The archaeology of research practices:: a social work case

Ian Frank Shaw

doi:10.1177/1077800414542691

The archaeology of research practices: a social work case

Ian Frank Shaw

Social Policy and Social Work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

From Foucault’s understanding of discursive forms, I suggest a hitherto little-recognized archival framework for understanding disparate but related objects, statements, and themes in social work research practices at Chicago in the third and fourth decades of the last century. Viewing these as surrounding and overhanging present practices, I detect from archival sources distinctions between methodology as professional model (research practices as taught), research practices as selective accountability and claims-making (reporting to funders), methodology as reported practice (monographs), and research practices in their relation to a vision for social service and reform. I suggest how the archive unsettles rhetorical ways of deploying visions for social work and applied research, and for the relationship between social work and sociology.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	36-49
Number of pages	14
Journal	Qualitative inquiry
Volume	21
Issue number	1
Early online date	14 Aug 2014
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414542691
Publication status	Published - 2015

Keywords

social work
research
methodology

Access to Document

10.1177/1077800414542691

http://qix.sagepub.com/content/21/1/36.full.pdf+html

Cite this

@article{616e62b07a404e7dbf97c2328f864178,

title = "The archaeology of research practices:: a social work case",

abstract = "From Foucault{\textquoteright}s understanding of discursive forms, I suggest a hitherto little-recognized archival framework for understanding disparate but related objects, statements, and themes in social work research practices at Chicago in the third and fourth decades of the last century. Viewing these as surrounding and overhanging present practices, I detect from archival sources distinctions between methodology as professional model (research practices as taught), research practices as selective accountability and claims-making (reporting to funders), methodology as reported practice (monographs), and research practices in their relation to a vision for social service and reform. I suggest how the archive unsettles rhetorical ways of deploying visions for social work and applied research, and for the relationship between social work and sociology. ",

keywords = "social work, research, methodology",

author = "Shaw, {Ian Frank}",

year = "2015",

doi = "10.1177/1077800414542691",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

pages = "36--49",

journal = "Qualitative inquiry",

issn = "1077-8004",

publisher = "SAGE",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The archaeology of research practices:

T2 - a social work case

AU - Shaw, Ian Frank

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - From Foucault’s understanding of discursive forms, I suggest a hitherto little-recognized archival framework for understanding disparate but related objects, statements, and themes in social work research practices at Chicago in the third and fourth decades of the last century. Viewing these as surrounding and overhanging present practices, I detect from archival sources distinctions between methodology as professional model (research practices as taught), research practices as selective accountability and claims-making (reporting to funders), methodology as reported practice (monographs), and research practices in their relation to a vision for social service and reform. I suggest how the archive unsettles rhetorical ways of deploying visions for social work and applied research, and for the relationship between social work and sociology.

AB - From Foucault’s understanding of discursive forms, I suggest a hitherto little-recognized archival framework for understanding disparate but related objects, statements, and themes in social work research practices at Chicago in the third and fourth decades of the last century. Viewing these as surrounding and overhanging present practices, I detect from archival sources distinctions between methodology as professional model (research practices as taught), research practices as selective accountability and claims-making (reporting to funders), methodology as reported practice (monographs), and research practices in their relation to a vision for social service and reform. I suggest how the archive unsettles rhetorical ways of deploying visions for social work and applied research, and for the relationship between social work and sociology.

KW - social work

KW - research

KW - methodology

U2 - 10.1177/1077800414542691

DO - 10.1177/1077800414542691

M3 - Article

SN - 1077-8004

VL - 21

SP - 36

EP - 49

JO - Qualitative inquiry

JF - Qualitative inquiry

IS - 1

ER -