UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Social workers' orientation to client problems McLeod, Ronald Keith 1967

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1967_A5 M27.pdf [ 1.74MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0302495.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0302495-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0302495-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0302495-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0302495-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0302495-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0302495-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0302495-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0302495.ris

Full Text

SOCIAL TO  WORKERS  1  ORIENTATION  CLIENT  PROBLEMS  by  Ronald  Keith  Walter  Willingdon  Maureen Jean  Thesis the  Jane  Margot  Submitted  McLeod Moy  Skahan Young  in Partial  Fulfilment  of  Requirements f o r the Degree o f MASTER  OF  in  SOCIAL  the  WORK  School  of Social  We  accept  this  thesis  Work  as c o n f o r m i n g  School  of Social  to the r e q u i r e d  Work  1 967 The  University  of B r i t i s h  Columbia  standard,  In  presenting  for  an advanced  that  thesis  o r b y h.iJs  of  Department  of  Date  a  it freely  that  thesis  J>m  >  j  It  is  for financial  A^Jj %£hJ>J Columbia  British  the  requirements  Columbia,  copying  b y t h e Head  understood  gain  I  agree  f o r r e f e r e n c e and  for extensive  may be g r a n t e d  permission.  Q^ ( ^/^  of  available  permission  representatives.  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a  fulfilment of  the University  purposes  this  my w r i t t e n  in p a r t i a l  make  agree  for scholarly  publication  at  shall  I further  Department  without  thesis  degree  the Library  Study.  or  this  shall  of  this  o f my  that  copying  not be a l l o w e d  i i . ABSTRACT  This problems  a  of  the  on  Protective  material School  of  Child The  and/or  accumulated  Abuse  work  the  have  (3).  tested a  1967  thesis  hypothesis  and  choice  In  differences  parts, are  indicated  out  Billingsley,  in  the  depth  our  in  reasons  child  report  in for  Worker his the  lack  protective  was  of  Client  and  Social  Briefly,  in  our  the  of  study  field  reference  to our  need  of  is  the  British  result  of  Columbia,  Workers'  that be  and  Perceptions  in  will  education  tend  to  psychodynamic  s o c i a l workers  results  professional  group.  associated  for  that  s o c i a l work  cognitive  discussed  the  The  to  (4).  indicate  appeared  worked  Billingsley,  entitled: Social  in  in  Orientation  framework  University  s o c i a l workers'  experience  also  Andrew  Workers'  s o c i a l workers  Neglect  findings  orientations. these  in  experience  orientations Our  be  Work  and  main  work  influence  to  Social  considered  trained  data  Social  by  Agency  dissertation,  The  on  theoretical  a monograph  professionally  services.  of  based  in  Child  doctoral  report  is  presented in  research  with  differed our  with low  psychodynamic  from  Billingsley  conclusions.  further  research  substantial  in  Our  and  findings  several  areas.  i i i . TABLE  OF  CONTENTS Page  CHAPTER  CHAPTER  1  2  Theoretical of r e l e v a n t  Hypotheses  framework studies  and  t o be t e s t e d  discussion 1  and  their  rationale  5  CHAPTER  3  Methodology  CHAPTER  4  Results  and c o n c l u s i o n s  CHAPTER  5  Summary  and i m p l i c a t i o n s  research BIBLIOGRAPHY  no.  of the study  10  16  f o r further  . 25 29-30  LIST  OF  TABLES Page  TABLE  I  Number o f 5 o c i a l W o r k e r s i n F a m i l y Counselling Agency s e l e c t i n g s p e c i f i c s y s t e m as Dominant  Sub-  TABLE I I  Psychodynamic O r i e n t a t i o n s o f Workers i n t h e two A g e n c y S e t t i n g s . .'  TABLE I I I  P r o f e s s i o n a l E d u c a t i o n a n d / o r Work E x p e r i e n c e as r e l a t e d t o C o g n i t i v e and P s y c h o d y n a m i c O r i e n t a t i o n and R e f e r e n c e Group  TABLE  TABLE  IV  V  TABLE VI  no.  1 2  14-1 5  P r o f e s s i o n a l E d u c a t i o n a n d Work E x p e r i e n c e as r e l a t e d t o P s y c h o d y n a m i c O r i e n t a t i o n .  17  The D i s t r i b u t i o n o f P s y c h o d y n a m i c S c o r e s o f S o c i a l W o r k e r s as r e l a t e d t o E d u c a t i o n a n d Work E x p e r i e n c e  20  Number o f S o c i a l W o r k e r s i n S a m p l e G r o u p s s e l e c t i n g s p e c i f i c Sub-systems as dominant R e f e r e n c e Gro u p s  22  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  We advisor, of  are indebted who  h i s time.  t o Mr. L o u i s  contributed  Elton  Reimer,  our t h e s i s  e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y o f h i s knowledge  and  SOCIAL TO  WORKERS' CLIENT  ORIENTATION  PROBLEMS.  CHAPTER THEORETICAL OF  1  FRAMEWORK RELEVANT  AND  DISCISSION  STUDIES  INTRODUCTION This a  study  research  School both  thesis  of  Social  the  U.B.C.  presented Social  theory this to  in  of  of  of  factions"  (3,  The  (a  a  as  "the p.1)  family  in  The  were  collected  performance,  Aid  Society  offices  the  Department  differences, another, There  in  were  study from  agency  of  one  worker  on  on  worked  two  for  out  and  The  studies  will  be  and  and  the  presented  present  the  the  in  hypotheses actual  But  in  the  the a  that  of  of  of  wide  satis-  used  role  in  his  agency).  performance  only,  B i l l i n g s l e y ' s areas. kinds  Welfare that  of and  agency: a  there  and  of  British  were s i g n i f i c a n t  from of  the  number  throughout  problems  these  and  protective  Vancouver  another,  a  specifically  agencies  worker's  indicated to  was  child  different  Social  he  covered  orientations  and  City  perception  indications  framework,  Billingsley  a l l three  two  the  findings  individual also  in  Columbia,  order.  suggests.  from  these  methodology,  title  gathered  in  (3).  sections  studies.  Children's  The  our  that  concentrated  were  Columbia.  other  is  obtained  Billingsley,  report,  s o c i a l workers  data  of  The  Andrew  of  this  data  British  report,  other  role  although data  to  of  Agency  critique  rationale,  of  by  from  theoretical  present  Protective  paper.  his  The  monograph  counselling  U.B.C. s t u d y  University  the  and  a l l , the  developed  (4).  related  study,  topics, with  and  in  as  the 1967  Child  their  concerned  tests  a  our  the  First  in  outline  of  tested,  findings  range  in  used,  section  be  Work  at  thesis  summary they  hypotheses  done  detail  Worker A  tests  one  setting  neglect  differences  could  and be  to abuse.  2. significantly  related  variables  pp.  more  (4,  general  to  other  80-82).  hypothesis  factors,  These  which  most  findings  reads  as  notably  to  demographic  supported B i l l i n g s l e y s 1  follows:  ". . . . s o c i a l work p r a c t i c e i n d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f agency s e t t i n g s i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s as w e l l as s i m i l a r i t i e s , and . . . the d i f f e r e n c e s e x e r t an i n f l u e n c e on t h e orientations, s a t i s f a c t i o n s and o t h e r r e s p o n s e s o f t h e s o c i a l w o r k e r s " ( 3 , p. x v i ) .  THEORETICAL Our  STATEMENTS  own  study  client  problems.  we  make  1.  can  the  To  concerned  put  the  following  Orientations  may  moral-evaluative  a)  A  cognitive  they b)  A  standards  to  do  in  to  the p.  are  two  cathetic,  cognitive,  54). is  "the  work"  a  situation  components and  the  psychodynamic  client's A  perspective,  statements:  help  of  to  intellectual  (3,  view p.  is  of  set  client  of  decide  role  problems  "underlying  what  conflict  alternative  conceptual  55).  the  person  the  and  courses  by of  he  ought  reference action"  91 ) .  perception  b)  that  orientations  its theoretical  orientation  consequences  psychodynamic A  worker's  components:  p.  their  given  in  the  s o c i a l workers  moral-evaluative  (3,  a)  (3,  in  value  There  three  which  confront  a  study  orientation  in  with  general  have  and  framework  2.  is  of  of  the  cognitive  orientation,  the  sociodynamic.  orientation  psychological  in  a  worker  factors  in  is the  one  which  causation  shows of  a  problems.  sociodynamic  sociological  orientation  factors  in  the  is  one  which  causation  of  shows a  perception  client's  of  problems.  3. Billingsley  ( 3 , p.  orientations purposes  t o be  then  both  psychodynamic low In  relationship  tests  were  education  obtained  o f j o b he w i l l  and  a "trained  AND  Perhaps work  research  SOCIAL  and  concentrate  but  which no  being  factor and  WORK  t h e mast must on  that  studies  importance  studied.  the research  rather  to a  high  psychodynamic  and  time.  were  tested  settings  ( 3 , p. 9 1 ) .  are r e l a t e d  thesis  for a  Data  to  f o r these  group.  does  not prepare  him f o r  t o do , i s d e s c r i b e d  as  1  ( 3 , p. 9 ) . influences  i s work  theme  job role  experience  i n both  itself  which  orientations  ( 3 , pp.  from  the detached t o him.  instruments,  Specifically, this  studies "pure"  are required  The  p r a c t i c a l i s the development  towards  psycho-  33-40).  EDUCATION.  basic  by  a reference  experience.  required  which  distinguish  a r e n o t done  special  be  and l o w  i n moral-evaluative  training  incapacity"  i s a fourth  performance,  RESEARCH  work  professional  psychodynamic  a t t h e same  to another  by t h e U.B.C.  the  There  exist  f o r the  sociodynamic)  high  t o the agency  and  whose  kind  both  significant differences  A person  having  of  worker  to high  words,  sociodynamic  Therefore,  to high  differences  significant  study,  one  and  sociodynamic)  means  orientations  from  professional  4.  to low  orientation  this  refer  In o t h e r  s study  1  inclusive.  (equivalent  terms.  sociodynamic  psychodynamic  will  orientation  Billingsley  In  3.  we  (equivalent  orientations  using  found  mutually  of our study  orientations dynamic  63)  criticism  toward  i s directed  social science,  profession,  because  of this  of a c r i t i c a l but a l s o  social  by t h e  scientist  result  i s that  they  commitment  attitude  are to  not  simply  the m a t e r i a l  being  toward  the  4.  "unthinking" The  use o f t r a d i t i o n a l  majority  questionnaire or  these  that  authors  singles people  include  method  education.  i s some  a psychosocial  notably  Kadushin  were  This  bias  performance.  and,  in a larger thought  presumably would  Thus  carry  affect  a study  context,  Some  authors than  have  social;  Billingsley  a psychological  bias,  such  ( 3 , p . x v i , p . 57 a n d p . 5 6 ) . vital  social  approach, into  both  as  i f the  a worker  trained i n  practice' the bias his role  o f t h e way  ofh i s  o r i e n t a t i o n and h i s  professional  i s of crucial  causal  psychological.  professionalization affect  and b e h a v i o u r  as t o whether  and B i l l i n g s l e y .  a r e a s much  not a p s y c h o s o c i a l  would  t o t h e U.B.C.  question  method.  with  and H o l l i s  problems  ( 3 , p. x v i ) .  more p s y c h o l o g i c a l  of authors  Austin  methods  replied  i t i s so or n o t , i s of course  role  worker's  work  who  There  i t i s a t t h e moment  in clients'  casework  this  i s truly  as G a r r e t t ,  factors  workers  caseworkers.  o u t , as examples  Whether  If  were  not casework  suggested  of social  social  education  the s o c i a l  importance.  5. CHAPTER HYPOTHESES TO AND The  second  postulates on  and  22  psychodynamic respondents was  among  that  ".  .  and  low  these  was  . the  difference  between  (78$) in  p.  69).  than  on  their This  than FCA  between  1:  social  we  the  worker's  Hypothesis  diagnostic  1 A:  The  orientation diagnostic Hypothesis  1 B:  The  orientation response Billingsley  and  69)  the  general  rationale,  based  CPA  social  to  will  i n diagnostic have  found  of  on  their  were  on  more  (39$) there  is a  planning of On  the  the  basis  high of  of  a between  orientation. a  high  psychodynamic  between  a low a  that  their  orientation. psychodynamic  more  treatment  suggested  low,  relationship  exhibit  and  or  treatment  with  to  high  differ  and  respondents tend  than i t  psychodynamic  whether  the  with  to  orientation  will  Agency  following:  treatment  tend  more  the  i s greater  component  workers.  influence  and  also  respondents  orientation, to  I t was  treatment  the  components  treatment  q u e s t i o n as  that  Counselling  agencies  were  and  and  revealed  Family  treatment  respondents  others  p.  two  (59$).  oriented  tend  the  (33$)  postulated  will  of  their  treatment  respondents  psychodynamic  worker  (3,  and  the  diagnostic  have  The  on  diagnostic  the  and  respondents.  treatment  raises  discussion  h i g h e r among  Agency  findings  the  study  Protection  (3,  is a tested  i t s diagnostic  component  TESTED  framework. 1  psychodynamically  Postulate  we  Child  orientations. difference  study  Billingsley s  i n both  BE  RATIONALE  that  orientation  orientation"  consistent  our  theoretical  of  diagnostic  diagnosis  of  hypotheses  Billingsley's Table  the  part  THEIR  2  consistent  orientation.  professional  social  6. work  training  genesis, mind"  i n a school  or the study  (23, p.  1833)  considerations  of social  work  of "the o r i g i n  rather  ( 3 , p.  than  tends  and d e v e l o p m e n t  towards  70). This  towards  psycho-  of the  sociological  suggests  the  following  postulate: Postulate  2:  Professional  social We  worker  define  years  developing  "professional  attendance  whether  o r not a degree  experience"  year  of experience  Blakely  in  the f i e l d  et  a l , 4,  We  assumed  work  social  was  p.  that,  school By  as one o r  of s o c i a l  "limited  amount  than  one  of s o c i a l  work  (category  a  of  complete 1 in  "substantial  as t h r e e  (categories  two  work,  to l e s s  i s defined  relatively than  their  training.  that  t o have there  years  or  more  3 and 4 i n B l a k e l y  with  believe,  are the exception  become  i n S o c i a l Work,  his table  21  limited  rather  less  and  but these  could  We  Agency  professional  cases,  the rule. had  noted  we  Although a l l Master's  Protection  at B i l l i n g s l e y ' s  6 7 ) , i t was  less  assumption; f o r  82$ o f t h e C h i l d  In l o o k i n g ( 3 , p.  experience".  experience  Counselling  only  supervisors  to this  than  had  but not n e c e s s a r i l y  assumed t h a t  supervisors  i n the Family  had them.  supervisors  are exceptions  quickly  respondents  the caseworkers  " s u b s t a n t i a l work  training  respondents  workers  speaking,  I t was  some  on  education"  106). O p e r a t i o n a l l y ,  example,  shown  orientation.  p. 1 0 6 ) .  considered  Degrees  work  granted.  work  r e s u l t s i n the  psychodynamic  i n the f i e l d  experience"  experience  recognize  a high  education  are r e f e r r i n g  of s o c i a l  professional be  we  e t a l , 4, o f work  work  at a p r o f e s s i o n a l  work  amount  social  Agency  r e s u l t s as  that  69$ o f t h e  7. FCA  c a s e w o r k e r s had  Similarly,  7 0 % o f t h e FCA  supervisors results  with  had a h i g h  suggested  Hypothesis  2 A:  work  Hypothesis  2 B:  a substantial  have  a high  and  A  Hypothesis and  no  2D:  with  o f work  worker  with  training  A social  worker  training  with will  with  an i n d i v i d u a l - f e e l s  which  to relate  testing  which  among  chose  (9,  sub-system  the agency,  psychodynamic  professional experience  of  orientation.  education  will  substantial will  tend  limited tend  tend  work  t o have  work  t o have  agency  p.  group"  and  to  experience a low  experience a low  i s defined  identified  psycho-  ( r e f e r e n c e group)  of the Family  as t h e d o m i n a n t  as a  was  he  found  in  dominant  in  and c o m m u n i t y , t h e Counselling  sub-system while  s u p e r v i s o r s chose  "social  and t o w h i c h  580). B i l l i n g s l e y  profession, client  ( 3 , p . 9 7 ) : 49%  C o u n s e l l i n g Agency  sub-system.  "reference  his identity  specific  results  caseworkers  i n the f i e l d  and  orientation.  dominant  following  education  orientation.  A person's  respondents  These  orientation.  aspires  Family  a high  social  professional  dynamic  t o have  no p r o f e s s i o n a l  psychodynamic  professional  experience  amount  o f t h e CPA  hypotheses:  with  worker  55%  orientation.  orientation.  o f work  psychodynamic  2 C:  with  worker  A social  with  Hypothesis  group  tend  psychodynamic  s u p e r v i s o r s and  the f o l l o w i n g  amount  will  high  psychodynamic  A social  a limited  social  t h e same  agency  as t h e  30%  Agency of the  dominant  8. TABLE NUMBER  DF  50CIAL  SELECTING  SPECIFIC  Supervisors  10  Caseworkers  39  Postulate  above 3:  IN FAMILY  SUB-SYSTEM  results  agency  with  3 B:  0  19  49  8  21  8  21  4  10  Hypothesis  experience choose, Hypothesis  work  treatment  amount  no  professional tend  toward  with  o f work  experience  and  the  agree-  education  and  the  worker with professional  training  with  group,  will  a substantial  worker  no p r o f e s s i o n a l  education tend  and  toward  group.  3D:  as a r e f e r e n c e  cognitive  choosing  professional  his clients.  and w i t h  and  orientations).  group,  A social  o f the s o c i a l  orientation  as h i s r e f e r e n c e  A social  direct  group.  s o c i a l worker  and w i t h  will  i s a  experience  as a r e f e r e n c e  experience choose,  and  group  of the variables  experience  t h e agency 3 C:  reference  education,  a substantial  choosing  %  0  A s o c i a l worker with  A  No.  0  as h i s r e f e r e n c e  Hypothesis  %  0  o r low p s y c h o d y n a m i c  l i m i t e d work  No.  suggest:  of his diagnostic  with  Ambivalent  Client  20  professional  3 A:  %  97)  2  worker's  Hypothesis  No. |  ( 3 , p.  80  of the i n t e r a c t i o n  ment  DOMINANT  AGENCY  8  function  (high  COUNSELLING  | Profession i  %  No.  The s o c i a l w o r k e r ' s  orientation  AS  Agency  T o t a l number of persons  Agency  The  WORKERS  I  a limited  will  tend  amount  training will  his clients.  amount  o f work to  o f work  tend  to  9. Our gleaned  rationale  from  professional of  f o r hypotheses  the s o c i a l training  a motivation  work  who  t o "work  3C and 3D i s b a s e d  literature,  chose  social  w i t h " and  that  work  "to help"  people  on  assumption  without  as a c a r e e r people.  our  do  so  because  10. CHAPTER THE  The procedure social (3).  third  T h e U.B.C.  distributed  part our  data  i n part case  purposes,  we  inclusive; first  others  Case  # 1:  i s a discussion  of the coding  gathered  gathered  workers  by t h e U.B.C.  by means  Department  study  of  group  of a questionnaire  i n the Vancouver  Columbia  orientation  Children's Aid  of Social  Welfare,  as  1 of our study.  The q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t e d i n  vignettes,  accompanied  made these  of the nine  the reader  STUDY  and low p s y c h o d y n a m i c  the data were  to s o c i a l  of nine  five The  using  and t h e B r i t i s h  described  OF THE  part o f our study  of analyzing high  workers,  Society  METHODOLOGY  3  by s i x q u e s t i o n s . F o r  use o f r e s u l t s  gathered  questions  identical  were  v i g n e t t e s i s reproduced  should  (Blakely  each  refer  e t a l , 4,  from  i n each below  t o B l a k e l y e t a l , 4,  Appendix  A,  questions case  two t o vignette.  ( f o r the eight Appendix  A,p.90):  p. 9 5 ) :  The A g e n c y had r e c e i v e d c o m p l a i n t s f r o m two n e i g h b o u r s that J o h n , a g e d 7, was m i s t r e a t e d b y h i s p a r e n t s . T h e f a m i l y c o u l d n o t m a i n t a i n c o n t i n u i n g f r i e n d s h i p s w i t h a n y o f t h e n e i g h b o u r s , saw l i t t l e o f t h e i r r e l a t i v e s , who l i v e d n e a r b y , d i d n o t a t t e n d PTA m e e t i n g s , c h u r c h e t c . One n e i g h b o u r h a d s e e n J o h n p l a y i n g i n t h e y e a r d when h i s f a t h e r came home f r o m w o r k a n d f o r no a p p a r e n t r e a s o n t h e f a t h e r h a d p i c k e d up a b a s e b a l l b a t a n d b e a t e n J o h n n e a r l y u n c o n s c i o u s . The o t h e r n e i g h b o u r r e p o r t e d a s i m i l a r i n c i d e n t when Mr. A. h a d t h r o w n J o h n a c r o s s t h e y a r d h i t t i n g h i m a g a i n s t t h e g a r a g e w a l l . He a l s o s a i d Mr. a n d M r s . A. a r e c o n t i n u a l l y s w e a r i n g and screaming a t each o t h e r . John i s sometimes a l l o w e d t o p l a y o u t s i d e h i s y a r d , a t o t h e r t i m e s he m u s t s t a y i n s i d e . J o h n ' s t e a c h e r s a i d he o f t e n came t o s c h o o l w i t h b r u i s e s on h i s b o d y . 1 . In t h i s In  this  case  neglect  case  abuse  2.  What  3.  What w o u l d up t o t h i s  4. What 5.  Who  would  help should  i s absent  i s absent  . . . moderate  . . . severe  . . .  . . . moderate  . . . severe  . . .  y o u s a y s e e m s t o be t h e e s s e n t i a l y o u s a y a r e some problem? or treatment provide  does  problem?  of the factors  which  this  seem t o r e q u i r e ?  the necessary  situation help  or  probably l e d  treatment?  6. How s i m i l a r i s t h e p a r e n t s t r e a t m e n t o f J o h n t o t h e t r e a t m e n t o f t h e c h i l d r e n i n t h e p r o t e c t i v e c a s e s w i t h which you have h a d e x p e r i e n c e ? I s i t s i m i l a r t o : None . . . L e s s t h a n 1/2 . . More t h a n 1 / 2 . . .  11. In t h e c o d i n g content  response  of content was  A response  (For a d e s c r i p t i o n of  B e r e l s o n , 2, p. 4 8 8 ) .  Each  the  coded  follows:  containing e x c l u s i v e l y p s y c h o l o g i c a l content  A response  was  containing e x c l u s i v e l y non-psychological content  was  a s c o r e o f 4_.  A response content  a s c o r e as  of  a s c o r e o f J_.  assigned 3.  a p p l i e d the technique  Billingsley.  a n a l y s i s see  assigned  assigned 2.  r e s u l t s we  a n a l y s i s employed by  technique  1.  of o u r  c o n t a i n i n g m i x e d p s y c h o l o g i c a l and  was  assigned  non-psychological  a s c o r e o f 2_ i f t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l e l e m e n t s  were d o m i n a n t o r 3_ i f t h e n o n - p s y c h o l o g i c a l e l e m e n t s were d o m i n a n t . I f t h r e e o r more e l e m e n t s were m e n t i o n e d , t h e d e c i s i o n was  mathematical;  mentioned f i r s t  i f o n l y two  was  e l e m e n t s were m e n t i o n e d , t h e  considered  dominant.  Thus, t h e h i g h e s t t h e o r e t i c a l sociodynamic  one)  one  one)  lowest one  times  number o f q u e s t i o n s ) t i m e s theoretical  (the h i g h e s t  distribution  ranges from a high  distributions  73.1.  are s i m i l a r ,  36.  4_ ( t h e  psychodynamic  However, t h e  i n the r a n g e f r o m 48  By c o n v e r t i n g B i l l i n g s l e y ' s  p r e t e d h i s m e d i a n t o be  times  9_ ( t h e number o f v i g n e t t e s ) = 144 •  appeared h e a v i l y c o n c e n t r a t e d 72.  lowest  sociodynamic  4_ on each q u e s t i o n t i m e s  s c o r e o f 36 t o a low p s y c h o d y n a m i c s c o r e o f 144.  was  (the  9. ( t h e number o f v i g n e t t e s ) =  p o s s i b l e psychodynamic score  c o u l d o b t a i n w o u l d be:  The  psychodynamic score  c o u l d o b t a i n would be: J_ on each q u e s t i o n  4_ ( t h e number o f q u e s t i o n s ) The  one  t o 100.  The  r e s u l t s t o our s c a l e , we  Thus i t w o u l d a p p e a r t h a t  as i n d i c a t e d  i n the f o l l o w i n g  data median inter-  our table.  12. TABLE I I PSYCHODYNAMIC  In at  our f i r s t  below  were  score  o f 60  second high  68 w e r e  regarded  dichotomized  of  analysis  "H" o n t h e c o m p u t e r  scores 68  ORIENTATIONS  OF WORKERS  at psychodynamic  code,  as h i g h  as low psychodynamic  a t " F " on t h e c o m p u t e r  dichotomy  scores,  psychodynamic scores.  code,  of the results  was c h o s e n  AGENCY  or at the psychodynamic  regarded  (a c o m p a r i s o n  IN THE TWO  with  and l o w p s y c h o d y n a m i c  a view  scores.  we  SETTINGS  dichotomized  score  o f 68;  and s c o r e s  In a second  above  analysis  we  or at the psychodynamic i s given  t o making  i n table optimum  I I I ) . The comparisons  13.  In  tabulating  difference used of  an  between  approach  the  workers'  similar  determining workers'  similar  to  psychodynamic  difference  diagnostic  to B i l l i n g s l e y dominant  B i l l i n g s l e y ' s method  and  (3,  p.  (that  i s , the  treatment orientation)  ( 3 , p.  reference  score  70).  group  94ff).  Again,  our  (sub-system)  we  method was  TABLE I I I P R O F E S S I O N A L EDUCATION'AND/OR WORK E X P E R I E N C E A5 R E L A T E D TO C O G N I T I V E AND PSYCHODYNAMIC O R I E N T A T I O N AND R E F E R E N C E GROUP Psychodynamic Scores w i t h c u t o f f p o i n t a t 60 Comparisons  of  Variables x  Psychodynamic vs Psychodynamic  Total  Psychodynamic vs Education  Total  Psychodynamic Scores w i t h c u t o f f p o i n t a t 68  2  ( d f = 1)  Level of Significance  x  2  ( d f = 1)  Level of Significance  0.195  .70  >  p  > . 50  .002  .98 >  p  >  .95  0.369  .70  >  p  > . 50  .079  .80 >  p  _>.70  *)  .01 2  .95 _>  p  >  .90  Difference  ! Psychodynamic T o t a l vs Educated, Limited Experience  2. 582  Psychodynamic T o t a l vs ; Educated, Substantial  2.1 64  .20  >  p  >.10  .029  .90 _>  p  >  .80  1 .360  .30  >  p  >.20  1 .369  .30 _> p  >  .20  .079  .80 >  ^  .70  1  Experience  | Psychodynamic T o t a l i vs No E d u c a t i o n , S u b s t a n t i a l Psychodynamic vs No E d u c a t i o n ,  Invalid  Experience  Total 6.531 Limited  Invalid  *)  p  Experience (cont.)  TABLE  I I I (cont.)  P R O F E S S I O N A L EDUCATION AND/OR WORK E X P E R I E N C E AS R E L A T E D TO C O G N I T I V E AND PSYCHODYNAMIC O R I E N T A T I O N AND R E F E R E N C E GROUP Psychodynamic Scores w i t h c u t o f f p o i n t a t 60 Comparisons  of  Psychodynamic Scores w i t h c u t o f f p o i n t a t 68  Variables x  Reference Group vs Educated, L i m i t e d Experience  2  (df =  1)  Level of Significance  x  2  (df =  Level of Significance  1)  Agency  Reference Group v. d. Educated, S u b s t a n t i a l Experience  0.146  Invalid  .146  *)  Invalid  *)  Agency  .70  >  p  >  .50  .338  .70  >  p  >  . 50  1 .354  .30  >  p  >  .20  1 .604  .30 >  p  >  .20  .522  .50  >  p  >  .30  , 522  .50 >  p  >  .30  10.028  .01  >  p  Client No  Reference Group vs Education, Substantial  0.338  Reference vs E d u c a t i o n , No  Experience  Client  Group  No  Experience  Psychodynamic ; vs Experience )  Total  R e s u l t s w e r e i n v a l i d due t o e x p e c t e d differentiated categories.  or observed  >.001  frequency  being  Not a v a i l a b l e i n e a r l i e r computor run-off.  less  than  5 i n the  16. CHAPTER RESULTS  In  this  obtained drew  part  these  dichotomy  at point results).  wherever  we  are  comparing  Postulate Out  " F " on  1  educated, this  indicated  against  high  results  and t h e c o n c l u s i o n s a r e based (see table  IIIfor  that,  throughout  the  groups  such  workers  we  on t h e  code  study,  as t h e  and o t h e r  groups,  we  " a l lothers".  between  psychodynamic  their  diagnostic  agreement  our hypothesis  orientation  orientation  of Social  orientation,  59.3$ e v i d e n c e d  short,  from  and t r e a t m e n t  tend  we  found  orientation;  40.7$ showed  these  workers  to d i f f e r  remaining  Of t h o s e  latter  with  not  27  with  dis-  orientations orientations.  a high  between  was  that  a notable  and t r e a t m e n t  orientation,  the  orientation.  between  (1A) t h a t  would  the C h i l d r e n ' s A i d  Welfare,  a low psychodynamic  psychodynamic  dynamic  between  t h e Department  (77$) i n d i c a t e d  agreement  In  noted  o f 117 r e s p o n d e n t s  (23.1$)  while  be  on t h e  (A a n d B ) :  of a t o t a l  high  report  quoted  the computer  experienced  group  and  a  will  results  It should  Society  90  The  make c o m p a r i s o n s  professionally  we  of our hypotheses,  results.  complete  CONCLUSIONS  of our study  i n the testing  from  AND  4  their  psychodiagnostic  statistically  upheld. Similarly,  o f 90  respondents  o r i e n t a t i o n , 45.6$ i n d i c a t e d treatment (1B), tend  that  scores  respondents  to exhibit  treatment  while  a more  orientations,  with  disagreement  54.4$ i n d i c a t e d with  psychodynamic  between  response  h a d t o be  diagnostic  agreement.  a low psychodynamic  consistent also  a low  Our  rejected.  hypothesis  orientation  i n their  and  would  diagnostic  and  17.  In those  accounting  f o r t h e d i s c r e p a n c y between  of Billingsley,  dynamic  orientation  Columbia:  Child  i t seems a p p a r e n t  does  Welfare  not operate and P u b l i c  Billingsley's  (United  Counselling).  Some p o s s i b l e  last  part In  variable  States:  Child  that  our f i n d i n g s  that  factor  i n our s e t t i n g s  Welfare)  explanations will  of  psycho-  (British  as i t d i d  Protection  and  in  and F a m i l y be p r e s e n t e d  i n the  o f our r e p o r t . connection with with  workers'  Postulate  high  1 we c o m p a r e d  o r low psychodynamic  the experience orientation.  T A B L E IV PROFESSIONAL AS  RELATED  EDUCATION  AND  WORK  TO PSYCHODYNAMIC  EXPERIENCE  ORIENTATION.  Psychodynamic orientation  Professionally educated workers:  58 <  s  Non-professionally educatedn workers: _ 59 < n  Limited experience Less than 1 year  g  O t h e r : more t h a n 1 year but l e s s than 3  _  years  found  that,  of experience  3 3  Not w i t h i n scope of t h i s study.  Substantial experience 3 y e a r s o r more  ^_  High: Low:  8 41  Limited experience than 1 year  __  High: Low  9 1 1  O t h e r : more t h a n 1 year but l e s s than  Not w i t h i n scope of t h i s study.  3  Substantial experience ^ 3 y e a r s o r more  We  High: Low:  o u t o f 117 r e s p o n d e n t s , (experienced), while  ^  71  High: Low:  h a d more  26 h a d 3 y e a r s  3 19  than or  three less  18. experience. dynamic  Of  inexperienced  orientation  orientation. experience, 16.5%  the  had  On  the  83.5%  a high  53.8%  had  other  hand,  of those  had  a low  and  psychodynamic  other  likely This  words,  to  see  could  a worker  explained  referred  to  social  work  training  may  a  psychodynamic  altered could  t o meet  be  due  Postulate  earlier.  As  relation we  education,  as  predicting  a  respondents,  10.028;  only  experience  .001  i n the  ^  p>.01).  field  of  is  must  has  suggested, by  giving  subsequently On  trained  the other workers  experience  terms.  "trained  the worker  of practice.  holding  while  results  between  Billingsley  which  to  t h e above  tested  the  mentioned  relationship  previously defined, positive  correlation  we  that  found  49.6%  and  had  50.4%  d i d not. There  significantly  fewer  M a s t e r ' s Degree  Billingsley's; results.  Of  the  an  important  factor  professionally  psychodynamic  between  him  be hand,  this  i n the  constant)  or  of  "trained  social  work  psychodynamic the two.  professional  workers to  orientation, Of  be  i n our  ( 7 9 . 3 % were  117  only  l o w ) . Of  while  noted,  sample  consider i n our workers,  the  training  are, i t should  educated  orientation  concept  between  remaining  high  These  years  2:  incapacity"  a  3 o r more  concept  "incapacitate"  (see t e s t  psycho-  (low psychodynamic)  of the  professionally  high  factors.  In  the  group  =  i n terms  realities  a  orientation  i s experienced  orientation  to fewer  "experienced" other  the  who  (x  i n sociodynamic  incapacity"  high  with  orientation.  orientation  had  psychodynamic  significant relationship  problems  be  a low  psychodynamic  psychodynamic  a highly  In  46.2%  while  indicated a low  group,  than  differing 20.7% the  had  non-  in  19.  professionally  educated  workers,  dynamic  orientation  ( 7 4 . 6 % were  th s s i s ,  there  slightly  ionally  educated  than  was  basis  the  of  was  a  workers  case  this  with  data,  leads  of  respondents  the  "new" the  58 to  the  to  "experience"  related  to  for  low  the  category contained  make  then  the  high  to  little  government  groups,  note  We  that  the  but  on  these  three  of  category  sample:  attracted  were  in  past  responsible  trained were  new  to  workers. invalid  the  frequency not  there  are  so  are  highly trained other  the  of  possible tc  but  other  as  field  i t is  respondents  the  settings  6  significantly  why  to  only  that  as  findings  while  noted  i t i s possible that  I t was  these  the  professional  be  expected  obtained.  questioned  i n our  Comparing  and  we  more  found  orientation  while  table  20).  V,  be  the  On  fell  three  few  in  were  workers  workers  than  low in  with  child  and  welfare?  2B:  education  that  hypothesis  educated  statement  experience  Hypothesis  not  psychodynamic  category  this  six respondents;  5 could  psychodynamic. this  of  of  be  hypo-  orientation  education,  above  our  workers.  should  may  orientation  results  a definitive  interesting  say  It  to  orientation,  professionally  only  educated  psycho-  non — p r o f e s s -  psychodynamic  p o s s i b l e to  referred  high  c o n t r a s t to  ( i . e . i n e x p e r i e n c e d ) . Thus  The  of  high  professional  variable,  a  proportion of  orientation.  psychodynamic 2A:  greater  not  with  psychodynamic  Hypothesis  a  In  professionally  either  field  indicated  low).  higher  with  i t is  education  25.4%  p.  the  than  that  three  83.7%  16.3% Here  respondents  were  again,  years  the  professional  experience  indicated high  with  a low  to  psychodynamic  psychodynamic. experience  a l l other  (Refer  variable  to  appeared  20.  to  be  related  to the g r e a t e r  orientations,  i n contrast  p r o p o r t i o n o f law  to our  TABLE  psychodynamic  predictions.  V  THE D I S T R I B U T I O N OF PSYCHODYNAMIC SCORES OF S O C I A L WORKERS AS R E L A T E D TO EDUCATION AND WORK E X P E R I E N C E . PSYCHODYNAMIC  SCORES  High  %  No. Educated, Limited experience  Total  Low  %  No.  No.  %  3  50. 5  3  50.0  6  1 00  8  16.3  41  83.7'  49  1 00  No e d u c a t i o n , Limited experience  9  45.0  1 1  55.0  20  1 00  No e d u c a t i o n , Substantial experience  3  13.7  1 9  86.3  22  1 00  Educated, Substantial  Hypothesis  2C:  education a  high  experience  O f t h e 22  but three  years  psychodynamic  dynamic,  thus  respondents o r more  orientation,  supporting  with  no  professional  experience, while  our hypothesis  13.7%  8 6 . 3 % were (Refer  indicated low  to table  psychoV  above) . Hypothesis  2D:  training  and  orientation, (Refer held of  l o w work while  to table  and  higher  with  O f t h e 20  there  respondents experience,  no  professional  45% have a h i g h  55% have a low psychodynamic  V above). appears  psychodynamic  the respondents  with  Our  hypothesis  i n s t e a d t o be orientation  was  a trend i n this  psychodynamic  orientation.  therefore i n the group,  not  up-  direction as c o n t r a s t e d  i n the n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l l y e d u c a t e d  but  experienced untrained to  the  group.  workers  social In  a  was  In  lation  58,  of  five  with the  on  the  and  in  orientation  while  38  experienced  workers,  of  towards  low  2.235  The of  59,  46.7%  was are  dynamic were  psychodynamic  (.20  low of  39.2%  ^  even  some  orientation  influence  psychodynamic  experience  between (five  60%  low  were  high  related  to  with  a  or less)  a low  workers.  psychodynamic Of  psychodynamic  appeared  popu(more  psychodynamic.  in orientation. there  held  experienced  high  of  orientation.  being  years  were  were  p >.10)  being  the  educated group,  made  40%  non-professionally educated similarly high  tested.  psychodynamic  psychodynamic Thus  Of  Thus  while  with  t o be  the  a  a x trend  psychodynamic  there  In  general  with  of  we  can  social  the  14  with  data  only  work  while  appears  orientation  obtained,  the  group,  45  while  be  very  experience  available  assume  training  are low  experienced  to  that on  with  a  population  inexperienced  53.3%  in orientation  psychodynamic then,  Of  the  in  influence  that  i n workers.  psychodynamic.  have  or  workers,  only  in orientation.  high  was  psychodynamic  experience  orientation  data  examined  inexperienced  inexperienced  value  high  professionally  the  were  a  we  variable  Of  60.8%  them  analysis,  a division  years)  20  with  i n our  field.  training  constant.  than  work  done  i t appears  bring  subsequent  professional This  Thus  and  there  workers,  psycho-  workers, 42.9% little among the  57.1%  were  difference this  results  is a  psychodynamic  low  group. we  slight orientation.  T A B L E VI NUMBER SELECTING  OF S O C I A L  SPECIFIC  SUB-5YSTEMS  56  AS DOMINANT  /51/*  43  GROUPS REFERENCE  GROUPS  Undecided and/or community  Client  No.  No.  No.  Study  IN SAMPLE  Profession  Agency  Billingsley's ( p . 97)  WORKERS  No,  29  26  16  1 5  24  20.51  31  26.50  35  29.91  1 8  1 0  26  31  20  24  27  23.08  12  32  21  26  16  1 9  F.C.A.  27  55  10  20  8  1 6  4  8  CP.A.  29  19  31  8  1 3  5  8  U.B.C.  Study  C • A • 5« Dept. o f Welfare  On  Social  recalculating  original  24  /JW7* 44  these figures,  c o m p u t a t i o n s . These  i t appeared  are our  7  that  corrections.  25  an e r r o r  was made i n B i l l i n g s l e y s 1  23,  Postulate  3:  (Refer  Hypothesis group  3A:  and  workers  In  Hypothesis  with  3B:  their  "the  work  and  hypothesis that  the In  13  while  was  the  26.5%  chose  not  to  we  workers  studied  feeling  that  and  p r o f e s s i o n . I t would  the  postulate Center, the  3  the  3C:  substantial  too  they  in  other  Mental  not  meet  local  Health  our  reference  difference  dissatisfied  do  10  with  the  adequately seem  Center,  such  and  as  others  identified  or  20.4%  other  32.6%  chose  chase  community.  data  the Our  indicates  group.  the  our  results  professional  agencies the  were  with  or  needs  d e s i r a b l e to  settings,  20.4%  between  whether  49,  16  and/or  Instead  wonder  or  of  and  in  question,  of  client  examine  the in  Family order  Service  to  compare  results.  Hypothesis  as  are  group,  primary the  Billingsley,  that  experience.  education  identified  undecided  upheld.  10  those  obtainable.  a population only  at  work  professional  found  reference  not  reference  first  limited  was  remaining we  between  looked  and  found  their  s p e c u l a t i n g as of  with  we  p r o f e s s i o n i s the  those  with  breakdown,  thus  we  frequency  workers  a l l others,  or  relationship  education  experience,  a later  22).  orientation,  expected the  p r o f e s s i o n as  client,  and  the  Agancy  In  p.  e x p l o r i n g the  When  against  groups.  VI,  professional  again  substantial tested  table  psychodynamic  with  However,  to  their  the  a  3D:  we  group  Of  chose  the only  with found  while  proportion to  inexperienced, remainder  workers  experience,  reference  small  Hypothesis  Of  the  were  " o t h e r s " as  with  professional  that  36.4%  remainder  validate  workers 20%  no  our  no  chose  the  chose  and  client  "others",  hypothesis.  professional  client-oriented their  training  reference  training  while group.  the Again,  and  24.  our  h y p o t h e s i s was In  tabulating  not  upheld.  our  datn,  we  compared  group  of workers  i n our  agencies with  study  (see t a b l e  VI,  22).  majority group,  of respondents  i n our  community"  population  was  Billingsley's to  most  settings  chose the  the  workers.  those  agency  chosen. this  about  primary in  as  1  latter  the  their  few  data  and/or  workers  category,  differences  a  reference  "undecided  Very  reference  Billingsley s  in Billingsley's  category of  chose  speculations and  Whereas  frequently  population  interesting  agency  p.  the  in  in  leading our  25.  CHAPTER  In found  SUMMARY  AND  summary  then,  t o be  as  i t could  orientation diagnostic  could  of  the experience  we  found  a  experience  a low  psychodynamic  There  appeared  education  t o be a  and a l o w  t o be p a r t l y 1  psychodynamic  workers  with  no e x p e r i e n c e  non-professionally  educated  workers  with  experience.  not s t a t i s t i c a l l y  possibility  that  with  "trained  them It  a  origin  of their  number  of workers  that  work  too small  students  psychodynamic  work  the study about  orientation  with  a view  orientation.  i n our study  recommendation  i s reduced  who  were  t o draw  workers with  the  the also  bring  experience.  workers  to understanding because  the of the  educated  but  conclusions, i t i s our  the f i e l d ,  ( i . e . trained  among  explore the  Similarly,  be a d m i n i s t e r e d  to enter  among  than  suggest  professionally  valid  result  Although  of n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l l y educated  psychodynamic  was  that  f u t u r e s t u d i e s might  of social  inexperienced,  social  that  backgrounds  the f i e l d  they  n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l l y educated incapacity"  i s suggested  educational entering  even  significant,  psycho-  prediction,  orientation  educated  were  the  In c o n t r a s t t o B i l l i n g s l e y s  non-professionally  results  education  to a g r e a t e r c o n s i s t e n c y between  postulated this  f o r a higher  was  i n our  nor to p r o f e s s i o n a l  of professional  variable.  orientation  t o i n c o n s i s t e n c y between  orientations.  b u t we  tendency  t o work  Conversely,  n o t be r e l a t e d  between lack  RESEARCH.  a high psychodynamic  related  study.  orientation  FURTHER  orientations  and t r e a t m e n t  relationship  FOR  n o t be r e l a t e d  and t r e a t m e n t  in Billingsley's  dynamic  although  significantly  population, diagnostic  IMPLICATIONS  5.  to  non-experienced  to determine  i f a  high  incapacity) i s characteristic  26.  of  this  during to  group. and  It i s also  following education  determine  orientation  either  already  present  in  Neither  our  ansered  this  and  own  data,  regards  obtained  of  Billingsley s  in  the  category  indicated  a  (se  VI). social  compare  In  order  necessary  to  Billingsley of our  whom  relationship  dominant  s e t t i n g s i n the  professionally  high of  psychoreference.  satisfactorily  workers'  group  local  education,  on  showed  while  that  and  expected  data  reference  a  the  basis  concentration  Billingsley's among  most  respondents  further studies  area,  workers  where can  a  be  be  done  greater found,  in  results. evaluate  our  i s dealing were  the  has  as  appropriateness a p p l i e d to  population  with  "fully  a  median  similarity,  (see  our  of  a  table  indicated  we  i.e. similar  or  low  the  work  were  i t is  billingsley. the  (3,  split  trained) found  concept  setting,  workers  partially  I I ) . There  a high  of  fifty-fifty  However,  of  local  that  trained" in social  approximately  overall  with  population  workers.  groups  those  educated  educated  which  a  experience  our  recommendation  prof essionally  in  from  reference  (including  orientation  work  undecided"  educated  an  between  and  professionally  indicated  order  far.  orientation"  population  reduce  has  "community  compare  (91%)  in  psychodynamic  Billingsley,  whole,  to  "psychodynamic  a  before,  work  of  the  of  social  frame  On  work  to  or  done  sociological  differing  I t i s our  of  be  a  orientation,  study.  distinct,  concentration order  the  results  1  other  to  of  studies  reinforce  students  that  thus  psychodynamic  also  in  means nor  question  we  table  by  that  a school  schools  orientation  With  at  i f the  dynamic  group  suggested  vast  p.  majority  36),  while  between and  that  non-  our  results  psychodynamic d i f f e r e n c e s , however,  psychodynamic  orientation.  27.  It  i s possible  educated the  that  workers  trained may  be  that  the  agencies  professionally  or  i n our  educated  orientations  of  i n the  a  locale  more  low  with  be  non-professionally  workers  direction that  we  have  i n keeping  to  a  low  orientation  examined.  We  suggest  c o n c e n t r a t i o n of  determine  with  influencing  professionally  a larger  studied  are  of  psychodynamic  agencies  workers  are  these  alternately,  have  type  p r o p o r t i o n of  either  workers  already  to  higher  settings  trained  who  attracted  workers'  the  orientation,  workers  other  to  i n our  professionally  psychodynamic  due  those  i f  of  their  Billingsley's  study. There method  used  results terms  are  i n our  from  of  number  study  those  used  Billingsley different. the  a  of  which  i n our  and,  as  Although  study  noted  a l l these  social  education  another  possible  suggestion than  casework  sciences twenty  sociological  of  a  have  Canadian  truly  the  i n our  years  of  results,  we  schools  sample  i n part  United  work  the  to  It i s generally  wonder  whether  of s o c i a l  work  in  The  than  those  of  were  be r e s p o n s i b l e  and  Canada  as  Billingsley s 1  towards the  " p s y c h o s o c i a l method", influence  in  difference  States  tend with  number.  studied  suggest  contrast  immensely  and  difference  different  could  we  i n the  social  f o r the  agencies  orientation,  contributed and  the  population  populations differed  total  factors  sociological  study.  Our  somewhat  e x p l a n a t i o n . In schools  i s not  effects  reflected  in  that  i n the  account  and  above,  between  the  may  were  i n our  work  factors  Billingsley.  differences  rather  of  experience, education  vignettes  for  then  on  result we  social  work  this  influence  than  in their  psychological that  wonder  recognized  to s o c i a l  a  whether  work that  are the  in the has  social  been  American  being social  last felt  more  counter-  28.  p a r t s , where p s y c h o l o g y  i s h e l d i n high esteem. A g a i n , a study o f t h e  psychodynamic o r i e n t a t i o n s o f s t u d e n t s i n l o c a l work i s n e c e s s a r y  In  before t h i s  schools of s o c i a l  s u g g e s t i o n can be v e r i f i e d .  s h o r t t h e n , we b e l i e v e t h a t f u r t h e r s t u d i e s w i l l  r e q u i r e d i n o r d e r t h a t t h e f a c t o r s which  determine  be  psychodynamic  o r i e n t a t i o n among p r o f e s s i o n a l l y and n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l l y e d u c a t e d workers  i n our l o c a l  s e t t i n g c a n be u n d e r s t o o d  more  fully.  29. B I B L I O G R A P H Y  1.  Bartlett, New  2.  Berelson, Bernard. "Content A n a l y s i s " i n Gardner Lindzen, Ed., H a n d b o o k o f S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 9. ( R e a d i n g , M a s s : Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1 9 5 9 ) , p. 4 8 8 .  3.  B i l l i n g s l e y , Andrew. The S o c i a l Worker i n a C h i l d A g e n c y . New Y o r k : N.A.S.W., 1 9 6 6 .  4.  Blakely e t a l . S o c i a l W o r k e r s ' P e r c e p t i o n s o f C h i l d Abuse and Neglect. University o f B r i t i s h Columbia: School o f S o c i a l Work ( u n p u b l i s h e d t h e s i s ) , 1 9 6 7 .  5.  B o e h m , W e r n e r W. Social C o u n c i l on S o c i a l  6. C o y l e ,  H a r r i e t t M. A n a l y z i n g S o c i a l Work P r a c t i c e b y F i e l d s , York: N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f S o c i a l Workers, 1961.  Work Work  Protective  Curriculum o f the Future. E d u c a t i o n , 1959.  Grace. Social Science i n the Professional S o c i a l W o r k e r s . New Y o r k : C o u n c i l o n S o c i a l E d u c a t i o n , 1958.  New  York:  Education of Work  7.  Fanshel, David. " O p p o r t u n i t y and C h a l l e n g e i n C h i l d W e l f a r e R e s e a r c h " i n M i r r i a m H a r r i s and B a r b a r a W a l l a c e , e d s . , The Known a n d t h e Unknown i n C h i l d W e l f a r e R e s e a r c h : An A p p r a i s a l . New Y o r k : N.A.S.W., 1 9 6 5 .  8.  French, David. S o c i a l w o r k a n d S o c i a l S c i e n c e : An A n a l y s i s Their Relationship. U n p u b l i s h e d PhD d i s s e r t a t i o n . University o f M i c h i g a n , 1960, i n B i l l i n g s l e y .  9.  Gould,  J . a n d W.L. K o l b . A Distionary New Y o r k : F r e e P r e s s , 1 8 6 5 .  of the Social  Gordon. T h e o r y and P r a c t i c e o f S o c i a l York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1951.  of  Sciences.  10.  Hamilton, New  11.  Hollis, Florence, Casework: Random H o u s e , 1 9 6 6 .  12.  Kadushin, A l f r e d . " I n t r o d u c t i o n a n d new O r i e n t a t i o n i n Child W e l f a r e R e s e a r c h " i n M i r r i a m H a r r i s and B a r b a r a W a l l a c e , eds., T h e Known a n d t h e Unknown i n C h i l d W e l f a r e R e s e a r c h : An A p p r a i s a l . New Y o r k : N.A.S.W., 1 9 6 5 .  13.  Kahn,  Alfred. Columbia  14.  Kempe,  C.H, e t a l . " T h e B a t t e r e d C h i l d S y n d r o m e " . J o u r n a l o f t h e American Medical A s s o c i a t i o n . V o l . 181 ( J u l y 7, 1 9 6 2 ) , pp. 17/21.  15.  Merton,  Robert  A Psychosocial  Issues i n American S o c i a l University P r e s s , 1959.  K.  Sociology  Today.  Casework.  Theory.  Work.  New Y o r k :  New  Basic  New  York:  York:  Books, 1959.  30.  16.  P a r s o n s , T a l c o t t . The S o c i a l P r e s s , 1951.  17.  Parsons, T a l c o t t , ed. Toward a G e n e r a l Theory o f A c t i o n . C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: Howard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1951.  18.  Perlman, Helen Process.  19.  P o l a n s k y , IM.A. S o c i a l Work R e s e a r c h . o f C h i c a g o P r e s s , 196D.  20.  Richmond, Mary E. Social F o u n d a t i o n , 1917.  21.  Schwartz, Edward, ed. Manpower i n S o c i a l W e l f a r e P e r s p e c t i v e s . New Y o r k : N.A.S.W., 1 9 6 6 .  22.  S t r e s h i v s k y , N a o m i e t a l . "A S t u d y o f S o c i a l Work Protective Services: I t ' s n o t What Y o u Know; Y o u W o r k " . C h i l d W e l f a r e . V o l . XLV ( O c t o b e r , pp. 444-471.  23.  W e b s t e r ' s T h i r d New I n t e r n a t i o n a l Dictionary. M a s s . ; G.C. M i r r i a m , C o . , 1 9 6 5 .  24.  W i l e n s k y , H a r o l d L. and C h a r l e s L. L e b e a u x . 5ociety a n d S o c i a l W e l f a r e . New Y o r k : F o u n d a t i o n , 19 58.  Harris. Chicago:  System. Glencoe,  1 1 1 . : The  Free  5 o c i a l Casework: A P r o b l e m - S o l v i n g U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1957. Chicago:  D i a g n o s i s . New  York:  The  University  Russell  Sage  Research  Practice i n I t ' s Where 1966),  Springfield,  Industrial Russell Sage  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0302495/manifest

Comment

Related Items