Research strategy, question and aims

i. Research strategy: Inductive

While constructionist theory provides a conceptual framework to understand the

relationship between social work and the news media, in order to generate new knowledge Blaikie (2007) argues that researchers need to describe the logic used to carry out the inquiry, which is commonly identified as a research strategy (Lewis-Beck, Bryman & Liao 2004). A research strategy provides a path and style of reasoning that guides the researcher to determine how to understand the research problem, where to research and how to proceed (Arthur et al. 2012). In line with the constructionist underpinnings the research adopted an inductive research strategy. Broadly within a constructionist approach to social research, inductive reasoning begins by looking at data to develop ‘generalisations limited by time and space’ that aim to provide greater understandings about the focus of inquiry (Engel & Schutt 2010). As Bryman & Burgess (1994, p. 4) write, ‘The researcher begins with a rough definition of a problem or issue … appropriate cases are examined and a possible explanation of the problem is formulated’.

An inductive approach was aligned with the aims of this research in exploring the

relationship between social work and the news media by developing new understandings from the data itself, rather than a presupposed hypothesis.

93

ii. Research question

Building on the literature review (which identified the contribution of a constructionist approach to researching the topic) and the underlying social constructionist research paradigm detailed in previous chapters, the research looked at better understanding:

What relevance do news media portrayals of social work hold for the social construction of social work?

iii. Research aims

In order to answer the question, this study had three main aims:

a) Aim: Through a critical reflection process with twenty practising social workers, explore how news media portrayals of social work affect social workers at a personal and professional level

Method: A critical reflection process consisting of reflection journals, interviews and group work

Site: Practising Melbourne social workers

b) Aim: To document and analyse how social work is discursively constructed in the Melbourne print and online news media over a twelve-month period

Method: Researcher and participant news media analysis Site: Twelve months of print and online news media

c) Aim: To develop new theoretical insights into the role of the news media in the social construction of social workers’ professional identity

Method: Stages of theory development (Alvesson & Karreman 2007) Site: Research data

94

4.3 Methodology

As Blaikie (1993 p. 7) writes, methodology is ‘the analysis of how research should or does proceed … it includes discussions of how theories are generated and tested … what criteria they have to satisfy, what theories look like and how particular theoretical perspectives can be related to particular research problems’. The methodology section of a research project is a fundamental component as it serves as the conceptual link between how it understands the social phenomenon that is the focus of inquiry, and how to investigate it (Clough &

Nutbrown 2012). The core theory, research question and aims presented two main and interconnected components: the micro social construction of social work and the macro discursive constructions of social work in the news media. Two suitable methodologies were therefore chosen that were consistent with the social constructionist and inductive

underpinnings to explore the relationship: critical reflection and discourse analysis. Broadly both are understood to belong to a qualitative approach to research. Although mainly within a qualitative tradition, this research rejects a clear differentiation between qualitative and quantitative, rather the two concepts are seen to describe poles on a spectrum rather than separate entities (Bergman 2008).

The following section will detail why critical reflection and discourse analysis approaches were deemed suitable methodologies for answering the research question.

i. Methodology: Critical reflection

Fook & Gardner (2007) & Morley (2008) argue that critical reflection, as a form of reflexivity, can provide a methodological framework for approaching research and evaluation that can be used to complement many approaches. This research utilised the poststructuralist tradition of critical reflection as it is well aligned with the constructionist approach (Fook &

Gardner 2007). Critical reflection as a methodology guided the research process and, in line with the theoretical underpinnings, also implied that researchers need to acknowledge the values from which they are operating in order to operate in socially just and inclusive ways (Fook 2002). As part of a larger approach to researching professional practice, a main purpose of a critical reflection methodology is to unearth how individuals participate in macro discourses (Fook 2002). Critical reflection is part of a broader approach to research

95

that seeks to understand professional practice in and of itself as a distinct social

phenomenon (D’Cruz, Jacobs & Schoo 2009; Green 2008; Fook 2012). The main objective for this form of research is to understand the relationship between practice and knowledge in constructing professional practice (D’Cruz, Jacobs & Schoo 2009).

D’Cruz, Jacobs & Schoo (2009) argue that academics in this field have researched

professional practice in most of the caring professions, including social work (Fook 2002), nursing (Benner 1984; Higgs & Titchen 2001; Mallik 2004), and occupational therapy and physiotherapy (Donaghy & Morss 2000). This area of research acknowledges that there is a common interest amongst caring professions in understanding what constitutes

professional practice and the translation between theory and action, but that professions are not ‘homogenous monoliths’ and each has idiosyncratic and contextual forms of knowledge (D’Cruz, Jacobs & Schoo 2009, p. 4). Critical reflection is part of this larger approach to researching professional practice but explored from the diverse critical

framework that is adopted by several schools of social work practice (Fook & Gardner 2007;

Taylor & White 2006).

Fook & Gardner (2007) argue that critical reflection as a methodology emphasises researching as an integral part of, rather than separate from, practice. It extends core critical social work values and principles to research by concentrating on the unheard voices and encouraging collaboration and participation (Fook & Gardner 2007). Critical reflection as a methodological approach has also been influenced by the work of Reason & Bradbury (2001, p. 12) who argue that ‘research can be thought of not as an interruption of work, but as a means for furthering and developing the work we are already engaged in’.

Furthermore, Mason’s (2002) idea of ‘noticing as research’, where practitioners are encouraged to critically reflect on their practice by paying attention to what happens in a systematic way so that the information collected can be used to generate change, has also been significant in the development of this methodology.

Critical reflection in research aims to create a conceptual space (Rossiter 2005) that seeks to explore and challenge ‘fixed and potentially restrictive ways of thinking and may indicate avenues for change’ (Fook 1996, p. 199). Fook (2012) argues that critical reflection is a process that first questions and then disrupts dominant structures, and relations, and lays

96

the ground for change. The process consists of three stages: construction, where

participants describe their situation; deconstruction, where participants reflect on action;

and reconstruction, where practice and theory is redeveloped (Fook 2002). This research further developed Fook & Gardner’s (2007) approach to critical reflection by incorporating Gidden’s (1979, 1993) theories on the role and function of the researcher (immersion in a form of life and the new rules for the sociological method), and expanding the critical focus on power towards the politics of recognition (Thompson 2006; Honneth 1996).

The role of the researcher in critical reflection

While there have been numerous writings about the critical reflection process and the role of the facilitator (Fook 2012; Fook & Gardner 2007), there is a lack of literature that explores the researcher’s role when using it as a methodology. In identifying the function of the researcher in the critical reflection process this research drew from Giddens’ (1979, 1993) extensive methodological work. Giddens’ (1993) ‘immersion in a form of life’ approach proposes that the objectivated knowledge that individuals use subjectively to conduct and make sense of daily interactions needs to be the primary focus of the social sciences.

Therefore, it is impossible for the social researcher to describe the social world without drawing upon what social actors know. The processes involved within this research strategy can be highly diverse but dependent on the researcher being able to immerse themselves in the way of life of the groups or individuals that are the focus of study. Giddens (1993) argues that full immersion is not necessary, or practical, but it is essential that the researcher is involved enough to be able to participate to some degree. ‘Social scientists must draw on the mutual knowledge that social actors use to make sense of their activity.

Without immersion there is no adequate understanding of what lies behind and structures overt behaviour … social research has to deal with a social world that is already constituted as meaningful by its participants’ (Blaikie 2007, p. 96).

As a practising social worker in the Melbourne context with several years of direct practice experience, I position myself as being part of, and highly immersed in, the professional culture that is the focus of this study sufficiently so to understand the culture of the group, the mutual knowledge and general frames of meaning that are used by the participants.

This is by no means a claim of full or absolute immersion as my role as a researcher places

97

me within a professional subculture that may be identified as different to their own by the participants. Regardless, it is evidenced by my professional background that I have sufficient understandings from which to research the relationship between practice and news media, and to facilitate the reflection process. The final section of Part One will explore in greater detail my own reflection and reflexivity, including further positioning myself within this research.

In terms of conducting the reflection process, this research also used Giddens’ (1993) proposed new rules for the sociological method.

Giddens (1979, p. 251) states that:

It is right to claim that the condition for generating valid descriptions of a form of life entails being able to participate in it … but it does not follow from such a conclusion that the beliefs and practices involved in forms of life cannot be subjected to critical assessment, including within this the critique of ideology … We must distinguish between respect for the authenticity of belief, and the critical evaluation of the justification of belief. We must differentiate what I call ‘mutual knowledge’, from what might be called ‘common sense’. Mutual knowledge is not corrigible to the sociological observer … Common sense is corrigible in the light of claimed findings of social and natural science … we should not succumb passively to a paralysis of the critical will … the critical evaluation of beliefs and

practices is an inescapable feature of the discourse of the social sciences.

This research developed a critical reflection methodology that values the ‘mutual knowledge’ (Giddens 1979, p. 251) that the participants draw upon to understand the relationship between practice and the news media, but is also open to critiquing the

‘common sense’ or taken-for-granted assumptions about everyday activities. In line with this notion, the intent of this process was not to challenge what participants understand to be social work or the news media but rather engage in a process that proposed a critical evaluation of the justification of their beliefs about the media coverage and the possible impacts. This process began with the critical reflection research project and continued independently through the theory development work.

98

ii. Methodology: Discourse analysis

As Phillips & Hardy (2002) argue, discourse analysis is not simply comprised of a set of techniques for conducting structured qualitative investigations of text, it also involves a set of assumptions concerning the constructive effects of language.

Discourse analysis tries to explore how the socially produced ideas and objects that populate the world were created in the first place and how they are maintained and held in place over time. Whereas other

qualitative methodologies work to understand or interpret social reality as it exists, discourse analysis endeavours to uncover the way it is

produced. This is the most important contribution of discourse analysis; it examines how language constructs phenomena. (Phillips & Hardy 2002, p.

6)

There are many approaches to discourse analysis. Phillips & Ravasi (1998) found that they could be categorised along two key theoretical dimensions. The first dimension concerns the relative importance of text versus context in the research. The second dimension concerns the degree to which power dynamics form the focus of the research (critical

studies) versus studies that concentrate more closely on the processes of social construction that constitute social reality (interpretive structuralism). This is seen as a continuum, not a dichotomy (Phillips & Hardy 2002). The research combined elements of critical (Fairclough

& Wodak 1997) and interpretive structural (Dunford & Jones 2000) discourse analysis as a methodology, with its focus on the constructive effects of macro discourses, presenting a viable methodological approach. The emphasis is therefore on context over text, and both a critical and constructionist approach. In exploring the macro-discursive contexts of this study, discourse analysis provides a methodological approach to research to examine how the profession is discursively constructed in the news media.

The next section of this chapter will explore the research sites used to generate and analyse the research data.

99