Abstract
ABSTRACTPrevious research emphasizes the need for reflection in complex, dynamic practices, like social work. However, increased governance of the public sector and welfare state has caused a reform, which in turn has affected the layout and conditions of work. Private sector control ideals and ideas from the auditing system have led to a new focus. It is argued that we should subordinate practice approaches – characterized by reflection, proven experience, and tacit knowledge – to manual-based treatment, evaluations, and assessments. This study aims at understanding the role of reflection in social work by investigating its use and valuation by family support social workers. Opportunities and resources for reflection are another focus. Focus group interviews (n = 40) were used to produce data. The need for reflection to conduct highly qualitative social work became evident. The question is not whether to reflect or not, rather how this best can be done, given current time constraints. Reflection was considered a coping mechanism, offering a sense of professional legitimacy. Organizational changes seem to impact on time for reflection. However, when enabling process, learning, and development, it can be argued that reflection is beneficial for several parties. Therefore, reflection requires continued emphasis, highlighting its potential benefits.
Highlights
Previous international research portrays reflection as both a vital part, and a useful tool in challenging, difficult practices like Western social work, in which practitioners are required to make uncertain judgements, to be flexible, and to deal with complex problem-solving (e.g., Gambrill, 2010; Ingram, Fenton, Hodson, & Jindal-Snape, 2014; Mantzoukas, 2008; Sch€on, 1991)
It is argued that this is a change that has led to an increased demand for external evaluations, the measuring of practice, an economically effective use of resources, and the favoring of manual-based approaches to practice, like evidence-based practice (EBP) (e.g., Gursansky, Quinn, & Le Sueur, 2010; Liljegren & Parding, 2010; Ponnert & Svensson; 2016; Webb, 2001)
The findings reveal an understanding of reflection as “self-evident” within social work and an aid for understanding complex situations, reactions, and emotions one faces in practice
Summary
Previous international research portrays reflection as both a vital part, and a useful tool in challenging, difficult practices like Western social work, in which practitioners are required to make uncertain judgements, to be flexible, and to deal with complex problem-solving (e.g., Gambrill, 2010; Ingram, Fenton, Hodson, & Jindal-Snape, 2014; Mantzoukas, 2008; Sch€on, 1991). Standardization is often mentioned in relation to, e.g., bureaucratic management, and is criticized as being a way of gaining control, limiting practitioners’ autonomy and reflection, and affecting their professionalism in favor of industrial uniformity (e.g., Avby, 2018; M€akitalo, 2012; Ponnert & Svensson, 2016; Timmermans & Epstein, 2010). At least in the field of social work, cannot possibly be treated in the exact same way, and situational knowledge is required to offer the best possible treatment This points to the need for highlighting both practice- and evidence-based knowledge in practice and education. For handling questions and complexities of practice, social workers are offered various types of supervision, often involving reflective practice, aimed at improving practice (cf. Bradley & H€ojer, 2009)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
