H. U. Otto, A. Polutta, and H. Zieglar (eds): Evidence-Based Practice—Modernising the Knowledge Base of Social Work?

Abstract

This title brings together a series of diverse chapters that reflect the central debates about evidence-based practice and its implementation within social work. Contributors critically appraise the methodological foundations of evidence-based practice, and the merits of varied sources of knowledge, experimentally grounded approaches and interpretive perspectives, in particular. The book examines the implications of evidence-based practice for practitioners and the profession, and situates the debate within a broader context of the politics of social services provision. The contributions are organised under three sections: What Knowledge? Evidencebased Practice; Profession and Users; Measuring and Implementing Evidence; and Towards an Evidence-based Professionalism. Though diverse, the structure of the book draws out common themes, preventing an explicit polarisation into the proponent-opponent camps, so often a feature of the dialogue about evidence-based practice. Not surprisingly, the book engages in debate about the utility of evidence derived from the randomised controlled trial. The status awarded this method within evidence-based practice and its utility when applied to the social world is strongly contested. The significant epistemological features of this discussion are summarised by the editors as a tension between ‘interpretative understanding’ and ‘causal explanation’ within social work knowledge (p. 10). The editors acknowledge that even the most enthusiastic supporters of evidence-based practice would not support the universal application of the randomised controlled trial, which is a position likely based on pragmatism rather than epistemology (i.e. there are different methods for different questions about the social world). It is questionable whether the strong focus on debating the merits of the randomised trial acts to reduce evidence-based practice to an associated (but not contingent) research