The Time is Right for a Common
Conceptual Framework
Kentucky Conference on Social Work Practice and Education
Feb 8-10, 2001 - Lexington, KY
Richard Ramsay
University of Calgary
Note: Best Viewed with Explorer Browser
Dedicated To . . . .
 Harriet Bartlett
 Jim Billups
 William Gordon
 Dorothy Miller
Bartlett’s Concern . . . .
 “. . . the lack of adequate words,
terms, concepts to represent the
important facets and components of the
profession’s practice as a whole”
Bartlett, 1970, p. 46.
Bartlett’s Dream . . . .
Graduates will leave schools of social
work with “an initial grasp of social
work’s full scope and content”
Bartlett, 1970, p. 83.
Wakefield’s priority . . . .
 “. . . The conceptual analysis of social
work’s purpose should be high among
the profession’s intellectual priorities”
Wakefield, 1996, p. 210.
Begin with Conclusions
Common Conceptual Framework
Aligned with holistic worldview
Based on a common organizing framework
Utilizes Nature’s minimum whole system
Allows for co-existing opposites
Displays entity-relationship constellations
Highlights relationship-centered focus
Common Organizing Structure
Tetrahedral Constellation
3-dimensional
top view
2-dimensional
unfolded view
Multi-dimensional
complex view
Common Conceptual Framework
 Core Components

Domain of Practice

Paradigm of Profession

Domain of Social Worker

Methods of Practice
Common Conceptual Framework
Scope of Social Work Map
Domain of Practice
relationship-connected pathways
Paradigm of Profession
Method of Practice
1 systematic
Domain of Social Worker
3 systemic
(network-like)
(phase-like)
Revisiting the Working Definiton
and Conceptual Framework
Meetings
1958 Working Definition
Pentahedral Constellation
Purpose
Values
Sanctions
R = (n2-n)/2
R = (25-5)/2
R = 10
Knowledge
Method
Purpose
Strengthen maximum potential in
individual, groups, communities
Common Values
Interdependence of elements
Social responsibility for one another
Common needs; diversely unique
Right to realize full potential; expectation
of active participation
Societal responsibility to prevent barriers
Sanctions
Agencies

Government and NGOs
Profession



Legislation, standards, code of ethics
‘Safety net’ profession
‘care for’ profession
Social assignment


Dependency problems (Popple, 1985)
Minimum distributive justice problems (Wakefield, 1996)
Knowledge
 Human development
 Giving and taking
 Communicating
 Group processes
 Cultural heritage
 Relationships
 Community
 Social services
 Self
Methods
Orderly systematic mode
Disciplined use of self in relationship
Practitioner is facilitator of PIE interactions
Includes observation, assessment, plan of action
Aided by techniques and technology
Technical expertise to use knowledge
1st CF Meeting: Is there a
Common Conceptual Framework?
Commissioned papers

Pincus and Minahan
• Resources, interaction, objectives, tasks and activities

Dean
• Political philosophies cannot be ignored

Morris
• A “caring for” profession

Cooper
• A professional mechanism for inducing change

Read
• Problem-oriented models that can be tested scientifically
Madison Meeting: Is there a
Common Conceptual Framework?
Reaction papers

Morales
• Over emphasis on knowledge to do clinical work

Simon
• The basis for a common framework; time is not right

Gilbert
• Absence of a well articulated conceptual framework

Alexander
• Past dichotomies reconstructed and repeated
O’Hare Meeting: Purpose and Objective
Hexahedral Constellation
Purpose and Beliefs
- Improved and clarified
Purpose
Values
R = (n2-n)/2
R = (36-6)/2 Knowledge
R = 15
Objectives
- added
Objectives
Sanctions
Method
O’Hare Meeting
 Beliefs reworked
 Purpose reworked
 Functional objectives added
 Direct practice articulated
 Identified unit of attention targets
 Silent on relationship-centred focus
 Silent on indirect practice
Moving in the Direction of a
Common Conceptual
Framework-Definition
Integration
Bartlett’s Common Base
Triangular base
Social functioning domain
Broad Orientation
Intervention repertoire
Beyond the Working Definition
Practitioner action, directed to a purpose

guided by values, knowledge and methods
Values and knowledge

interact in determining professional goals
Sanction

removed as a basic definer
Central concern of social work

not in WD, nor recognized as needed
Social workers

not taught to think holistically
Beyond the Common Base:
Systems Informed Models
 Meyer
 Pincus & Minahan
 Middleman & Goldberg
 Goldstein
 Comptom & Galaway
 Geraine & Gitterman
 Shulman
 Johnson
 Sheafor et al
 Zastrow
 O’Neil
 O’Miley et al
Post Madison and O’Hare Meetings
 1982, IFSW international definition

common base elements
 2000, CASW National Scope of Practice

domain, preparation, practitioner, method
 2000, IFSW international definition

purpose, focus, knowledge, values
Can We Do What We Came Here
To Do?
Reworking the Working Definition
 Yes! A common conceptual framework is
possible
 No! We don’t have to repeat dichotomies
 Yes! Bartlett’s dream of a comprehensive
professional model can be achieved
We can do it!Make the WD elements an
integral part of the conceptual framework
Common Conceptual Framework
 based on minimum whole system constellation

tetrahedral
 informed by Bartlett’s common base

Social functioning, broad orientation, intervention repertoire
 informed by Wilber’s domain-method criteria


Identifiable domain/area of practice
Refutable method/intervention process
 informed by Kuhn’s paradigm criteria

Common values, rules and standards of practice of a likeminded group
Common Conceptual Framework
Operational Framework
Domain of Social Work
Social functioning
- role performance
- just environment
challenges,
strengths
Paradigm of Profession
Outcomes
Method of Practice
1 systematic
Domain of Social Worker
3 systemic
SW functioning
- competent
- burn-out
Domain of Social Work Practice
 Defining Purpose/Organizing Value



Informed by tensionally connected moral imperatives
Contains clear vision and mission
Guides the use of diverse repertoire of methods
 Functional Objectives

Guided by defining purpose vision and mission
 Informed by:

Diverse knowledge bases
Paradigm of Profession
Values


Primary
Instrumental
Practice Options/Decisions
Functions
Modes of delivery/programs
Knowledge

curriculum
Sanctions

Social assignment
• (Popple) (Wakefield)

Profession
• enabling

Governments and NGOs
• Embracing and/or limiting

Corporate world
• limiting
Domain of Social Worker
 disciplined use of self
 personal-professional integration
 ability to rise above personal beliefs

Methods of Practice
 Intervention repertoire
 Phase-like processes


Mixture of linear and non-linear dynamics
Dialectical/dialogical
 Intervention-specific theories
Techniques
Skills
Think Conceptually
Practice Specifically
Common Conceptual Framework
Operational Framework
Domain of Social Work
Social functioning
- role performance
- just environment
challenges,
strengths
Paradigm of Profession
Outcomes
Method of Practice
1 systematic
Domain of Social Worker
3 systemic
SW functioning
- competent
- burn-out
Back To The Conclusion
Futurist Vision
“How do we make the world work for 100% of
humanity in the shortest possible time through
spontaneous cooperation without ecological
damage or the disadvantage of anyone?”
R.Buckminster Fuller
End of Paper
Response to Responder
Working Definition Issues
Working Definition Re-worked Definition
 individual concern
 worldview base
 Divided whole
 Equilibrium health
 self-determination
 linear-circular causes
 social functioning
 Quality of life
 Strengthen max potential
 dual purpose
 individual-collective
 worldview base
 Undivided whole
 Far from equilibrium health
 co-determination
 linear-non-linear patterns
 social well being
 Just and civil society
 Distributive justice
 unifying purpose
Working Definition Issues
Working Definition Re-worked Definition
 Change focus is entitycentered
 Intervention target is
abstract entity
 empowering methods

bestowed outcome
 dichotomous opposites
 theory that links method
and purpose
 change focus is relationshipcentered
 Intervention target is entitycentred
 enabling methods

Co-empowered outcomes
 co-existive complementarity
 conceptually clear purpose;
methods to pursue purpose
Working Definition Issues
Working Definition Re-worked Definition
 person-in-environment
 person-environment network
(PIE) domain
(PEN) domain
 2 practice options
 4 practice options
 Client and target
 Client, target, action, c.a.system
 science derived knowledge  science-indigenous derived
knowledge
 no organizing framework  nested in a common organizing
framework “house”
“house”
Say It Again Sam!
Lest We Forget
Appendix 1b
Common Conceptual Framework
Operational Framework
VO
RO
PO
Domain of Practice
• systemic person-in-environment area
• unifying purpose
• relationship-centred target of change
Social functioning
- role performance
- just environment
P
Paradigm of Profession
like-minded agreement
CS
 domain, values,
 ethics, functions
CAS
 practice options
AS
Outcomes

Method of Practice
TS

VO
PO
RO
systematic challenge/problem solving process
 theory-specific interventions
 dialogical process
 minimum system phase process (3-4)
Domain of Social Worker

need to address and critique biases, values,
personal issues
VO - Validator Otherness
RO - Resource Otherness
PO - Personal Otherness
P - Person/Practitioner
SW functioning
- competent
- burn-out
CS - Client System
CAS - Change Agent System/Social Worker
TS - Target System
AS - Action System
Working Definition: Context, Essence
(What it is), Function (What it does)
 Context
 The professional boundaries and global scope of social
work and social work practice are governed primarily by
sanctions and constraints of educational preparation,
ethical principles, social work statutes, legislative
regulations, code(s) of ethics, standards of care and local
case law, or some combination of the aforementioned.
 The extent to which the scope of social work can be
practiced in a given society or setting is ultimately
governed by societal sanctions, moral imperatives,
organizational constraints and precedent requirements in
statutory laws or other regulatory systems
Working Definition: Context, Essence
(What it is), Function (What it does)
 Essence
 Social work is the science-profession of social well being
functioning. Social work has a distinct “person-in-environment”
domain of practice and defining purpose that is directed to
social well being, individual and communal.
 The central focus of social work is on societal relationships that
advance distributive justice and well being for all.
 Value-guided and evidence-based knowledge and methods of
enabling others that are derived from the sciences (including
social work), humanities and human experience inform the
function of social work.
Working Definition: Context, Essence
(What it is), Function (What it does)
 Function
 The practice of social work employs two kinds of dialogical
process-guided social well-being/distributive justice
activities/interventions.
 One is directly with individuals and families in their contextual
environments. Psychotherapy, psychosocial counseling, group
work, and social support methods of social caring principally
aid this kind of practice.
 The other is indirectly with contextually relevant environment
systems, including societal validators, institutional structures
and social support resources, and their distributive justice/social
well-being impact on individual and communal social wellbeing. Community development, social policy and social justice
methods of social change principally aid this kind of practice.