SAMPLE PAPER
Martinez-Brawley and Zorita (2007) and Pozzuto&Arnd-Caddigan (2008) are critical of social work as it is taught and practiced today in the United States because students are generally exposed only to a technocratic modus operandi “that ignores the frequency with which certain events have occurred in the past” (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007, p.535). In other words, the historical experiences are ignored when teaching social work. Practitioners who are successful in their interventions are asked to develop protocols or blueprints that could facilitate the duplication of the intervention in large scale. (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007). Often, the assumption made is that these practitioners operate from an analytical or atomistic framework (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007). But these practitioners might be arriving at the solutions using faculties, intuition, or imagination that defy analysis and thus, standardization (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007).
The first criticism offered by the authors regarding how social work is taught and practiced today in the United States is that it is governed by standards that assure compliance with a basic set of professional principles, codes, and know-how (Pozzuto&Arnd-Caddigan, 2008). These standards are based, primarily, on codified knowledge, enlightenment thinking, rule setting, and order (Pozzuto&Arnd-Caddigan, 2008). In addition, social work education is also governed by a complex formulaic manual or set of rules that translate the “codes” and privileges a way of thinking about education and practice (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007). This means that codified knowledge has become the foundation of the way social work is taught and practiced today in the United States. The problem is that this approach curtails creativity and inventiveness in the way social work professionals approach their world and results in tacit knowledge being underused (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007).
The second criticism offered by the authors in relation to the way social work is taught and practiced today in the United States is that the use of codified knowledge has a major problem in that the transmission of knowledge relies on prescriptions, not on reflection (Martinez-Brawley and Zorita, 2007). This makes it possible for the social work professionals to solve discreet problems because the definition of the problems and the solutions to the problems are readily prescribed. In other words, professionals are not accorded the opportunity to think beyond what they are taught and read. The professionals are also not provided with an opportunity to define problems and design solutions to the identified problems (Fargion, 2006). In this regard, the authors noted that overreliance on codified knowledge in teaching social work in the United States continues to produce professionals with “habituated thoughts” and who rely on habitual processes in their practice (Fargion, 2006). As a result, the level of creativity and inventiveness in the profession is also curtailed.
In my view, these arguments are valid because the essence of any profession is to produce individuals who are holistically equipped with knowledge that can help to improve and advance the professional practice. The reliance on codified knowledge which lead to the development of habituated thoughts cannot contribute positively to the development of creative and innovative social workers. Additionally, the way social work is taught and practiced should emphasize the applications of imaginative solutions rather than specific protocols and mechanistic skills. It is important that social work education policies be formulated to reflect not only the current experiences but also past and historical experiences so that social work professionals can have a strong foundation in their practice. In this regard, the arguments presented by the authors are valid and should be used as the basis for brining change into the way social work is taught and practiced in the United States.
References:
Fargion, S. (2006). Thinking professional social work. Journal of social work, 6(3), 255-273. Retrieved from http://jsw.sagepub.com/content/6/3/255.full.pdf+html
Martinez-Brawley, E., &Zorita, P. (2007). Tacit and codified knowledge in social work: A critique of standardization in education and practice. Families in Society, 88(4), 534-542. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview
Pozzuto, R., &Arnd-Caddigan, M. (2008). Social work in the US: Sociohistorical context and contemporary issues. Australian Social Work, 61(1), 57-71.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]