Reclaiming the practical: Formal and substantive rationality in social work practice

In this article, I argue that the starting point for inquiry about practice knowledge should be the empirical question, How does the competent practitioner go about knowing "in" practice? Using the work of J u r g e n Habermas, Michael Polyani, Donald Schon, and others, I advance a claim for the nonderivative status of substantive rationality alongside the technical in the construction of professional knowledge. I maintain that the researcher and practitioner have functionally different relationships to the practice arena and, therefore, differing cognitive interests for their involvement in that arena. These interests are assumed decisive for (1) categories in which knowledge is structured, (2) methods by which truth claims are authenticated, (3) the type of discourse in which knowledge is communicated, and (4) the mode in which knowledge is available to the knower

Who is the "self" in self-aware: Professional self-awareness from a critical theory perspective

Professional self-awareness is widely considered a necessary condition for competent social work practice. Alternate prescriptions for self-awareness rely implicitly on varying definitions of what it means to be a "self" and what it means to be "aware." I will review three approaches to professional self-awareness conventionally adopted in the literature: (a) simple conscious awareness (awareness o f whatever is being experienced), (b) reflective awareness (awareness of a self who is experiencing something), and (c) reflexive awareness (the self's awareness of how his or her awareness is constituted in direct experience). Strengths and limitations of these three epistemological approaches are discussed. An alternate framework, based on Anthony Giddens's "structuration theory," is developed and advanced as a more macro-level and less exclusively psychological understanding of practitioner selfawareness. The article concludes with illustrations from practice

Concept, act, and interest in social work practice: Implications of an empowerment perspective

Within recent social work literature, the concept of empowerment as a practice perspective has received wide endorsement. In this article, I argue that adopting the notion of empowerment as a framework for practice requires not only that we think differently about professional practice but, more fundamentally, that we think differently about professional knowledge. Using the work of philosopher Jiirgen Habermas, particularly the distinction he makes among three arenas of human activity—work, interaction, and power—I outline ways in which the functional and cognitive interests associated with these arenas dictate differing orientations to practice, alternate commitments to various forms of knowledge as applicable in practice settings, and different accounts of practitioner error. Implications for professional education are addressed

Translating Concept into Act forMulti-Cultural Practice: Comparison of Students’ and Field Instructors’ Perceptions of Diversity Training Effectiveness

Education for culturally competent practice increasingly is a responsibility for social work educators.Using data collected for an evaluation of the field education component of a large,Midwestern social work program, the purpose of this study is to shed light on students’ application in the field practicum setting of classroom training in culturally competent practice. Responses were obtained from field instructors (n=76) and students (n=70). Students reported learning in areas dealing with diversity at statistically significant levels; however, instructor ratings of student competence were significantly lower than student ratings. Results are discussed in light of necessary attitudes, knowledge, and skills. Implications for program monitoring and improvement, education, and further research are discussed