervisors, and social work education play an essential role both in facilitating evidence-based practice and, more broadly, in bridging the gap between research and practice. SAMMENDRAG Siden 1990-tallet har evidensbasert praksis blitt en del av sosialt arbeid, forankret i en idé om at sosialt arbeid skal vaere en forskningsbasert profesjon. Studier viser imidlertid til at det har vaert utfordrende å overføre forskningsresultater til praksis. Denne studien analyserer norske sosialarbeidere sin bruk av kunnskap i deres daglige praksis, med utgangspunkt i data fra en undersøkelse bestående av 2060 sosialarbeidere fra forskjellige praksisfelt, og kvalitative intervjuer med 30 sosialarbeidere og ledere fra NAV og barnevernet. Resultater fra de kvantitative dataene viste at klienter, arbeidserfaring og kolleger var de tre vanligste kunnskapskildene blant sosialarbeiderne. Deres bruk av kunnskap i praksis kunne deles inn i to undergrupper: (a) teoriorientert og (b) praksisorientert. De kvalitative intervjuene viste at sosialarbeidere

show abstract

The Role and Nature of Evidence: A Systematic Review of Social Workers' Evidence-Based Practice Orientation, Attitudes, and Implementation

Cited by 39 publications

References 47 publications

The Role of Reflection in Family Support Social Work and Its Possible Promotion by a Research-Supported Model

The Role of Reflection in Family Support Social Work and Its Possible Promotion by a Research-Supported Model

Inter-Personal and Critical-Thinking Capabilities in Those about to Enter Qualified Social Work: A Six-Centre Study

Social workers use of knowledge in an evidence-based framework: a mixed methods study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About