Teaching | ICPR2a

Educating Current and Future Research-Minded Social Workers: Teaching Practice Research

Christa Fouche, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Sidsel Natland, Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway

Sara Serbati, University of Padua, Italy

Lars Uggerhoj, Aalborg University, Denmark

Michael J. Austin, University of California, Berkeley, USA

Expanding the capabilities of current and future social work practitioners to engage in practice research calls for the core attributes of research-minded including curiosity, self-reflective practice, and critical thinking. These attributes are linked to questions about social work practice such as: 1) is there a more effective way to meet the needs of service users? 2) what can we learn from the literature about the outcomes of the services we provide? 3) how can we regularly assess the impact of the services that we provide? 4) how can we strengthen our critical thinking skills related to engaging in practice research? and 5) how does an analysis of current social policies inform the impact of the services being provided or the need for improved social policies? While speculating upon the answers to these questions is beyond the scope of this statement, the questions provide a broad context for identifying the challenges related to educating current and future research-minded social workers about the processes of practice research.

This element of the ICPRSW Visioning Process focuses on educating current social work students (undergraduate and graduate) as future practitioners as well as current practitioners engaged in expanding their research-minded capacities. This emphasis on education complements the other sections of the Visioning Process related to defining practice research, exploring research methodologies, identifying relevant theories that inform practice research, and elaborating upon the relationship between practice research and transforming social work practice.

Core Attributes of Research-minded Practitioners

Learning about practice research begins with social work practice and the definitions of curiosity, self-reflection and critical thinking (Austin, Dal Santo & Lee, 2012). Curiosity is an approach-oriented motivational state associated with asking questions, examining/manipulating interesting images/objects, reading exhaustively, and/or persisting on challenging tasks (Kashdan & Silvia, 2009). The function of curiosity is to learn, explore, and immerse oneself in an interesting topic/event. Curiosity also serves a broader function of building knowledge and competence.

The self-reflective process includes several different stages or levels; namely, awareness of an event or situation that creates puzzlement, surprise, or discomfort, an analysis of the situation that leads to an examination of current knowledge, perceptions, and assumptions, and an effort to revise assumptions that lead to a new sense of balance (Fook, 2008, p. 40).

Critical thinking involves careful examination and evaluation of beliefs, arguments, and actions by considering alternative views to arrive at well-reasoned decisions, for example ‘paying attention to the process of how we think, not just the outcome’ (Gambrill, 2005, p. 253).

Multiple Stakeholders

In addition to the thought processes of research-minded practitioners, it is also important for all participants in practice research to understand and appreciate the experiences of other stakeholders engaged in collaborative and respectful coordination of different perspectives and experiences. For example, practice-minded researchers reflect in-depth experience through observation and interaction with the breadth and depth of social work practice. This experience is often reflected in a considerable amount of time spent inside a social service agency and/or universities educating social work students related to theory-informed practice, research-informed practice or policy-informed practice.

In more recent times, there has been a growing recognition of service users as key stakeholders related to conducting practice research. This group of experienced-informed stakeholders bring their life experiences that often include functioning as consumers of social services. Their valuable perspective is often missing in the conduct of practice research. Their involvement has led to new leadership roles in some settings where service users lead a practice research project and expect research-minded practitioners and practice-minded researchers to serve as consultants (Sweeney, Beresford, Faulkner, Nettle, & Rose, 2009).

The success of the collaboration among multiple stakeholders can frequently be traced to the empowerment provided by the academic-practice partnerships that enable practice research. The partnership vary around the world as some are administered by schools of social work (University of California, Berkeley) while other university-linked relationships are based in a local university and public social services (Helsinki, Finland) or hospital systems (Melbourne, Australia) (Austin, McBeath, Xu, Muurinen, Natland & Roose, 2024). Other collaborations rely upon the creativity and leadership of individual university faculty members as in New Zealand, Norway, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, and South Africa or senior practitioners in human service organizations.

Multiple Levels of Social Work Practice

Exploring the role of practice research involves particular attention to levels of social work practice. Practice at the level of individual service users working with practitioners has different characteristics from working with a group of service users. Similarly working at the community or organizational level involves different skills and understanding.

In a similar way, educating future practitioners involves different levels of learner readiness. For example, there are different learner capacities needed to function as a consumer of research at a basic level from the advanced learner capacities to translate practice research findings into practice improvements. Even more advanced are the skills and experience needed to explore the relationship between conducting practice research and building practice knowledge as well as the skills to participate in and/or lead democratic and participatory practice research processes and the skills needed to support communicative processes.

Post-qualifying (post-graduate) learning of practice research is a crucial site where learning of practice research takes place. This means qualified social workers are involved in or even leading research about and/or for practice – often known as ‘practitioner research’. In the context of a higher education degree social workers often learn about research methods and carry out a piece of research in relation to their practice or practice insights; alternatively, practitioners can also be engaged in research that is facilitated by their service agencies (Shaw, 2005). In some cases, practitioner-engaged/led research is a lone activity (Shaw and Lunt, 2018) while at other times it can be part of a networked approaches involving multiple practitioners and academic partners (Lunt, Shaw and Fouche, 2010; Kong, Stepanova and Thanki, 2023). These different forms of practitioner research present different dynamics in shaping what questions to ask, research methods to employ, data types and its direct utilization in improving practice; hence, how learning of practice research takes place.

Different approaches to teaching and learning about practice research

While research and practice methods can be taught separately in university courses and fieldwork, the underlying theme of a future vision of practice research is to view the process as a fully integrated dynamic and multi-dimensional process. One way to integrate learning about practice research is to look for ways to connect the various elements related to acquiring of social work practice skills through the use of both course work and field work. If the ultimate goal of social work education is to prepare future practitioners to engage in evidence-informed practice, then research skills need to be integrated into the teaching of practice skills. This integration is often complicated by the fact that different instructors teach separate courses on practice and research in many social work education programs (often based on different interests and competencies that do not reside in one person or one integrated course). However, the teaching of practice research needs to be reconceptualized as a co-taught process inside either research or practice courses.

As illustrated in Figure 1, it is helpful to identify the parallel processes found in teaching both practice and research methods (Austin & Carnochan, 2020). The addition of service users as the third partner among practitioners and researchers provides another perspective of the integrations process. The shared elements of the integrated approach include engaging different stakeholders in formulating practice research questions as part of assessing service issues and developing a research plan, collecting data and engaging in shared data analysis and interpretation, finally reporting practice research findings. In this parallel process experienced by service users, service user voices can be amplified when framing the practice research plan, service user participatory skills can be enhanced in an environment of differential power and status, active participation in the process of interpreting practice research findings, and ultimately using the practice research findings to help with advocacy for change in organizations and communities (Austin & McBeath, 2022). Case-based teaching can be used to illustrate the parallel processes of research methods and practice principles along with the unique role of service users (Austin & Isokuortti, 2016).

Figure 1: Parallel and Integrated Processes between Practice, Research, and Service User Involvement

The teaching and learning process in social work education is greatly enhanced by the experiences of agency-based fieldwork placements. The actual work of doing research, even if only at the beginner level, can plant important seeds for the further development of research as well as practice skills. Methods that encourage the learner to integrate research into actual practice (as an apprentice in the craft of research) can lead to significant learning such as research leaning in clinical settings. Experiences of working within interdisciplinary teams with substantial supervision can also contribute to rich learning.

For example, the Helsinki model includes teaching master’s students in close collaboration with practice stakeholders who propose topics for students’ research work while students negotiate the research setting, conduct research in close collaboration with them, and then share the results to be used in service development (Tapola-Haapala et al. 2020). Another example from Denmark includes communication taught at the bachelor level is mostly connected to communicating with individuals and not with groups of people, especially not with groups negotiating a research process or with service users in need of help. Likewise democratic processes are very abstract to students and social workers. Practice research is very specific and is closely related to actually working and researching together.

Practice research approaches and social science research methodologies

While the integration of practice and research methods is a critical perspective on teaching and learning, it is also important to note that the teaching of practice research is not a new methodology but rather an “approach” to understanding the multiple challenges facing social work practice (McBeath, Austin, Carnochan & Chuang, 2021).The research tools needed for the practice research approach are drawn primarily from the social sciences (e.g. research interviews, focus groups, surveys, ethnographic documentation, structure literature reviews, etc.).

As observed by Webber (2020), practice research calls for methodological pluralism in order to understand the relationship between the practice research approach and traditional social science research methods (qualitative and quantitative). This pluralism reflects the fundamental recognition that research methods vary according to the research questions proposed. For example, if the stakeholders involved in practice research are trying to acquire a basic understanding of a practice issue, then more qualitative or ethnographic methods might be more useful for framing a practice research study. On the other hand, if many study respondents need to be able to generalize the findings across wider populations, then the quantitative or statistical approach may be more relevant. In addition, it is important to note that methodological pluralism in practice research can feature both qualitative and quantitative approaches. However, it is important to recognize something of an anti-quantitative sentiment among practitioners who do not see this research methodology as consistent with a social justice or advocacy orientation.

Drawing heavily upon social science research methodologies, practice research 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. Social science methods rely upon the use of specific practice-based criteria (measurable, achievable, relevant, timeframe) or population-based criteria (population description, intervention used, comparison groups developed, intended outcome identified, and the specification of follow-up time to assess outcome). Equally important is the identification of practice knowledge already acquired in the form of a review of the existing literature. A structured literature review often includes the following major components: clarity of search questions, inclusion/exclusion criteria, key word databased search strategy, number of sources included/excluded, and the qualitative assessment of the key data extracted in the form of a narrative synthesis of key findings/themes.

Social science research methods include efforts to link research questions to the methods selected (experimental, cohort, case-controlled, cross-sectional, qualitative ethnographic). In a similar way, data collection and analysis methods, often using standardized measures and structured/open-ended interviews are linked to statistical and thematic analysis. Other important methods include dialogical communications, intra- and inter-group negotiating, and promoting democratic processes. And finally, ethical challenges represent a particular feature of social science research methods as they relate to the importance of protecting human subjects to minimize stress on respondents or data sources and to attend to power imbalances.

Psychological dimensions of doing practice research

One core characteristic of practitioner research is ‘peer learning/co-learning’. Lunt et al. (2010) observed how practitioners gained a 'research gaze' which enabled them to look afresh at practice, with new understandings that made assumptions implausible’. Research-mindedness is therefore not only about research literacy and utilization but a different frame of mind and language in approaching practice concerns. While the role of teachers is well documented in these studies as ‘support’ and ‘mentor’, few studies identify how they are gaining practice-mindedness in these collaborations. For example, Kong et al. (2023) documented that practitioner-led research can cause the feelings of ‘unease, confusion and anxiety’ when the practice research process is more fluid requiring an open attitude towards methodological pluralism. Deviation from well-established research methodologies or methods might create discomfort and confusion among academics, posing questions about the ‘validity’ of practitioner research and the suitability of established methods.

The emotion of discomfort (unease, anxiety, sense of uncertainty etc.) can be both destructive and productive where the two worlds of research and practice collide. This perceived mismatch can be the best moments to examine professional boundaries, underlying values and goals of the colliding disciplines and, when well facilitated, can lead to methodological innovation and transdisciplinary learning.

Lingering Questions

If practice research is to be informed by theory, then how will practice research inform future theory development?

How will innovations supported by practice research be disseminated/utilized by practitioners?
What type of learning networks will be needed to support practice research?
How do we keep practitioners up to date with the results of practice research?
Once social work practitioners have left the academic environment, how do we sustain their interest/involvement in the promotion of practice research?

Attachment A: A South African Approach to Lingering Questions

In countries, such as the UK and South Africa, Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is required for registration renewal. It is part of the professionalization strategy to ensure social workers are kept up to date with the latest law, practice and evidence that are essential for supporting the wellbeing of service users. These regulatory requirements can foster a space for post-qualification learning of practice research, if mechanisms are there to recognize practitioner research, both learning and doing of which, as a key element of CPD (see the example of the British Association of Social Workers UK Practitioner Research Network). More attention to workforce development and data infrastructure is needed to genuinely promote the learning and doing of practitioner research, and these will need to be part of a future vision.

If practice research is to be informed by theory, then how will practice research inform future theory development?

Through systematic engagement with real-world practice contexts, particularly those in which students are placed for practicum within social work organizations.
In these settings, theory is continuously tested, adapted, and re-shaped through co-researching processes involving students, practitioners, and academic supervisors.
By encouraging practitioners to participate as co-researchers alongside the students they supervise, practice knowledge—often tacit, embodied, and context-specific—is made visible and theorized.
With mentorship and support from academic supervisors, insights emerging from practice are critically reflected upon and translated into conceptual contributions that inform theory development. This model allows theory to emerge inductively from practice realities, particularly within African contexts where relationality, spirituality, and community-based responses remain under-theorized in mainstream social work theory.

What type of learning networks will be needed to support practice research?
- Practicum partnerships between universities and social work organizations
- Practitioner–student–academic co-research teams
- Communities of practice facilitated through refresher courses and research workshops
- Conference and scholarly platforms that connect local practice to national and global conversations
- These networks function as mentored knowledge ecosystems, where learning is continuous, relational, and reciprocal. Academic supervisors and mentors play a critical role in supporting methodological rigor while valuing practitioner and community knowledge as legitimate sources of theory and innovation.
How do we keep practitioners up to date with the results of practice research?
- Regular feedback sessions linked to student practicum research
- Refresher training courses on emerging methodologies and practice research findings
- Abstract writing workshops and research capacity-building sessions
- Practice-focused seminars and learning dialogues
- By involving practitioners directly in research supervision, reflection, and dissemination, research findings are not only shared but collectively interpreted and applied, ensuring relevance to practice realities.

Once social work practitioners have left the academic environment, how do we sustain their interest and involvement in the promotion of practice research?
- In South Africa, Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is compulsory and mandated by the counsel. When practitioners engage in scholarly or personal development work, they are awarded points towards their CPD. We are exploiting this requirement to sustain practitioner interests and involvement in the promotion of practice research.
- CPD points are:
  - Continued participation in practicum supervision, co-research projects, refresher courses, and conference preparation programs.
  - Through abstract writing workshops and mentorship for conference participation, practitioners are supported to remain active contributors to scholarly and professional discourse. This approach positions practice research as an extension of professional identity and ethical responsibility rather than as an academic obligation

References

Austin, M.J., Dal Santo, T. & Lee, C. (2012). Building organizational supports for research-minded practitioners. Special Issue, Journal of Evidence-based Social Work, 9(1/2), 174-211.

Austin, M.J. & Isokuortti (2016). A framework for teaching practice-based research with a focus on service users. Journal of Teaching in Social Work. 36(1), 11-32.

Austin, M.J., & Carnochan, S. (2020). Practice Research in the Human Services: A University-Agency Partnership Model. UK: Oxford University Press.

Austin, M.J. & McBeath, B. (2022). Conducting Practice Research. China Journal of Social Work. 15(3), 270-286.

Austin, M.J., McBeath, B., Xu, Bin, Muurinen, H., Natland, S., & Roose, R. (2024).
Organizational supports for practice research: Illustrations from an international practice research collaborative. Research on Social Work Practice. 34 (6), 610-624.

Fook, J. (2008). Developing model(s) of critical reflection to contribute to organizational learning via case reviews in children’s services: A scoping review of relevant concepts and frameworks. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence.

Gambrill, E. (2005). Critical thinking in clinical practice: Improving the quality of judgments and decisions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Sons, Inc.

Kashdan, T., & Silvia, P. (2009). Curiosity and interest: The benefits of thriving on novelty and challenge. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook
of positive psychology (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Kong, S.T. (2015). Social work practice research innovation, implementation and implications: A case of ‘Cooperative Grounded Inquiry’ with formerly abused women in Hong Kong. Qualitative Social Work, 15(4), 533-551.

Kong, S. T., Stepanova, E., & Thanki, V. (2023). Collaborative practice research in social work: piloting a model for research and professional learning during COVID-19. European Social Work Research, 1(1), 84-101.

Lunt, N., Shaw, I., & Fouché, C. (2010). Practitioner research: collaboration and knowledge production. Public Money & Management, 30(4), 235–242.

McBeath, B., Austin, M.J., Carnochan, S., & Chuang,E. (2021). Practice research methods in social work: Processes, applications and implications for social service organisations, The British Journal of Social Work, 1-19.

Shaw, I. (2005). Practitioner Research: Evidence or Critique? The British Journal of Social Work, 35 (8), 1231–1248.

Shaw, I. & Lunt, N. (2018). Forms of Practitioner Research, The British Journal of Social Work, 48(1), 141–157.

Shaw, I., & Bryderup, I. (2008). Visions for social work research, in Evidence Based
and Knowledge Based Social Work: Research Methods and Approaches in Social Work
Research. Bryderup, I.M. (Ed), Aarhus University. Denmark.

Sim, T. and Fook, J. (2024). ‘Practice Research and Transformative Social Work – Evolving Concepts and Social Impact’ in Fook, J. and Jatlow, D. (eds). Transformative Social Work. New York: Columbia University Press.

Sweeney, A., Beresford, P., Faulkner, A., Nettle, M., & Rose, D. (eds) (2009). This is Survivor Research. PCCS Books, England.

Tapola-Haapala, M., Kääriäinen, A., Jäppinen, M., & Satka, M. (2020). Teaching practice research through fieldwork placements: Critical factors for successful trialogical learning processes. In L. Joubert, & M. Webber (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Social Work Practice Research (pp. 243-254). London: Routledge.

Webber, M. (2020). Teaching practice research: A curriculum guide for postgraduate social work training. In Joubert, L.& Webber, M. The Routledge Handbook of Social Work Practice Research.