Türkiye'de Sosyal Hizmet Uzmanlarının Sosyal ve Ekonomik Destek Hizmetlerinde Mesleki Karar Verme Davranışlarının Belirleyicileri

Abstract

Bu çalışma, sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının mesleki deneyimleri aracılığıyla karar vermelerini etkileyen faktörleri incelemeyi amaçlamıştır. Bu çalışmada nitel araştırma yöntemi ve durum çalışması deseni kullanılmıştır. Toplam yirmi katılımcı ile yüz yüze görüşmeler yapılmış ve elde edilen veriler betimsel analize tabi tutulmuştur. Katılımcıların karar verme süreci üzerinde etkisi olan sekiz temel unsur belirlenmiştir. Sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının başlıca unsurları şunları içeriyordu: tanımlar, değerlendirme aşaması, önceki deneyimler, dünya görüşleri ve ideolojiler, eğitim, mesleki deneyimler ve uygulama, meslektaşları ile fikir alışverişi ve kendi kurumsal ve kurumsal olmayan beklentileri. Duygular ve kültür, sosyal hizmet uzmanının profesyonel kararını da oluşturur. Bahsedilen faktörler bir istisnadan ziyade bir kuraldır ve bu faktörler sosyal hizmet uzmanının rasyonel kararlar geliştirmesini zorlaştırmaktadır. Bu etkileri önlemek için sosyal hizmet uzmanı, kişisel ve mesleki değerler arasındaki geçişin farkında olmalı ve bunlarla başa çıkma sorumluluğunu üstlenmelidir.

Keywords

• Sosyal hizmet uzmanı
• değerlendirme
• karar verme
• sosyal inceleme
• sosyal ve ekonomik destek

محددات سلوكيات صنع القرار المهني للأخصائيين الاجتماعيين في خدمات الدعم الاجتماعي والاقتصادي في تركيا

Abstract

هدفت هذه الدراسة إلى دراسة العوامل التي تؤثر على اتخاذ القرار للأخصائيين الاجتماعيين من خلال خبرتهم المهنية. تم استخدام أسلوب البحث النوعي وتصميم دراسة الحالة في هذه الدراسة. أجريت المقابلات وجهًا لوجه مع ما مجموعه عشرين مشاركًا وتم تحليل البيانات التي تم الحصول عليها تم تحليلها وصفيًا. تم تحديد ثمانية عناصر رئيسية لها تأثير على عملية صنع القرار لدى المشاركين. تضمنت العناصر الرئيسية للأخصائيين الاجتماعيين: الأوصاف ، ومرحلة التقييم ، والخبرات السابقة ، ووجهات النظر العالمية والأيديولوجيات ، والتعليم ، والخبرة المهنية والممارسة ، وتبادل الأفكار مع زملائهم ، وتوقعاتهم المؤسسية وغير المؤسسية. تشكل العواطف والثقافة أيضًا القرار المهني للأخصائي الاجتماعي. العوامل المذكورة هي قاعدة وليست استثناء وهذه العوامل تجعل من الصعب على الأخصائي الاجتماعي تطوير قرارات عقلانية. لمنع هذه الآثار ، يجب على الأخصائي الاجتماعي أن يكون على دراية بالانتقال بين القيم الشخصية والمهنية وأن يتحمل مسؤولية التعامل معها.

Keywords

• عامل اجتماعي
• تقييم
• صناعة القرار
• الفحص الاجتماعي
• الدعم الاجتماعي والاقتصادي

Determinants of the Professional Decision-Making Behaviors of Social Workers in Social and Economic Support Services in Turkiye

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the factors that influence the decision-making of social workers through their professional experience. The qualitative research method and case study design were employed in this study. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with a total of twenty participants and the data obtained has been descriptive analyzed. Eight key elements have been identified that have an impact on the participants’ decision-making process. The chief elements of social workers’ included: descriptions, assessment phase, previous experiences, worldviews and ideologies, education, professional experiences and practice, exchanging ideas with their colleagues, and their own institutional and non-institutional expectations. Emotions and culture also form the social worker’s professional decision. The mentioned factors are a rule rather than an exception and these factors make it difficult for the social worker to develop rational decisions. To prevent these effects, the social worker should be aware of the transition between personal and professional values and take the responsibility to deal with them.

Keywords

• Social worker
• assessment
• decision-making
• social examination
• social and economic support

References

1. BARSKY, A. E. (2010). Ethics and values in social work. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. BARTLETT, H. M. (2003). Working definition of social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 13(3), 267-270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731503013003002
3. BOEHM, A. (2013). Clients and social workers’ perceptions of social work: an Israeli case study. British Journal of Social Work, 4, 964-986. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs028
4. BOLGER, J. & WALKER, P. (2014). Models of assessment. Social Work: An Introduction, 169-183.
5. CONLLINS, E. & DALY, E. (2011). Decision making and social work in Scotland: the role of evidence and practice wisdom. Scotland: Iris Press. https://www.iriss.org.uk/sites/default/files/2016-07/iriss-decision-making-social-work-scotland-evidence-practice-wisdom-2011-09-27.pdf
6. CONGRESS, E. P. (2000). What social workers should know about ethics: understanding and resolving practice dilemmas. Advances in Social Work, 1(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.18060/124
7. CRESWELL, J. W. (2017). Nitel yöntemler. In S. B. Demir (Ed.), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitive and Mixed Methods Approaches. (pp. 183-213). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap
8. CRISP, B. R., ANDERSON, M. R., ORME, J. & LISTER, P. G. (2005). Learning and teaching in social work education: textbooks and frameworks on assessment. Great Britain: Social Care Institute for Excellence. http://www.brown.uk.com/teaching/socialwork/textbookstudy.pdf

9. CUZZI, L. F., HOLDEN, G., GROB, G. G. & BAZER, C. (1993). Decision making in social work: A review. Social Work in Health Care, 18(2), 10-23. https://doi.org/10.1300/J010v18n02_01
10. GRRENSON, R. P. (2017). The working alliance and the transference neurosis. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 77(1), 77-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/21674086.1965.11926343
11. GUARTE, J. M. & BARRIOS, E. B. (2006). Estimation under purposive sampling. Communications in Statistics – Simulation and Computation, 35(2), 277-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610910600591610
12. HARREN, V. A. (1979). A model of career decision making for college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 119-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(79)90065-4
13. HENNIK, M., HUTTER, I. & BAILEY, A. (2020). Qualitative research methods. London: Sage Publications.
14. HOLLAND, S. (2004). Child and family assessment in social work practice. California: Sage Publications.
15. HORVITZ, E. J., BREESE, J. S. & HENRION, M. (1988). Decision theory in expert systems and artificial intelligence. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 2, 247-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0888-613X(88)90120-X
16. KUÇURADI, I. (2018). İnsan ve Değerleri. (7th ed). Ankara: Şen Matbaa
17. LLEWELLYN-THOMAS, H. A. & CRUMP, R. T. (2013). Decision support for patients: values clarification and preference elicitation. Journals Permission, 70(1), 50-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558712461182
18. MAGIVLY, J. K. & THOMAS, E. (2009). A first qualitative project: qualitative descriptive design for novice researchers. Scientific Inquiry, 14(4), 298-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6155.2009.00212.x
19. MARTIN, R. (2010). Social work assessment. Britain: Learning Matters.
20. MATTISON, M. (2000). Ethical decision making: the person in the process. National Association of Social Workers, 45(3), 201-212. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/45.3.201
21. MERRIAM, S. B. (2018). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. S. Turan (Ed.), Ankara: Nobel Press.
22. MILNER, J., MYERS, S. & O’BYRNE, P. (2015). Assessment in social work. England: Red Globe Press.
23. MINISTRY OF FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY. (2020). 2019 Annual Report. https://ailevecalisma.gov.tr/media/49934/acshb_2019_yili_faaliyet_raporu.pdf
24. NASSAJI, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: data type versus data analysis. Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 129-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815572747
25. O’CONNOR, L. & LEONARD, K. (2014). Decision making in children and families social work: the practitioner’s voice. British Journal of Social Work, 44, 1805–1822. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct051
26. OSMO, R. & LANDAU, R. (2001). The need for explicit argumentation in ethical decision-making in social work. Social Work Education, 20(4), 483-492. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470120064723
27. O’SULLIVAN, T. (2011). Decision making in social work. New York: Paigrave Press.
28. PARKER, J. (2015). Single assessment in social work. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 12, 501-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.28105-1
29. POLLACK, S. (2010). Labelling clients’ risky: social work and the neo-liberal welfare state. British Journal of Social Work, 40, 1263-1278. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcn079
30. PROCTOR, E.K. (2002). Decision making in social work practice. Social Work Research, 26(1), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/26.1.3
31. ROBISON, W. & REESER, L. C. (2002). Ethical decision-making in social work. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. https://www.rit.edu/~w-ethics/Ethical%20Decision%20Making.pdf
32. ROSENTHAL, M. (2016). Qualitative research methods: why, when and how to conduct interviews and focus groups in pharmacy research. Current in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(4), 509-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2016.03.021
33. ROWLEY, J. (2002). Using case studies research. Management Research News, 25(1), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170210782990
34. SANT, M. (2019). Wasp (write a scientific paper): qualitative research and evidence based practice: implications and contributions. Human Development Journal, 133, 37-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.03.009
35. SCOTT, S.G. & BRUCE, R. A. (1995). Decision making style: the development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(5), 818-831. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164495055005017
36. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SUPPORT REGULATION. (2005). https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2015/03/20150303-3.htm
37. TAYLOR, C. N., BRYAN, C. H. & GOODRICH, C. G. (1990). Social assessment theory, process & techniques. New Zealand: Centre for Resource Management. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.999.7689&rep=rep1&type=pdf
38. WALDEN, T., WOLOCK, I. & DEMONE, H. W. (1990). Ethical decision making in human services: a comparative study. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 71(2), 67-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/104438949007100201
39. WEBB, N. B. (2017). Social work practice with children. E. Erbay (Ed.), Ankara: Nika Yayınevi.