A presentation at Heritage University at CBC Week 04 in September 2019 in Pasco, WA 99301, USA by Jacob Campbell
Location: CBC Campus - Tuesday T-336 & SWL-220
Time: Tuesdays and Thursdays from 5:30-8:15
Week 04: 09/09/19 — 09/15/19
Reading Assignment: DeCarlo (2018) chapters six and seven
Topic and Content Area: Theoretical Frameworks
Assignments Due: Assignment 05: theoretical framework due Friday 09/13/19 at 11:55 PM via Moodle; Assignment 02: reading quiz for chapters six and seven are due at 5:30 PM prior to class via My Heritage
Other Important Information: N/A
Information taken from Julie Schillreff
[Small Group Activity] Divide students up into three groups where they will come up with an explination regarding some satistical information.
The various way that we talk and think about research follows a number of different areas of interest. This include:
As we start to look into what theoretical perspective we will following, it is driven by our ontology epistemology. Both the ontology and epistemology are encompassed by what paradigm we choose to relate to our research.
We can start by defining what is a paradigm.
Paradigm: Set of assumptions that help you understand and view the world
There are four paradigms that we generally consider when we think about social work research. The paradigm that is most frequently thought of as we consider social work research is that of Positivism.
Positivism Paradigm: objectivity, deductive logic, empiricism, value-free science Assumptions: Society can and should be studied empirically and scientifically.
DeCarlo (2018) describes an example of positivism in research as:
An inquiry would look at “precisely measuring substance abuse and finding out the key causes of substance abuse during adolescence. Forgoing the objectivity of precisely measuring substance abuse”
[Whole Class Activity] Discuss what this looks like.
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
A second common paradigm is that of social consuctionism
Social Constructionism Paradigm: subjectivity, social context and interaction, meaning, understanding, inductive logic
Assumptions: Reality is created collectively. Social context and interaction frame our realities.
DeCarlo (2018) describes an example of social constructionism paradigm
“Focus on how people who abuse substances understand their lives and relationships with various drugs of abuse. In so doing, it seeks out the subjective truth of each participant in the study”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
A third paradigm is that of Critical Paradigm.
Critical Paradigm: Power, inequality, social change. Values-based, social justice and oppression
Assumptions: Social science can never be truly value-free and should be conducted with the express goal of social change in mind.
DeCarlo (2018) describes an example of critical paradigm.
“Investigate how people who have substance abuse problems are an oppressed group in society and seek to liberate them from external sources of oppression, like punitive drug laws, and internal sources of oppression, like internalized fear and shame”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
The final, and most complicated paradigm is that of Postmodern
Postmodern Paradigm: No truth. Skepticism towards large, sweeping theories Assumptions: Social science can never be truly value-free and should be conducted with the express goal of social change in mind.
DeCarlo (2018) describes an example of postmodern paradigm
“Study one person’s self-reported journey into substance abuse and changes that occurred in their self-perception that accompanied their transition from recreational to problematic drug use”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
So we’ve talked breifly about the various paradigms that are out there. Look at this statement, and try to think below what is going on with the statement (e.g., what are the assumptions made) and what is wrong with this statement.
“When a scientist observes the world, he does so objectively.”
[Small Group Activity] Talk with a partner about what kind of problems you might see with the statement.
[Whole Class Activity] Follow up with class. Attempt to draw out the following potential problems:
So if paradigms are a broad way of viewing and thinking about the world, a theory is the explanation of the world that is based in a specific paradigm.
A logically interrelated set of propositions that helps us explain, predict, and understand why things happen
These Theories help us explain what is going on in the world, but why are the so important.
The following are some social work theories that are discussed in DeCarlo’s (2018) text. It is not a comprehensive list, but we will provide some examples of each:
Theory | Focuses on —- | —- Systems Theory | Interrelations between parts of society; how parts work together Conflict theory | Who wins and who loses based on the way that society is organized Symbolic interactionism | How meaning is created and negotiated though interactions Social Exchange | How behavior is influenced by costs and rewards
A researcher using systems theory might look at the following research example as described by DeCarlo (2018).
“How a lack of employment opportunities might impact rates of substance abuse in an area”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
A researcher using conflict theory might look at the following research example as described by DeCarlo (2018).
“How the War on Drugs has impacted minority communities”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
A researcher using social interactionism might look at the following research example as described by DeCarlo (2018).
“How people’s self-definitions as ‘addicts’ helps or hurts their ability to remain sober”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
A researcher social exchange theory might look at the following research example as described by DeCarlo (2018).
“Whether increased distribution of anti-overdose medications makes overdose more or less likely”
Photo Credit: Matthew T Rader
The following is a bit more of a comprehensive list. Potentially won’t review all of them, but offer it as a resource. You can also look at the original document by Setterlund (2013).
For each theory Setterlund has compiled: the following information
Theory Name: Underlying Perspective: Theories Included: Focus of the Theory: Main Components in Human Behavior: Theorists: Practice Interventions: Practice Applications:
Setterlund, K (2013) Overview of theories of human behavior and the social envionrment. Retrieved from https://home.apu.edu/~ksetterlund/2012-2013/theories%20handout%20with%20terminology.pdf
Theory Name: Systems Theory Underlying Perspective: Systems Perspective Theories Included: Ecological systems theory Focus of the Theory: How persons interact with their environment Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Parsons, Merton, Germain, Gitterman
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Systems Theory Underlying Perspective: Systems Perspective Theories Included: Family Systems Focus of the Theory: How the family system affects the individual and family functioning across the life-span Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Bowen, Satir, Minuchin, Carter, McGoldrick
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications: Useful for understanding family systems and life cycles over multiple generations
Theory Name: Behaviorism & Social Learning Theory Underlying Perspective: [Social Behavioral Perspective] Theories Included: Cognitive theory, behavioral theory, social learning theory Focus of the Theory: How individuals develop cognitive functioning and learn through acting on their environment Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Pavlov, Skinner, Watson, Piaget, Bandura, Beck
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Psychodynamic Theory Underlying Perspective: [Psychodynamic Perspective] Theories Included: Classical psycho-dynamic theory, ego-psychology,object-relations theory, self-psychology Focus of the Theory: How inner energies and external forces interact to impact emotional development Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: S. Freud, Adler, Jung, Horney, A. Freud, Kernberg, Kohut, Klein, Mahler, Bowlby
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Psychosocial Developmental Theory Underlying Perspective: [Developmental Perspective] Theories Included: Erikson’s theory of development Focus of the Theory: How internal & external forces shape life development, generally by life stages Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Erikson
Practice Interventions: General assessment of developmental functioning that can be compared with chronological age of the client
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Transpersonal Theory Underlying Perspective: [Developmental Perspective; built upon Humanistic Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How the spiritual and religious aspects of human existence can be understood; How spiritual development builds upon and goes beyond biopsychosocial development Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Maslow, Jung, Fowler, Wilber, Washburn
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Social Exchange Theory Underlying Perspective: [Rational Choice Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How persons minimize costs and maximize rewards through social exchange Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Homan, Thibault, Kelley, Blau
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Social Constructionism Underlying Perspective: [Social Constructionist Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How sociocultural and historical contexts shape individuals and the creation of knowledge; How individuals create themselves . Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Foucault, Berger, Luckmann, Gergen
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Symbolic Interactionism Underlying Perspective: [Social Constructionist Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How the “self” is influenced and shaped by social processes and the capacity to symbolize Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Charon, Mead, Goffman
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Conflict Theory Underlying Perspective: [Conflict Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How power structures & power disparities impact people’s lives Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Marx, Marcuse, Haberrmas, Feminist theorists, LGBTQ theorists
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Theory Name: Contingency Theory Underlying Perspective: [Systems Perspective] Focus of the Theory: How individuals & groups gain power, access to resources, & control over their lives, often through collective action Main Components in Human Behavior:
Theorists: Weber, Lawrence, Lorsch, March
Practice Interventions:
Practice Applications:
Along with paradigms, theories, there are also concepts that you will find.
A concept is a mental image or perception of a thing that varies from individual to individual and therefore must be defined
Examples: effectiveness, satisfaction, intelligence, fitness, culture, power, rich, poor, chronic absenteeism
With all of these paradigms and theories they come into conflict with each other. A helpful way of watching and considering this is through Karl Poppers theory of falsification.
[Whole Class Activity] Watch the video
[Whole Class Activity - Discuss] How these theories conflict. How this can become confusing quickly… etc.
BBC Radio 4 (2015 August 8) Karl popper’s falsification. Retreived from https://youtu.be/wf-sGqBsWv4
Now lets spend some time looking at your writing and how to write about a theoretical framework.
Rational for why including a theoretical framework
Example:
Scholarly work requires evaluating the underlying reasons and methods to the research being completed.
Perhaps the theory that best explains (study topic) is (name of theory).
Example:
Perhaps the best theory that explains Native American student retention at Heritage University is Tribal Critical Race Theory.
According to (name of theory),…
Example:
According to Tribal Critical Race Theory (TCRT), colonization is endemic to society and evidenced in the dominance of European thought, knowledge, and power structures as well as in continued efforts to change Indians to be more like White people (Brayboy, 2005). Essentially, TCRT places racism and colonialism at the center of explorations of Native American educational experiences and outcomes while contextualizing research within the on-going legacies of colonialism and racism (Abercrombie-Donahue, 2017).
Within the framework of (name of theory), (name of topic) occurs because…
Example:
Within the framework of Tribal Critical Race Theory, we shift our focus away from individual deficit models towards a structural perspective that frames the retention of Native American students in higher education within the contexts of racism and colonialism. Specifically, TCRT pushes us to look at the way traditional practices in higher education may be functioning to perpetuate the dominant culture while alienating our Native American students. If we want to increase the retention of Native students, we need to address those colonizing practices.
Perhaps the best theory that explains Native American student retention at Heritage University is Tribal Critical Race Theory. According to Tribal Critical Race Theory (TCRT), colonization is endemic to society and evidenced in the dominance of European thought, knowledge, and power structures as well as in continued efforts to change Indians to be more like White people (Brayboy, 2005). Essentially, TCRT places racism and colonialism at the center of explorations of Native American educational experiences and outcomes while contextualizing research within the on-going legacies of colonialism and racism (Abercrombie-Donahue, 2017). Within the framework of Tribal Critical Race Theory, we shift our focus away from individual deficit models towards a structural perspective that frames the retention of Native American students in higher education within the contexts of racism and colonialism. Specifically, TCRT pushes us to look at the way traditional practices in higher education may be functioning to perpetuate the dominant culture while alienating our Native American students. If we want to increase the retention of Native students, we need to address those colonizing practices.
The next thing we want to do is go over the rubric for theoretical frameworks
The following is the rubric that is in the syllabus
Initial | Emerging | Developing | Highly Developed —- | —- | —- | —- No theoretical framework is presented | At least one theoretical framework is weakly presented | At least one theory/theoretical framework is adequately presented with a basic understanding of that framework demonstrated | At least one theory/theoretical framework is clearly presented with an in-depth understanding of that framework demonstrated No attempt to relate theoretical framework to the topic is present | Theoretical framework is weakly related to topic | Theoretical framework is adequately related to topic | Theoretical framework is clearly related to topic
There are two ways that we go about solving a problem. These are inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning.
Inductive Reasoning: Data to theory
“start with a set of observations and then move from particular experiences to a more general set of propositions about those experiences:
Gather Data (Specific level of focus) -> Look for Patterns (Analysis) -> Develop Theory (General Level of Focus)
Deductive Reasoning: theory to “truth”
“Study what others have done, reads existing theories of whatever phenomenon she is studying, and then tests hypotheses that emerge from those theories”
Theorize/Hypothesize (general level of focus) -> Analyze Data (Analysis) -> Hypotheses Supported or Not (Specific Level of Focus)
To help us look into and understand these forms of reasoning, lets dive into some data published by the Guardian by Hardy (2016)
[Whole Class Activity] Open the webpage, show that it talks about some stories of social workers and why they became social works.
[Small Group Activity] Have students break up into small groups and talk about how they would approach the question of how do social workers from an inductive and a deductive approach
Hardy, R. (2016 March 14) Why I became a social worker. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2016/mar/15/why-i-became-a-social-worker.
[Whole Class Activity - Discussion] Take the class through what they might think about for inductive reasoning.
Why do undergraduate students choose social work?
[Whole Class Activity - Discussion] Take the class through what they might think about for deductive reasoning.
Why do undergraduate students choose social work?
Causality is something that is difficult to prove. How it does get proven or demonstrated is based on both the reasoning and the paradigm. To help example this there is idiographic causality and nomothetic causality
Inductive Reasoning & Social Constructionism Idiographic causality:
Deductive Reasoning & Positivism Nomothetic causality:
Nomothetic causal explanations require a type of math to be proven. They use variables and look for changes in those variables. Basically:
IV (Independent Variable) changes the DV (Dependent Variable).
Independent Variable: The thing that is being manipulated or observed Dependent Variable: The thing that is changed based on the manipulation or observation
The hypothesis describes the relationship of the these variables and what we think is going to have happen.
To be able to be causal… must…
Covariation: “the degree to which two variables vary together” Plausibility: in order to make the claim that one event, behavior, or belief causes another, the claim has to make sense Temporality: “whatever cause you identify must happen before the effect” Nonspuriousness: Spurious- “an association between two variables appears to be causal but can in fact be explained by some third variable”
Control Variables: “potential ‘third variables’ effects are controlled for mathematically in the data analysis process to highlight the relationship between the independent and dependent variable”
Idiographic causal explanations are… messy
Idiographic Casual Explanations
Nomothetic Casual Explanations
Can mix these together in the same project
