Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:24:38.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competency – views from one child protection front

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Elisabeth Starbuck
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Definitions of competent practice which were developed by a team of child protection workers are reexamined in light of current debates about enterprise competency standards. Such definitions indicate that competence is more aptly analysed in terms of the nature of workers' process objectives and their capacity to work within tensions and contradictions than in terms of listings of specific skills and knowledge.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , 1994 , pp. 27 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, H. & Geer, B. (1982) ‘Participant Observation: the Analysis of Qualitative Field Data’ in Field Research: A Source Book and Field Manual, Burgess, R. (ed) London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Burgell, B. (1993) ‘A Rejoinder: The real story of the H&CS Enterprise Competency Standards’ Children Australia, 18(3) 31–34.Google Scholar
Cooper, L. (1993) ‘A Word Salad: Enterprise based competencies in child protection’, Children Australia, 18(2)26–29.Google Scholar
Donovan, F. & Jackson, A. (1988) ‘Education for public welfare practice: back to the future?’ in Advances in Social Work Education, Berreen, R. et al. (eds), Sydney: Univ. of New South Wales.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. & Dreyfus, S. (1986) Mind Over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer, London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Gonczi, A. (1993) ‘Competency standards for the professions: a review of arguments for and against’, in The Challenge of Competencies in Social Welfare, Proceedings of a National Conference, 9-10 July, Canberra: AASW.Google Scholar
Hasenfeld, Y. (1983) Human Service Organizations, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Google Scholar
Healy, B. & Springall, J. (1988) ‘The forgotten fieldworker - a challenge for social work practice’, in Advances in Social Work Education, Berreen, R. et al. (eds), Sydney: Univ. of New South Wales, Sydney.Google Scholar
Loane, S. (1988a), ‘Child abuse cases shelved’, The Age, 2 July, 1&4.Google Scholar
Loane, S. (1988b) ‘Shake-up for the state's child protection system’. The Age, 7 July, 1.Google Scholar
Loane, S. (1988c) ‘Cain urged to set up child abuse inquiry’, The Age, 22 July, 1.Google Scholar
Mallucio, A. (1984) ‘Promoting client and worker competence in child welfare’, Australian Child and Family Welfare, 9(1), 8–24.Google Scholar
Ryan, M., Fook, J. & Hawkins, L. (1993) ‘From beginner to graduate social worker: preliminary findings of an Australian longitudinal study’, paper presented to AASW Conference, 27-30 Oct. Newcastle University.Google Scholar
SACS (1992) Competency Based Training -The SACS ITB Policy, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professions Think in Action, London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
Scott, D. (1989) ‘Meaning construction and social work practice’. Social Service Review, March, 63(1)39–59.Google Scholar
Starbuck, E. (1991) ‘Balancing risks: a qualitative and participatory exploration of practitioners' constructions of competence-in-action in one field of public welfare - Protective Services for Children and Young People’, unpublished MSW thesis, Univ. of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Tierney, L. (1985) ‘Some dilemmas in human service administration: the case of child welfare’, Australian Child & Family Welfare, Spring, 10(3) 1–5.Google Scholar