The unfulfilled promise of scientific inquiry in advancing social work knowledge and practice

Abstract

This article seeks to critique scientific inquiry’s uncontested position as the sole method in which to advance social work research and knowledge generation. Through making a comparison to the field of medicine and the tremendous advances achieved in the past 100+ years by its use of scientific inquiry, the question is posed as to why social work’s embrace of scientific inquiry during this time span has not yielded equivalent spectacular advances despite adopting the medical model for practice. Three key areas of social work are examined: clinical practice; case management; and advocacy. Through examination of the historical record in regards to the contributions of scientific inquiry to the field of social work, it is demonstrated that the gains from employing 100+ years of scientific inquiry have been limited at best when it comes to advancing clinical practice and case management, and have actually served as a lodestone in advancing social work advocacy’s role in advancing social justice. For these three areas of social work practice, a comparison is made to the advances achieved in the 30+ years that postmodern thought has guided research endeavors: which has yielded more fruitful results in a much shorter time span. Yet despite its poor track record, scientific inquiry continues to dominate as social work’s primary method for generating knowledge, and as a result, rival methods of inquiry remain conspicuously absent in research texts, while hard hat adherents continue to seek to delegitimize these alternate forms of inquiry—in direct opposition to our field’s core value of respecting diversity.