Sociology and Social Work: Science and Art

Excerpt from the full-text article: We live in an age of specialization and usually find it beneficial, perhaps even essential. However, we have been aware since Marx\u27s time at least that the division of labor has its cost. And though we may be a long way from the unconpartmentalized utopia where an individual might do four different kinds of work in a single day, we cannot afford to let the assumptions which underlie the separation of important jobs and functions go without periodic reexamination. The separation of the work of the sociologist (or, indeed, any social scientist) and the social worker is one area where reconsideration is overdue. In examining the taken-for-granted bases of this division of labor, we may find they obscure more than they clarify

A Replication of Failure, Not a Failure to Replicate

Purpose: The increasing role of systematic reviews in knowledge production demands greater rigor in the literature search process. The performance of the Social Work Abstracts (SWA) database has been examined multiple times over the past three decades. The current study is a replication within this line of research. Method: Issue level coverage was examined for the same 33 SWA core journals and the same time period as our 2009 study. Results: The mean percentage of issues missing in the current study was 20%. The mean percentage of issues missing in the current study was significantly greater than the mean percentage of issues missing in the 2009 study. Discussion: The research of other groups, and that of our own, has failed to prompt NASW Press to act. SWA was failing, it is failing and NASW Press has failed to correct those failures

Direct Deliberative Governance Online: Consensual Problem Solving or Accommodated Pluralism?

Abstract This article describes and analyses patterns of "governance conversation" observed in interactions on e-mail lists that aim to support local, direct governance in a geographically co-located community in South Africa. It examines the extent to which governance conversations feature instrumental or expressive dialogue and how they subsequently support consensual or pluralist outcomes. Although each conversation pattern relates to governance, the making of consensual, "binding decisions" which is usually seen as a key outcome of deliberative democratic processes, is almost entirely absent from the observed interactions. Nonetheless, the exchanges appear to be relevant and useful to the broader process of local direct deliberative governance. The results indicate that online interaction may be particularly suited to facilitating the pluralist deliberation required to manage complex local governance problems. The study points to the potential value of an infrequently investigated context of online deliberation - that of resident-to-resident deliberation on geographically local issues - and presents a broader conception of the role of online deliberation in local governance