ETIESE DIMENSIES IN DIE BENUTTING VAN DIE ENKELSISTEEMNAVORSINGSONTWERP

  • C Reynolds Departement Maatskaplike Werk, Hugenote Kollege, Wellington, Suid-Africa.

Abstract

Maatskaplike werkers moet kan demonstreer dat die maatskaplikewerk- hulpverleningsintervensieswat hulle toepas, waarneembare uitkomste lewer in die lewens en omstandighedevan individue, groepe, gemeenskappe en organisasies. Laasgenoemde geld ook vir dieprogramme en projekte wat deur ’n welsynsorganisasie aangebied word. Hierdie verantwoordelikheidval saam met die staat se Kwaliteitsbeheerbeleid. Hierdie verantwoordelikheid is reedssedert die sewentigerjare van die vorige eeu sterk beklemtoon (Fanshel, 1980:32-35).Maatskaplike werkers het die verantwoordelikheid om aan kliënte, werkgewers, borge,subsidiërende liggame en die gemeenskap te kan toon dat hulle professionele dienslewering ’nbydrae tot die welsyn van die breër gemeenskap lewer. Hierdie verwagtinge ten opsigte vanmaatskaplike werkers is ook deur skrywers soos onder andere Bloom en Fischer (1982:476) enRoyse (1991:5) uitgewys. Loewenberg en Dolgoff (1992:223) sê in die verband: “Socialworkers are accountable to the people they serve, to their profession and to society.” Reeds in1993 noem Nelson (1994:65) die volgende in die verband: “In the past few years, socialworkers have been invited,…to evaluate their practice outcomes more objectively for greateraccountability to clients and agencies.” In die lig van die globaliseringsproses, die hoër eisewat die mens aan sy omgewing en diensleweringstrukture stel, die strewe na meer bruikbarekennis, asook die hoër opleidingstandaarde wat aan maatskaplike werkers gestel word om altydeties op te tree, word daar by die aanvang van die nuwe millennium verwag dat maatskaplikewerkers op ’n etiese en vaardige wyse praktyk-evaluering kan onderneem.Ten spyte daarvandat evaluering ’n integrale deel van die maatskaplike werker se professionele vaardighede vorm(Bloom & Fischer, 1982:476), bevraagteken skrywers soos Fischer (1993:19) en Nelson(1994:140) die wetenskaplikheid van die wyses waarop maatskaplike werkers hulledienslewering evalueer. Maatskaplike werkers evalueer dikwels die effektiwiteit van hulledienslewering aan die hand van die positiewe of negatiewe menings wat die kliënt(e) metbetrekking tot die bereiking van die beplande hulpverleningsdoelwitte uitspreek (Nelson,1994:141), of hulle steun op hulle eie subjektiewe waarneming of vooroordele (Grinnell,1997:9).

References

ANASTAS, J.W. & MACDONALD, M.L. 1994. Research design for social work and the

human services. New York: Lexington Books.

BABBIE, E. 2004. The practice of social research (10th ed). Australia: Thomson.

BLOOM, M. & FISCHER, J. 1982. Evaluation practice: Guidelines for the accountable

professional. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

BLOOM, M., FISCHER, J. & ORME, J.G. 1995. Evaluation practice: Guidelines for the

accountable professional (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

BLOOM, M. & ORME, J.G. 1993. Ethics and the single-system design. Journal of Social

Service Research, 18(1/2):161-180.

CORCORANC, K.J. 1993. Practice evaluation: Problems and promises of single-system

designs in clinical practice. Journal of Social Service Research, 18(1/2):147-159.

DE VOS, A.S., STRYDOM, H., FOUCHE, C.B. & DELPORT, C.S.L. 2005. Research at

grass roots (3rd ed). Pretoria: Van Schaik.

DOOLEY, D. 1995. Social research methods (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

FANSHEL, D. 1980. (ed) Future of social work research. Washington: National Association

of Social Workers, Inc.

FISCHER, J. 1993. Empirically-based practice: The end of Ideology? Journal of Social

Service Research, 18(1/2):19-64.

GILCHRIST, L.D. & SCHINKE, S.P. 1981. Research Ethics. In: GRINNELL, R.M. Social

work research and evaluation. Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

GRINNELL, R.M. 1981. Social work research and evaluation. Illinois: F.E. Peacock

Publishers, Inc.

GRINNELL, R.M. 1988. Social work research and evaluation. Illinois: F.E. Peacock

Publishers, Inc.

GRINNELL, R.M. 1997. Social work research and evaluation. Quantitative and qualitative

approaches. Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

GRINNELL, R.M. & UNRAU, Y.A. 1997. Group Designs. In: GRINNELL, R.M. Social

work research and evaluation. Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Illinois: F.E.

Peacock Publishers, Inc.

GRINNELL, R.M. & WILLIAMS, M. 1990. Research in social work: A primer. Illinois:

F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

HEPWORTH, D.H. & LARSEN, J.A. 1993. Direct social work practice: Theory and skills

(4th ed). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

HEPWORTH, D.H., ROONEY, R.H. & LARSEN, J.A. 2002. Direct social work. Theory and

skills (6th ed). Australia: Brooks/Cole.

KIDDER, L.H. & JUDD, C.M. 1986. Research methods in social relations (5th ed). New

York: CBS Publishing Ltd.

LOEWENBERG, F.M. & DOLGOFF, R. 1992. Ethical decisions for social work practice

(4th ed). Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

MAHON, A., GLENDINNING, C., CLARKE, C. & CRAIG, G. 1996. Researching children:

Methods and ethics. Children and Society, 96(10):145-154.

MARLOW, C. 1993. Research methods for generalist social work. Pacific Grove:

Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

MATTHEWS, L. & VENABLES, A. 1998. Critiquing ethical issues in published research. In:

CROOKES, A. & DAVIES, S. (eds) Research into practice. Edinburgh: Bailliere Tindall.

MILEY, K.K., O’MELIA, M. & DuBOIS, B. 2001. Generalist social work practice: An

empowerment approach (3rd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

NELSON, J.C. 1994. Ethics, gender, and ethnicity in single-case research and evaluation.

Journal of Social Service Research, 18(3/4):139-152.

NUEHRING, E.M. & PASCONE, A.B. 1986. Single-subject evaluation: A tool for quality

assurance. Social Work, 86(31):359-369.

NEUMAN, W.L. 2003. Social research methods. Qualitative and quantitative approaches

(5th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

PATRICK, P.D., MOZZONI, M. & PATRICK, S.T. 2000. Evidence-based care and the singlesubject

design. Infants and Young Children, 13(1):60-73.

REAMER, F.G. 2000. Ethical issues in direct practice. In: ALLEN-MEARES. P.A. &

GARVIN, C. (eds) The Handbook of Social Work Direct Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publications, Inc.

RENGER, R., GOTKIN, V., CRAGO, M. & SHISSLAK, C. 1998. Research and legal

perspectives on the implications of the Family Privacy Protection Act of 1995 (FPPA).

American Journal of Evaluation, 98(19):191-202.

ROBSON, M., COOK, P., HUNT, K., ALRED, G. & ROBSON, D. 2000. Towards ethical

decision-making in counseling research. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling,

(4):1-13.

ROYSE, D. 1991. Research methods in social work. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.

RUBIN, A. & BABBIE, E. 1997. Research methods for social work (3rd ed). Boston:

Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

SHEAFOR, B.W. & HORESJI, C.R. 2003. Techiques and guidelines for social work

practice (6th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

SOUTH AFRICAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES PROFESSIONS. (N.D.) Policy

Guidelines for Course of Conduct, Code of Ethics and the Rules for Social Workers.

WILLIAMS, M., GRINNELL, R.M. & TUTTY, L.M. 1997. Research Contexts. In:

GRINNELL, R.M. Social work research and evaluation. Quantitative and qualitative

approaches. Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.

ZASTROW, C.H. 1999. The practice of social work (6th ed). Boston:Brooks/Cole Publishing

Company.

Published
2014-06-20
Section
Articles