Research Design for Social Work and the Human Services

Anastas, Jeane W.

doi:10.7312/anas11890

Cited by 115 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The research process may be characterized as fixed or flexible according to Anastas and MacDonald (1994) and Robson (2002). In a fixed design process, all parameters are defined at the launch of the study, while in a flexible design process key parameters of the study may be changed during the course of the study.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Research Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case study is a suitable research methodology for software engineering research since it studies contemporary phenomena in its natural context. However, the understanding of what constitutes a case study varies, and hence the quality of the resulting studies. This paper aims at providing an introduction to case study methodology and guidelines for researchers conducting case studies and readers studying reports of such studies. The content is based on the authors' own experience from conducting and reading case studies. The terminology and guidelines are compiled from different methodology handbooks in other research domains, in particular social science and information systems, and adapted to the needs in software engineering. We present recommended practices for software engineering case studies as well as empirically derived and evaluated checklists for researchers and readers of case study research.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of Research Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Memos and notes were kept in a number of exercise books and concept maps were drawn as ideas, themes and category codes emerged (Lincoln & Guba, 2000;Padgett, 2004). Throughout the data reduction phase themes emerged and codes and clusters of codes (that is, subdivisions in the code) became apparent (Anastas & MacDonald, 1994). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-disciplinary Collaboration and Health Promotion in Schools

Testa

2012

Australian Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the challenges facing teacher and social worker cross-disciplinary collaboration. A case study methodology was used to research a particular model of health promotion, the St Paul's Model ('the Model'). The Model, comprising of twelve student wellbeing programs ranging from prevention to restoring resilience programs, included input from social work students undertaking their field education practicum. This article argues that social workers have a place in the school context but to have legitimacy, purpose, and ultimate success in contributing to health promotion, cross-disciplinary approaches must be clearly embedded, articulated and profiled in school processes and policies. The research presented in this article is part of a bigger PhD project whose aims was to research a particular model of teaching and social work collaboration which sought to formalise its health promotion structures.

show abstract

“…Examples of this new type of opposition occur in the article by Bolland and Atherton (this issue) and in the work of Anastas and MacDonald (1994), and Anastas (1999). These authors first thoroughly and systematically misrepresent and dismiss the heuristic paradigm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These authors first thoroughly and systematically misrepresent and dismiss the heuristic paradigm. Then, they recommend fallible realism as if it were in opposition to the heuristic paradigm, when in fact fallible realism was originally imported into social work by Heineman Pieper (1981 as part of the heuristic paradigm, and two papers elucidating this perspective were reprinted as foundations for the heuristic paradigm in Tyson's (1995) textbook (one by Bhaskar [1989] who calls it "transcendental" or "critical" realism [1975,1991], and the paper by Manicas & Secord [1983] to which Anastas & MacDonald [1994], Anastas [1999], and Bolland & Atherton refer). After claiming the heuristic paradigm opposes a "straw man" and that the legacy of logical empiricism is "dead" in social work (Bolland & Atherton, this issue), these authors proceed to recommend logical empiricist concepts in their proposed frameworks for social work research (for example, Popper's ideas for research design and theory-testing, see below).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(For an incisive analysis that illuminates why this may have happened, see Collins, 1990, p. 219, andHartman, 1995. ) Proponents of logical empiricism continue to constrain academic freedom (as documented by Cloward, 1998), devalue research contributions that do not match their unwarranted, methodologically-based criteria for scientific knowledge (Grinnell, 1997;Rubin & Babbie, 2001;Task Force on Social Work Research, 1991;Williams, Unrau, & Grinnell, 1998), create divisions between practitioners and researchers and between scientists and advocates (Gibbs, 1983;Reid, 1994a;Rubin & Babbie, 2001;Thyer & Myers, 1998), promote or exclude approaches to practice based solely on whether or not they are supported by a flawed and pervasively distorting (logical empiricist) approach to research (Myers & Thyer, 1997;Reid, 1994aReid, , 1994bThyer, 1991), and completely misrepresent the heuristic paradigm and the issues at stake for the field (Anastas & MacDonald, 1994;Anastas, 1999;Bolland & Atherton, this issue;Thyer, 1993;Williams, Unrau, & Grinnell, 1998). These problems are exacerbated by logical empiricist textbooks that first thoroughly misrepresent the ideas and issues involved, and then do not even provide students with citations to the sources capable of rectifying these thoroughgoing misrepresentations (Grinnell, 1997;Royse, 1999;Rubin & Babbie, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Doing Good Science without Sacrificing Good Values: Why the Heuristic Paradigm is the Best Choice for Social Work

Heineman-Pieper

Tyson

Pieper³

2002

Families in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social work today faces a crucial watershed: Will the field continue to promulgate unsound and detrimental beliefs about social work research and knowledge, or will the field fully embrace the heuristic paradigm and thereby realize its true potential as a first-rate science committed to humanistic ideals? Proponents of unsound and detrimental beliefs have obscured the choice for social workers by systematically and thoroughly misrepresenting the heuristic paradigm, making unwarranted and misleading claims for the paradigms to which it is opposed (logical empiricism and relativism), and confusing the issues at stake for the field. Accordingly, this article helps social workers recognize the tenets and implications of each of the three paradigms for research that social work has available to it-the heuristic paradigm, logical empiricism, and relativism-so that social workers can make a truly informed choice about the best approach to knowledge in their field.

show abstract

Research Design for Social Work and the Human Services

Cited by 115 publications

References 0 publications

Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering

Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering

Cross-disciplinary Collaboration and Health Promotion in Schools

Doing Good Science without Sacrificing Good Values: Why the Heuristic Paradigm is the Best Choice for Social Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About