In Social Work research there is a strong debate on the distinctiveness and methodological quality, and how to address the dilemma of rigour and practice relevance. Given the nature of Social Work the field has developed a characteristic research culture that puts emphasis on giving voice to service users and disseminating research knowledge in practice, especially in a stream of so called practice-based research. However, there is no consensus on how to best contribute to the practice of Social Work through research and at the same time producing rigourous scientific outcomes, resulting in methodological pluralism. Studying the perceptions of Social Work researchers on their role, the aims and values of Social Work research and their research approach, provides insight into the methodological pluralism of Social Work research. Thirty-four professors specialising in practice-based Social Work research participated in a Q methodology study. Q methodology combines qualitative and quantitative methods. It helped reveal and describe divergent views as well as consensus. The analysis led to the identification of three differing viewpoints on Social Work research, which have been given the following denominators: The Substantiator, The Change Agent and The Enlightener. The viewpoints provide researchers in the field of Social Work with a framework in which they can position themselves in the methodological pluralism. Researchers state that the viewpoints are helpful in clarifying perspectives on good research, facilitate the discourse on methodological choices to further develop and strengthen Social Work research as a scientific discipline
DOCUMENT
As multifunctional places that combine shopping and hospitality with public space and residential functions, urban consumption spaces are sites where different normative orders surface and sometimes clash. In Amsterdam, such a clash emerged over touristification of consumption spaces, eroding place attachment for local residents and urging the city government to take action. Based on policy analysis and interviews with entrepreneurs and key informants, we demonstrate how Amsterdam’s city government is responding to this issue, using legal pluralism that exists within formal state law. Specifically, the city government combines four instruments to manage touristification of consumption spaces, targeting so-called tourist shops with the aim to drive them out of the inner city. This strategic combination of policy instruments designed on various scales and for different publics to pursue a local political goal jeopardizes entrepreneurs’ rights to legal certainty. Moreover, implicitly based on class-based tastes and distrust towards particular minority groups of entrepreneurs, this policy strategy results in institutional discrimination that has far-reaching consequences for entrepreneurs in itself, but also affects trust relations among local stakeholders.
DOCUMENT
This paper argues that there is a need for a dialogical learning space because soft skills are becoming increasingly important in an ever more unstable labour market. Where once a monological form of education worked to prepare youth for the future, now a dialogue is required. This dialogue, by definition or in the first place seek consensus, but assumes pluralism and even conflict and is thereby intended to be a true departure from the monological nature of education.
DOCUMENT
