Professionalisation and social care in Ireland Perry Share PhD Head of Department of Humanities Institute of Technology, Sligo Ireland

why now? legislation currently before Dáil expansion of field public concern re abuse &c expansion of and revision of educational provision activities of peak agencies

previous research Pat O’Connor (1982) Carmel Gallagher & Jackie O’Toole (1999) David Williams & Kevin Lalor (2000) Niall McElwee – various Knorth et al (2002) Sarah Banks (2004) Pelle Hallstedt & Mats Högstrom (2005)

trait/checklist theory ownership of a recognised body of knowledge exclusive to that profession with development of new knowledge through research self-government through a body that sets and monitors its own standards of practice control of training and recruitment monopoly of practice in its own field of work with registration by the state conformity to moral and disciplinary codes of behaviour autonomy of practice and greater individual accountability a public ideology of service to a client group

issues 1.the professionalisation project 2.problem of definition 3.content of social care practice 4.performativity & institutional reform 5.resistances to professionalisation 6.five-fold model of professional strategies

professionalisation project the fight to be professional now recognised as ‘central’ to development of social care barriers key actors: the occupational group, the academy, the state

problem of definition a ‘social profession’ blurring of boundaries social pedagogy/social educational work Child & Youth Care (CYC) relationship with social work?

content (1) institutionally defined Banks (2004) the ‘social professions’: ‘the calling to care’ co-option to welfare and control commitment to change (eg anti-oppressive practice) an ambivalence towards professionalisation deprofessionalisation the concept of ‘care’

content (2) ‘social educational work can be described as an exploration of the possibilities to change critical life situations and at the same time not to deprive the client of his autonomy’ (Madsen 1995)

content (3) ability to recognise and deal with the asymmetrical relationship between practitioner and client: to turn that imbalance of power into a working relationship ability to make use of broad social, cultural and theoretical knowledge to interpret another’s life formulation of a constructive pedagogical goal with reference to the actual client’s resources and the potentials for action (citing Madsen, 1995) ‘the synthesis of the communication should include an evaluation of the content, of the client’s life aspirations and resources, the culture, and ultimately of the potentials for action’. to reflect on the behaviour, to be aware of the quality of the current relationship; to act in accordance with ethical principles Hallstedt & Högström (2005)

performativity globalisation SMI the audit society new accountability joined-up thinking modern management

qualities of the professional flexible reflexive + self-managing teamworker life long learner market-oriented managerial entrepreneurial

resistances professional culture – how we do things around here (Schön) distance asymmetry of power

the new professionalisms? manager/practitioner traditional professional reflexive professional ‘new’ professional entrepreneurial professional

manager/practitioner buys into the ‘new accountability’ and the ‘audit culture’. They relate closely to state and organisational projects for change, restructuring and reform. The endorse concepts of accountability, self-management, competition, performativity.

traditional professional modelled on the established professions, in particular medicine and social work. Focuses on content of knowledge, especially in terms of academic material. Endorses technical rationality in Schön’s sense; Endorses the boundaries that surround, contain and ‘protect’ the professional group; collegial and group- focused. Anti-managerial; accountability is an unwarranted intrusion

reflexive professional person-centred and client-centred rather than group-focused. Sees the ‘self’ and work on selves as the basis of professional work. Therapeutic and individualistic bias. Favours flexibility, indeterminancy. Opposed to rigid structures, competencies or checklists

‘new’ professional posited by Banks (2005) ‘works with collectivities, is participatory and acknowledges a primary responsibility to users’. community-focused, consultative, democratic

entrepreneurial professional opportunistic, network-focused, project-focused. Non-organisational but can use organisation as resource. Individualistic and eclectic. Strategic, flexible, portfolio worker.

the future ‘the notion of professionalism [is] constantly evolving [to] take account of the shifts towards technical competencies, increasing market influence and managerial control, as well as more equal and participatory relationships with service users’ (Banks, 2005: 45)

next stages in research examine Dáil debates in detail examine agency survey results interviews with key actors (following Gallagher + O’Toole) interviews with managers, practitioners, educators and students investigate the validity of the typology a new model of professionalism in social care practice?

thank you! any questions or comments?