Abstract:
This study is about how people learn to be good social workers. It is
based on thirty-seven tape-recorded interviews with practitioners who
were selected by
-their, peers and each other as doing the job well.
The analysis adopts the view that interviews be seen as situated
encounters in which interviewees attempt to provide morally adequate
accounts of themselves and their actions. This approach is used as a
means of making sense of both the 'interview talk' and of the cultural
features to which appeal-is made in producing an adequate account. -
The analysis is set in a discussion of new theories of adult learning;
a crique of professional literature on theory and practice in social
work; and, an appraisal of organisational studies of social work.
Whilst the professional literature can be criticised for paying scant
attention to the organisational settings of social work, the
sociological studies can be criticised for failing to comprehend the
accomplishments of social workers. This study aims to avoid both of
these shortcomings. The literature from new theories of adult
learning provides some promising developments in this regard, and the
recent trends in the re-organisation of professional training are
subjected to scrutiny.
On examining the social workers' accounts, it was seen that there were
certain central features in common. They were all structured so as to
relate the social worker's identity to his or her role, and to relate
learning to experience. The differences
as well as the similarities
in how this is done are clarified by the analysis. In constructing their versions of good social work, the practitioners differed
according to their managing of the tension between the formal
dimensions of their practice (law, policy, procedure) and their
informal, discursive interactions within the everyday worlds of their
clients.
The accounts of learning given by the social workers refer
predominantly to the place of experience, and to membership within
collegiate teams. This is viewed as consistent with their ways of
constructing good practice, but it is in marked constrast to the
versions of learning dominant within the professional literature and
educational methods. Ultimately, however, the social workers' own
accounts of their learning falter, as they are unable to construct an
adequate version for the rigours of formal rationality. The argument
is made that this is due to the suppresion of a different reading of
social work: social work as 'practice', a practical activity, and a
cultural practice. Finally, the implications of this different
reading of social work are considered, and reference made to recent
major changes in legislation.