Suchergebnisse

Die Verfasser setzen sich kritisch mit der Umstellung von professioneller pädagogischer Praxis auf eine wissenschaftlich gesteuerte, evidenzbasierte Praxis und andere Modelle von wirkungsorientierter Steuerung auseinander. Sie stellen fest, dass die idealtypischen Vorstellungen von professioneller Praxis zunehmend durch Effektivitäts- und Effizienznachweise unter Druck geraten. Mit dieser Umstellung wird professionelles sozialpädagogisches Handeln selbst zum Gegenstand von Reformbemühungen und wird umgestellt auf die Logik evidenzbasierter Praxis. Die Verfasser zeigen, dass es auch aus wirkorientierter Sicht nicht zielführend ist, Interaktions- und Partizipationsprozesse in der professionellen Praxis zu standardisieren und auf wissenschaftlich-evidenzbasierte Steuerung umzustellen. Es geht vielmehr darum, die Befähigung der Praxis durch eine evidenzbasierte Professionalisierung herzustellen und darin einen reflexiven Umgang mit empirischen Forschungsergebnissen und die individuell gestaltete Unterstützung im Einzelfall zu fördern. (ICE2).

Die Verfasser setzen sich kritisch mit der Umstellung von professioneller pädagogischer Praxis auf eine wissenschaftlich gesteuerte, evidenzbasierte Praxis und andere Modelle von wirkungsorientierter Steuerung auseinander. Sie stellen fest, dass die idealtypischen Vorstellungen von professioneller Praxis zunehmend durch Effektivitäts- und Effizienznachweise unter Druck geraten. Mit dieser Umstellung wird professionelles sozialpädagogisches Handeln selbst zum Gegenstand von Reformbemühungen und wird umgestellt auf die Logik evidenzbasierter Praxis. Die Verfasser zeigen, dass es auch aus wirkorientierter Sicht nicht zielführend ist, Interaktions- und Partizipationsprozesse in der professionellen Praxis zu standardisieren und auf wissenschaftlich-evidenzbasierte Steuerung umzustellen. Es geht vielmehr darum, die Befähigung der Praxis durch eine evidenzbasierte Professionalisierung herzustellen und darin einen reflexiven Umgang mit empirischen Forschungsergebnissen und die individuell gestaltete Unterstützung im Einzelfall zu fördern. (ICE2)

Is evidence-based practice really best practice? This is a hotly debated question in health and social care circles and the starting point for this book. Engaging firmly in the debate, Values-Based Health & Social Care calls into question the dominance of evidence-based practice and sets out an alternative vision of care which places holism, professional judgement, intuition and client choice at its centre. Bringing together writers from a range of health and social care backgrounds, the book describes the rise of evidence-based practice and explores major criticisms of the approach. It argues

Purpose: We aimed to systematically review published empirical research on leadership as a determinant for the implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) and to investigate leadership conceptualization and operationalization in this field. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted. Relevant bibliographic databases and reference lists of pertinent review articles were searched. To be included, a study had to involve empirical research and refer to both leadership and EBP in health care. Study quality was assessed with a structured instrument based on study design. Findings: A total of 17 studies were included. Leadership was mostly viewed as a modifier for implementation success, acting through leadership support. Yet, there was definitional imprecision as well as conceptual inconsistency and studies seemed to inadequately address situational and contextual factors. Although referring to an organizational factor, the concept was mostly analysed at the individual or group level. Research limitations/implications: The concept of leadership in implementation science seems to be not fully developed. It is unclear whether attempts to tap the concept of leadership in available instruments truly capture and measure the full range of the diverse leadership elements at various levels. Research in implementation science would benefit from a better integration of research findings from other disciplinary fields. Once a more mature concept has been established, researchers in implementation science could proceed to further elaborate operationalization and measurement. Originality/value. Although the relevance of leadership in implementation science has been acknowledged, the conceptual base of leadership in this field has received only limited attention.

This conceptual article argues that evidence-based practice (EBP) is best understood as a component of the informed consent process preceding treatment. The legally mandated informed consent/consent to treat process requires that professionals disclose to clients the nature of services along with potential risks, benefits, and alternatives. Informed consent is a long-standing part of professional practice ethics with over a century of legal precedents. The more recent EBP process also requires discussion with the client of the best research-supported treatments, which are explored in combination with the client's values and preferences and the professional's expertise, to develop a treatment plan. Yet, EBP has not been clearly linked to informed consent for treatment. EBP can be usefully understood as part of the more comprehensive informed consent ethics process. New practice and ethics competencies are examined.

Choices about how to view evidence-based practice (EBP) are being made by educators, practitioners, agency administrators, and staff in a variety of organizations designed to promote integration of research and practice such as clearinghouses on EBP. Choices range from narrow views of EBP such as use of empirically based guidelines and treatment manuals to the broad philosophy and evolving process of EBP, envisioned by its originators, that addresses evidentiary, ethical, and application issues in a transparent context. Current views of EBP and policy are reviewed, and choices that reflect the adopted vision and related indicators are described. Examples include who will select the questions on which research efforts are focused, what outcomes will be focused on, who will select them and on what basis, how transparent to be regarding the evidentiary status of services, how clients will be involved, and whether to implement needed organizational changes. A key choice is whether to place ethical issues front and center.

The relatively recent establishment and expansion of governmental social programs within past decades has resulted in a citizenry hostile to any new taxation, especially from the paradoxical viewpoint of monies benefiting the American justice system. Current criminal justice policies and programs are lacking a common-sense foundation built upon evidence-based practices (Mears, 2010). The criminal justice system, and by extension the policies under which it operates, is lacking research to support what society is undertaking with criminal justice policy, or to even question current practices regarding returns on public investments. This lack of evidence-based practice would be questionable at best to any business model within the private sector where investment would be measured by returns and standardized means testing would be conducted throughout processes. Lack of integrity measures, methodologies, and accountability are topics of concern requiring focus in order to fix the broken criminal justice system. As proper stewardship is a responsibility assumed by any state entity as a public trust regarding expenditures of tax dollars, the justice system requires and demands a business model to follow to assure taxpayers are seeing a return for their investment, and subsequently, a fair and equitable justice system.

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an orientation to practice that values evidence as a resource for clinical decision making while recognizing that evidence alone is never sufficient to make a clinical decision. Critics of EBP typically ignore, negate, or misrepresent the role of practitioner thinking processes and expertise in clinical settings. The authors believe that, far from being a mechanistic process that ignores practitioner expertise, reflection and critical thinking are essential to implementing EBP in real-world clinical practice. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance for how practitioners bring their expertise to bear when engaging in the process of EBP. The authors use a social work practice scenario to illustrate the application of practitioner expertise in each of the five steps of EBP.

The generalist approach subscribes to the eclectic methodology for what Social Workers do. The application of the generalist approach is by nature nebulous. In an advanced technological society, practice technology is less forthcoming in the absence of technologically based skill. Evidence-Based Practiced entails a series of scientific research procedures. It is intended for the application of rigorous expertise to arrive at the most effective intervention based upon objective research findings. Subsequently Evidence-Based Practice is then critical to accommodate social services in the 21st century.