Post on 25-Apr-2018
the human service organization becomes an
arena in which different moral values compete for dominance
Hasenfeld, 2010Friday, May 13, 2011
2
community-based human service organizations
often lack frameworks to help guide their thinking and action (Delpeche et. al., 2003).
Praxis
Friday, May 13, 2011
critical community practice
Action based on critical theorizing, reflection,
and a clear commitment to working for social justice through empowering and
transformative practice.Paul Henderson (2007) in Butcher et al, Critical Community Practice
Friday, May 13, 2011
“is about empowerment; ... working with communities in a way that assists them to mobilize, and
effectively exercise a greater degree of power when challenging the construction and
maintenance of the social differences that shape their experience of disadvantage, exclusions, and oppression.”
(Butcher, 2007, p. 21) in Critical Community Practice
critical community practice
Friday, May 13, 2011
The shared beliefs, assumptions, and values of the organization are oriented towards empowerment,
collaboration, social justice and social change. These elements of consciousness are reflected in communicated
organizational values, mission, and vision, theory of change and general organizational discourse.
critical organizational consciousness
Evans, et al, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
Cri$cal Org.Consciousness
Cri$cal Prac$ce
High
High
Low
Low
“Ideology-‐prac4ce divide” Delibera4ve Cri4cal Prac4ce
Tradi4onal Services
1
2 3
4
Ins4nc4ve Cri4cal Prac4ce
Friday, May 13, 2011
S P E C
Critical practice can be framed by four principles:
Strengths-based - Acknowledging and appreciating individual and community strengths helps people thrive, but focusing on deficits diminishes their dignity.
Prevention - Preventing ill health and social and psychological problems is better than curing people who already suffer.
Empowerment - Well-being requires power, control, voice and choice.
Community Change - We cannot eliminate problems one person at a time. We must change conditions that lead to problems in the first place.
Prilleltensky, I. (2005), Evans, Hanlin, & Prilleltensky, (2007)www.specway.org
Friday, May 13, 2011
Quadrant I
Examples:Voice and choice in celebra4ng and building competencies, recogni4on of personal and collec4ve resilience
Quadrant II
Examples:Voice and choice in deficit reduc4on approaches, par4cipa4on in decisions how to treat affec4ve disorders or physical disorders
Strengths
Empowerment
Deficit
Aliena.on
Affirmation Field in Helping Professions
Quadrant III
Examples:Labeling and diagnosis, “pa4enthood” and clienthood,” ci4zens in passive role
Quadrant IV
Examples:Just say no! You can do it! Cheerleading approaches, Make nice approaches
Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33(66 suppl), 53 -60.
par$cipa$oncapabili$es
Friday, May 13, 2011
Quadrant IIIExamples:Crisis work, therapy, medica4ons, symptom containment, case management
Quadrant IExamples:Community development, affordable housing policy, recrea4onal opportuni4es, high quality schools and health services
Quadrant IIExamples:Skill building, emo4onal literacy, fitness programs, personal improvement plans, resistance to peer pressure in drug and alcohol use
Quadrant IVExamples:Food banks, shelters for homeless people, chari4es, prison industrial complex
Community
Preven.on
Individual
Reac.ve
Contextual Field in Helping Professions
Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33(66 suppl), 53 -60.
temporal
ecological
Friday, May 13, 2011
The Challenge
Get an accurate picture of an organization’s community
practice through the lens of SPEC
Image taken from: http://libcom.org/files/Society-of-the-spectacle.jpgFriday, May 13, 2011
a participatory approach that generates
learning and action
The Goal
Image: http://z.about.com/d/psychology/1/0/R/8/student-thinking.jpgFriday, May 13, 2011
13
People and organizations benefit from a reflective process that
creates the organizational learning context through which members negotiate their different values, attitudes and perceptions http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidthibault/5062020370/
(Suárez-Herrera, 2009).
Friday, May 13, 2011
The SPEC Check
Empowerment Evaluation
Competing Values Framework
FeWerman, (1994); FeWerman & Wandersman, (2005)
Cameron & Quinn (2005)
Participatory EvaluationCousins & Whitmore (1998)
Participatory Action ResearchArgyris & Schon (1974); Fals Borda (1979); Kemmis & McTaggart (2000)
Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971); Delbecq et al. (1975)
Nominal Group Technique
Friday, May 13, 2011
double-loop learning - participants question existing frameworks underlying the organization’s goals, strategies and assumptions (Argyris and Schön, 1978; Suárez-Herrera, 2009)
Friday, May 13, 2011
http://www.oasiscenter.org/#programsFriday, May 13, 2011
“Talking about this stuff always helps you think about the programs in a different way and my hope is that we can take some of this information back into how we judge our future proposals and future RFP’s….”
“Using the lens of SPEC is throwing down a big challenge. After an RFP is released, as an example, we could
bring it to the T-Team and rate it on its SPEC-iness and again after contracts are picked and reviewed”
“I’m gonna change my score…now that I’ve listened to you…”
I’m kind of thinking again…the program might advocate…but they don’t really do anything to change policies that are the root of the cause.”
Friday, May 13, 2011
“Process effects” (Cousins & Earl, 1992; Patton, 1998; Preskill 1994; Preskill &
Torres, 1999).
integrates critical reflection into organizational routines & culture
builds a capacity not only for critical analysis and critical reflexivity, but also for critical action
helps develop an appreciation and skills for evaluation
enhances dialogue & organizational learning
demystifies evaluation
Friday, May 13, 2011
“Honestly, I have a question. Is this gonna change anything?
{laughter} I’m sorry, I just have to ask that question. Is talking
about this going to change anything?”
Friday, May 13, 2011
Acknowledgements: NIck Mescia, Emily Thaden, Courte Voorhees, United Way of Middle TN, The Children’s Trust
Summary and Implications
The SPEC Check process…
Is informative: it generates a picture of an organization’s value choices
Is reflective: it facilitates critical reflection on human service practice
Is generative: it opens up possibilities for change
Image: newvaluestreams.com/ wordpress/?p=639
“Service technologies” in human services are value choices
Human service funding & practice is weighted towards amelioration
Organizations benefit from more opportunities for “reflective practice”
Friday, May 13, 2011
28
The SPEC Check: A deliberative approach to reflecting on program alignment with Strengths,
Prevention, Empowerment and Community Change (SPEC) principles in community based organizations.
Correspondence: s.evans4@miami.eduTwitter: @evanssd
Scot EvansUniversity of Miami
Slides: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4085143/SEvans_SPECcheck_CUexpo2011.pdf
The Critical Friend:
Friday, May 13, 2011
ReferencesArgyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978) Organisational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.
Butcher, H., Banks, S., Henderson, P., & Robertson, J. (2007). Critical Community Practice. Briston, UK: Policy Press.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2005). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.
Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The Case for Participatory Evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14 (4), 397-418. doi:10.3102/01623737014004397
Cousins, J. B., & Whitmore, E. (1998). Framing participatory evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, (80), 5-23.doi:10.1002/ev.1114
Delpeche, H., Jabbar-Bey, R., Sherif, B., Taliafero, J., & Wilder, M. (2003). Community Development and Family Support: Forging a practical nexus to strengthen families and communities. Newark, DE: Center for Community Research and Services.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466 -492. doi:10.1177/002188637100700404
Evans, S. D., Prilleltensky, O., McKenzie, A., Prilleltensky, I., & Nogueras, D, Huggins, C. & Mescia, N. (2011). Promoting Strengths, Prevention, Empowerment, and Community Change Through Organizational Development: Lessons for Research, Theory and Practice. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 39(1), 50-64.
Evans, S. D., Hanlin, C. E., & Prilleltensky, I. (2007). Blending ameliorative and transformative approaches in human service organizations: A case study. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3), 329-346.
FalsBorda, O. (2006). Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and Challenges. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research (pp. 27-37). London: Sage Publications.
Fetterman, D.M. and Wandersman, A. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York: Guilford Publications.
Fetterman, D.M. (2001). Foundations of empowerment evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hasenfeld, Y. (2010). “The Attributes of Human Service Organizations”, Ch. 2, pp. 9-32 in Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.). Human Services As Complex Organizations. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks California.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Henderson, P. (2007). Introduction. in H. Butcher, S. Banks, P. Henderson, &J. Robertson, (Eds). Critical Community Practice (pp. 1-15). Briston, UK: Policy Press.
Kemmis, S., &McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin& Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 559–603). London: SAGE.
Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Promoting well-being: Time for a paradigm shift in health and human services. Scandanavian Journal of Public Health, 1-8.
Preskill, H. (1994). Evaluation’s role in enhancing organizational learning: A model for practice. Evaluation and Program Planning, 17 (3), 291-297. doi:10.1016/0149-7189(94)90008-6
Preskill, H., & Torres, R. T. (1999). Building Capacity for Organizational Learning Through Evaluative Inquiry. Evaluation, 5(1), 42 -60. doi:10.1177/135638909900500104
Suárez-Herrera, J. C., Springett, J., &Kagan, C. (2009). Critical connections between participatory evaluation, organizational learning and intentional change in pluralistic organizations. Evaluation, 15(3), 321 -342.
Friday, May 13, 2011