Mission and Vision

Envisioning the Future of Practice Research:
ICPRSW Visioning Process

Introduction

Based upon the interests and questions posed by members of the International Advisory Board of the ICPRSW in 2023, the Board made a commitment to begin the process of envisioning a future of practice research. The resulting reports compiled by members of the International Advisory Board are designed to unlock the creative energies of partners around the world that can help provide directions for the next decade. *

The context for these reports is the updated definition of practice research noted below and elaborated in the website section on About Us related to the Evolving Definition of Practice Research in Social Work that:

Represents a disciplined and systematic form of inquiry with an overall aim to develop and enhance social work practice in a wide range of contexts.
Includes the goal of producing context-sensitive and directly relevant knowledge to strengthen social work in order to bridge the gap between research and practice as well as democratize knowledge creation through the use of participative research methods that include significant stakeholders.
Promotes social justice values related to inclusion, equity and empowerment, cultural sensitivity by incorporating indigenous and local knowledge.

The results of the visioning process are captured in the following four areas that were designed to inform future ICPRSW decision-making:

1) the articulation of the practice research approach or methodologies that elaborate upon the evolving definition of Practice Research

2) the identification of the knowledge building process at the front end and back end of the practice research enterprise related to theory-informed practice research and theorizing about practice research findings

3) illustrating the reciprocal impact of how practice research findings can transform practice while practice informs research

4) an evolving discussion of the issues associated with educating current and future practitioners about the breadth and depth of practice research

The inter-relationships between the four domains of theory, research, education and practice are captured in a concept map (Figure 1). Since practice research is fundamentally concerned with transforming social work practice, practice research methodologies appear in the center of the figure. While theory informs methodology, the primary goal of practice research is to provide a foundation for transforming practice as well as incorporating dialogic structures and processes. The overlapping inter-relationships between the four domains can be viewed in terms of boundary-spanning concepts where theory-informed research and research-informed theory appear on the left side of the concept map and practice-informed research and research-informed practice appear on the right side of the concept map. The entire practice research enterprise balances on the strength of the engagement and involvement of partners in the collaborative process (see fulcrum).

In essence, the outcomes of the ICPRSW visioning process supports a global hub for knowledge mobilization on all aspects of Practice Research in Social Work including through the use of ICPRSW Practice Research Collaboratives related to knowledge exchange, knowledge brokering, knowledge creation, and knowledge sharing/dissemination/diffusion.

*The various components of Envisioning the Future of Practice Research were created by the members of the International Advisory Board of the International Community for Practice Research in Social Work <ICPRSW.com>. The eighteen-month process evolved under the leadership of the following Board members: Lars Uggerhoj, Aalborg University, Denmark (Board Chair), Christa Fouche, University of Auckland, New Zealand (Board Vice Chair), Maija Jäppinen, Helsinki University, Finland (Methodologies Chair), Sui Ting Kong, Durham University, United Kingdom (Theories Chair), Sidsel Natland, Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway (Education & Definition Chair) and Michael Austin, University of California, Berkeley, USA & Christa Fouche, New Zealand (Practice Chairs). The process was enriched by contributions from other Board Members including Ke Cui, Sichuan University, China; Lynette Joubert, University of Melbourne, Australia; Ilse Julkunen, Helsinki University, Finland; Bowen McBeath, Portland State University, USA; Sara Serbati, University of Padua, Italy; Timothy Sim, University of Social Sciences, Singapore; Kate Thompson, University of Melbourne, Australia; Martin Webber, University of York, United Kingdom; Laura Yliruka, University of Eastern Finland; and Sibonsile Zibane, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Component I: The Future of Practice Research Methodologies

There are many different types of methodologies that emphasise collaboration and lived experience, including participatory action research, co-research, co-creation, and survivor research. Practice research draws from these research traditions and contributes to them. The following five foci have been identified for the development of practice research methodologies:

Drawing upon the different methods of social research
Engaging theories, data and practice in abductive analysis
Orienting practice research methodologies towards impact
Involving service users
Innovative dissemination of research results

Component II: The Future of Theory-Informed Practice

An approach to examine and transform the theory-research- practice trialogue requires a thoughtful and explicit elaboration of theories, methodologies and actions at personal, relational, organizational and societal levels to ensure that research in and with practice is:

Trialogical: The trialogical relationships among theories, research and practice involves the core mechanism of theorizing from practice, for practice and during practice
Multi-voiced: A multi-voiced translative framework involves high levels of trust between actors to lead to new interpretations and insights and enhance the exchange of knowledge.
Democratic: Democratization of knowledge production, often informed by feminist and decolonizing scholarship, is a form of justice intervention where safe spaces are co-created to challenge dominant notions and tell silenced stories and build community for knowledge development.
Socially Robust: Disseminating research knowledge through dialogues that reflect a learning process situated in research and practice contexts, cultural differences and the process of change.

Component III: The Future of Transformational Social Work Practice

Practice research influences and is influenced by various factors, with the ultimate impact of transforming practice. Transforming Social Work practice through practice research includes:

The consideration of social change agendas inside and outside human service organizations
The process of integrating multiple forms of practice and fields of practice
Expanding partners (stakeholders) to actively involve service-users

Practice research principles focus on a negotiated process of inquiry, enfranchisement through dialogical communication, balancing power relationships, and addressing the challenges underlying the assumptions of knowledge. The principles enhance the reciprocal impacts of practice research and social work practice. These reciprocal impacts are influenced by contextual factors related to purpose, capacities, networks, approaches, fields of practice, policy environments, cultural, political and linguistic diversity along with personal, relational and structural conditions.

Component IV. Teaching Practice Research

Educating current and future research-minded practitioners often includes fostering curiosity, self-reflective practice, and critical thinking. This emphasis on education features multi-partner collaboration between research-minded practitioners, practice-minded researchers, and experience-minded service users as well as involving multiple fields of social work practice (services for individuals and groups, community and administrative practice, policy practice).

Some of the different approaches to teaching and learning about practice research include:

identifying the parallel processes found in teaching both practice and research methods with service users as the third partner among practitioners and researchers. The shared elements utilized by practice research partners include formulating practice research questions and developing a research plan, collecting data and engaging in shared data analysis and interpretation, and finally reporting practice research findings that help to promote change in organizations and communities.

Within the context of methodological pluralism, the research tools needed for practice research are drawn primarily from the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the social sciences (e.g. research interviews, focus groups, surveys, ethnographic documentation, structure literature reviews, etc.). Practice research also involves framing research questions using collaborative, democratic, participatory and anti-oppressive processes. In essence, it is a shared process that is not dominated by researchers.

Implementing the Results of the Visioning Process

The goal of the inter-relationship of the vision components is to construct a future pathway for partners around the world to address some of the aspirational activities noted along with questions like the following:

To what extent should an updated review of the methodologies discussion include lessons learned from service user-led practice research?
To what extent should increased attention be given to theorizing about practice research findings to inform middle range practice/praxis theory?
To what extent should the dissemination and utilization of practice research be explored in terms of identifying key principles and processes along with the illustration of international exemplars?
To what extent can organizational support for service users be identified that parallels the university supports for researchers and the service agency supports for practitioners?
How might the social work education curricula be changed/expanded to provide more prominence and understanding of practice research among future practice researchers?