Can't we be critical thinkers as well as hopeful? Response to Hoffman and Albers.

Can't we be critical thinkers as well as hopeful? Response to Hoffman and Albers. Critical discussion of ideas is vital to the growth of knowledge.In this spirit I respond to Hoffman and Albers's letter. In theirfirst paragraph Hoffman and Albers state that "whether or not thesequestions [posed in my editorial] are the best questions to ask aboutthe EPAS EPAS Educational Planning and Assessment System (ACT, Inc.)EPAS Environmental Performance Assessment SystemEPAS Electronic Power Assisted SteeringEPAS Employee Performance Appraisal SystemEPAS Enterprise Planning & Architecture Strategy at this time is not at issue." I thus assume that theyagree that these questions are reasonable ones to pose. A first requirement of dialogue that forwards the growth ofknowledge is accurate description of diverse points of view. Accuratelyrepresenting arguments and counterarguments is important so that one cansee their defects and their possibilities. Hoffman and Albersmisrepresent mis��rep��re��sent?tr.v. mis��rep��re��sent��ed, mis��rep��re��sent��ing, mis��rep��re��sents1. To give an incorrect or misleading representation of.2. what I wrote at many points in their letter. They attributewords to me that I do not use and arguments that I do not make. Theydistort my arguments and then attack the distorted versions; that is,they rely on straw man arguments at a number of points--a classicinformal fallacy An informal fallacy is an argument pattern that is wrong due to a mistake in its reasoning. In contrast to a formal fallacy, the error has to do with issues of rational inference that occur in natural language; which are broader than can be represented by the symbols used in formal ("imputing to one's adversaries opinions agood deal more extreme than those they have set out and are willing todefend," Engel, 1994, p. 173). For example, I do not makeassertions or claims as they allege (see their pp. 183, 184), I makesuggestions (e.g., see my p. 234). I don't request"proof," as the authors allege in a number of places. All mysuggestions are guesses subject to critical discussion and testing. I do not "admonish the accrediting body" (p. 181), Icritique a written document. I at no point "insist that specificcurriculum content ought not to be included unless it can be proven thatthe content helps clients meet the out comes they value" (p. 183).My critique does not, as the authors allege, turn "on a thesisthat, in order to prove its worth, the EPAS should first be tested todetermine whether or not it can be empirically shown to helpclients" (see their first paragraph.) I never said anything about"a massive study of the effects of social work education" (p.185). (I refer them to my Fall 2001 editorial, "Evaluating theQuality of Professional Education: Options Galore," for examples ofsteps toward critical appraisal Noun 1. critical appraisal - an appraisal based on careful analytical evaluationcritical analysisappraisal, assessment - the classification of someone or something with respect to its worth of what students and social workers doto what effect.) I never said we should put "social work on holduntil the study is completed" (p. 185). What I do suggest is thatwe should be honest and clear about which statements in the EPAS areaspirational and which are not so we do not mislead ourselves or otherswho may read the EPAS, and I suggest that evidentiary ev��i��den��tia��ry?adj. Law1. Of evidence; evidential.2. For the presentation or determination of evidence: an evidentiary hearing.Adj. 1. criteria should beconsidered when drafting accreditation guidelines. What I do say is: Evidentiary status should be a key principle guiding educational policy and accreditation standards, that is, inclusion of content, formats, and structures that have been found via critical appraisal to result in knowledge, skills, and values that maximize the likelihood of helping clients while minimizing harm and honoring the code of ethics in the process. (p. 28) I go out of my way not to use the word "proven" (whichthey in error attribute to me a number of times) since I am not ajustificationist--I don't think anything is "proven."Belief in "proof" reflects a justificationary approach toknowledge in which certainty is assumed to be possible. I do not thinkknowledge can be gained by piling up observations, and I do not thinkthat there is certain knowledge; indeed history illustrates this (e.g.,see Popper, 1972). Hoffman and Albers state, "She criticizes the statement [EPAS]because it doesn't have a section on `outcomes clientsvalue.'" (p. 181). My argument is far more wide ranging. Isuggest that clients were ignored in the entire EPAS, not just in onesection. They state that "clients per se are not included becausethe statement [EPAS] is about social work education" (p. 182).Isn't the purpose of social work education to prepare socialworkers who help clients attain outcomes clients value? I do "distrust" surrogate measures (p; 185) and encourageothers to do the same if such measures are not highly correlated withoutcomes. This concern does not "[rule] out obtaining data fromemployers," as the authors allege (p. 185) or students; it rules inother measures, including percentage of outcomes attained of value toclients. Self-report measures of students and employers, even thoughreliable and standardized, may be invalid measures of outcome. Iquestion sole reliance on self-report data from students (socialworkers) and employers, and suggest the importance of gaining data fromclients and significant others, including both subjective and objectiveindicators of outcome (e.g., see Schwartz & Baer, 1991). I suggestthat not just outcomes but also the quality of services should bereviewed (p. 228). (See also the discussion of the distinction betweencompetence and performance in the Fall 2001 editorial.) I do not say that the use of non-evidence-based standards"will likely push" (p. 183) helpers to use whatever methodsthey wish; I say it "would allow social workers to use assessmentmethods found to be inaccurate or harmful" (p. 228). I do not claim(as the authors imply) that EPAS as written means "that people areprecluded or rebuked from studying client outcomes." Quite theopposite. I think it would be wonderful and in fact urge this. I do notsay that "if the criteria for educational standards are notevidence based ... then it is based on `popularity,' a sort ofpopular culture characterization of social work education" (p.182). The authors confuse the concept of popular culture with relianceon popularity (consensus authority) as a criterion on which to makedecisions. I refer the authors to any one of a number of excellent booksdescribing informal fallacies (e.g., Engel, 1994; Kahane, 1995;Thouless, 1992). What I do say is that "policy and standards may bebased on many different criteria, including people's opinions,tradition, popularity (authority), or on evidence that standardscontribute to hoped-for-goals (e.g., client well-being). We have optedfor authority" (p. 228). I refer to the criteria relied on. I donot comment on the process used to select the criteria as the authorsallege ("This is an unfair portrayal of the process that led to therevised standards," p. 182). It never occurred to me that "theprocess amounted to a popularity contest" (p. 183), but this is anintriguing idea. Hoffman and Albers often appeal to revelational sources. Theyappear to have privileged knowledge into personal interiors, includingmy own. They say that I have "a deep distrust of social workers andsocial work education" (p. 183). Actually I have a deep interest inproviding the best services to clients and honoring our Code of Ethics,and I suspect that many social workers share these interests. And, I amfamiliar with research findings showing the play of cognitive biasesregarding decision making to which we are all subject (e.g., see Dawes,2001; Hastie & Dawes, 2001), research showing that decisions madeare often not the best (e.g., see Munro, 1996; Ofshe & Watters,1994), and the gaps between obligations described in our Code of Ethicsand guidelines in EPAS and what is done in everyday practice. Forexample, we find in EPAS "Apply critical thinking skills within thecontext of professional social work practice" (CSWE CSWE Council on Social Work EducationCSWE Certificate in Spoken and Written EnglishCSWE Center for Student Work Experience , 2001, III .A.1), "Use theoretical frameworks supported by empiricalevidence" (III.A.7) and (in IV.G) "research content ...prepares students to develop, use, and effectively communicateempirically based knowledge, including evidence-based interventions.Research knowledge is used by students to provide high quality services... and to evaluate their own practice." Does not fulfillment ofsuch obligations require a self-reflective critical process? Yetresearch shows that social workers do not draw on practice-relatedresearch (e.g., see Rosen, Proctor, Morrow-Howell, & Staud, 1995). The authors also seem to have privileged knowledge concerning whatNancy Randolph meant to say at the discussion of EPAS at the March 2001Annual Program Meeting. I am told that I lack "both the intuitiveand the reasoned understanding that Randolph was simply sayingaccredited accreditedrecognition by an appropriate authority that the performance of a particular institution has satisfied a prestated set of criteria.accredited herdscattle herds which have achieved a low level of reactors to, e.g. programs are better than nonaccredited programs" (p.182). (Better in which way? And where is the evidence that this is so?)Here is one of the many ad hominem [Latin, To the person.] A term used in debate to denote an argument made personally against an opponent, instead of against the opponent's argument. appeals in their letter. And how dothey know what she was "simply saying"? I do not have specialknowledge regarding Nancy Randolph's interior thoughts. Thisstatement was made in a public forum. I think when anybody writes orspeaks, we have to take their words at face value, putting them ofcourse in context. Yet another appeal to access to private interiors canbe seen in their statement that "the educational policy documenthas not excluded clients because the people writing the policy and thebody that has approved the policy don't care about clients."(p. 182). Printed documents are part of the "objective world"open to review and criticism. If we have to interpret them based on theintentions of the writers or because they are unclear, what advances aremade? Such documents should stand on their own, especially officialdocuments from professional organizations such as accreditationstandards. We should not be referred to revelational sources. Hoffman and Albers focus on (and confuse) psychologicalcharacteristics with evidentiary issues. There seems to be an assumptionthat if we raise questions, we don't trust people, rather than theview that raising questions is integral to knowledge growth designed toimprove service to clients. This is not a psychological issue but adesire to test claims that are made that affect clients' lives andthose of social workers. I ask evidentiary questions. Is there anyevidence that X helps clients or X helps students to help clients? It isnot an issue of psychological distrust but an interest in criticallydiscussing claims about what helps clients which the history of thehelping professions shows is needed in view of both past and current useof ineffective and harmful methods and neglect of effective ones. Idon't think we should or can depend on trust to protect clientsfrom harming in the name of helping (Blenkner, Bloom, & Neilson,1971; Gomory, in press; Ofshe & Watters, 1994), neglect of effectivemethods (e.g., Baldwin, 1999) and use of ineffective ones (e.g.,Schuerman, Rzepnicki, & Littell, 1994). Given the play ofself-interest and cognitive biases and the plethora of muddled thinkingand propaganda in the media and the professional literature (e.g., seeBandolier's law of inverse claims, 1998), critical appraisal ofservice-related claims seems vital for protecting clients from harmfuland ineffective services. This focus on psychological rather thanevidentiary issues highlights the difference between authority-basedcriticism and open, free critical appraisal of arguments and evidence. I do favor a policy of hiring candidates regardless of particularcredentials "given a sound argument for doing so" (the authorsomit mention of this), for example, a track record of education andwork-related experiences and values which indicate that they wouldprovide fine leadership in a social work program. I raise the sameevidentiary concern in relation to other content in EPAS. My concern isthat we should consider the evidentiary status of our requirements andbe honest about our state of ignorance. Thus, I do not see thecontradiction the authors allude to allude toverb refer to, suggest, mention, speak of, imply, intimate, hint at, remark on, insinuate, touch upon see see, elude . I do refer to documentation regarding social work education(Christiansen, & Jacobson, 1994; Dawes, 1994). This researchsuggests that nonprofessionals are as effective in attaining a widerange of outcomes as those with credentials, licenses, and experience.This, combined with research illustrating that some social work servicesare ineffective and some are harmful (see prior cites), raises cautionabout claims of effectiveness. Hoffman and Albers claim that "itgoes without saying that social work graduates will work with and onbehalf of others" (p. 182); they appeal to good intentions. Even ifthis were so, it says nothing about whether they do more good than harmand our responsibility to find out. And the history of the helpingprofession shows that we cannot, and thus should not, rely on goodintentions to protect clients from harm or ineffective services. I could not find examples of some alleged defects. They say theeditorial is "loose and inchoate Imperfect; partial; unfinished; begun, but not completed; as in a contract not executed by all the parties. inchoateadj. or adv. referring to something which has begun but has not been completed, either an activity or some object which is " (p. 181), but give noexamples. I am said not to have strong analytical arguments. However, Ioften found distortion of positions and ad hominem appeals (focusing oncharacteristics of the person making an argument) in place of ad rem ad rem?adj.Relevant; pertinent.adv.To the point; relevantly.[Latin : ad, to + rem, accusative of r replies (arguing to the positions advanced and related evidence).Hoffman and Albers state that "standards are always written asdeclarative de��clar��a��tive?adj.1. Serving to declare or state.2. Of, relating to, or being an element or construction used to make a statement: a declarative sentence.n. sentences that are as unequivocal as possible so as to stateclearly what is expected" (p. 182). I gave examples illustratingthe vagueness of content in EPAS. Simply saying so won't make itso. They allege that "Gambrill seeks to trick us" (p. 182).One could argue that it is far more tricky to rely on informal fallaciessuch as straw man arguments and emotive language in place of arguing adrem. The authors confuse misunderstanding with disagreement. Thissection contains one of the many ad hominem arguments in their letter:"Anyone familiar with the style by which purpose statements arewritten would understand that" (p. 182). They allege that Imisunderstand mis��un��der��stand?tr.v. mis��un��der��stood , mis��un��der��stand��ing, mis��un��der��standsTo understand incorrectly; misinterpret. , when I disagree. To say that someone misunderstands aposition when he or she understands it and disagrees with it is afrequent confusion. I note the aspirational nature of statements in theEPAS and argue that they should be stated as such. If the statement that"social work education enables students ..." is a statement ofwhat programs ought to do or should strive to do, why not say that? Thisis my point. The appeal to tradition (authority) or popularity (othersdo it) for the aspirational wording says nothing about whether this isbest and for whom. Both tradition and popularity, as history reflects,are poor guides as to what is best, especially for those in weak powerpositions. And purpose and mission statements differ in the grandiosityof claims. For example, language used in the Sutter Health Sutter Health is a hospital network in Northern California based in Sacramento, California. External linksSutter Health homepage Hospitals/Care Centers Sutter Corporate Watch - a consumer organization Mission/Vision/Values Statement (2001) includes such wording as,"We are committed to ... and seek to.... "We can be bothaspirational and honest as reflected in some statements of otherorganizations. Thus, it is not the case, as the authors allege, that allother organizations' statements are similarly grandiose orpropagandistic. Efficiency and effectiveness are not viewed as redundant inliterature on service effectiveness (e.g., see Scriven, 1991; Rossi,Freeman, & Lipsey, 1993). Two or more programs could be equallyeffective but differ in their efficiency in terms of effort, time, andcost. That is why people distinguish between the two concepts. Efficiency goes beyond effectiveness by bringing in a reference to the amount of resources involved. It implies the absence of wastage for a given output; it can be increased by increasing the output for a given input. It does not guarantee that the results are of any useful size. For this reason, in many contexts, planners conventionally require that a social intervention must be both effective and efficient. (Scriven, 1991, p. 129) I see no evidence that efficiency is a concern in social workservices, as Hoffman and Albers suggest. Where is the evidence thatsocial workers provide services that are efficient; that is, where isthe counterevidence to a concern for efficiency? And here too, I shouldnot have to ask people about their reasons for excluding key concepts inofficial documents. These reasons should be clearly described in thedocuments. I never said that omitting the term "efficient"from the EPAS "is likely to act as a causal agent Noun 1. causal agent - any entity that produces an effect or is responsible for events or resultscausal agency, causephysical entity - an entity that has physical existence to make schoolsand practitioners spend money needlessly" (p. 3). This is Hoffmanand Albers's idea. My critics claim that I give no argument or evidence for thesuggested indicators. These indicators are based on content in EPAS andour Code of Ethics (e.g., see earlier quotes from EPAS), takingadvantage of additional detail provided by those outside of social workwho suggest how we can better honor described obligations. (Readers arereferred to related sources for further description such as Sackett,Straus, Richardson, Rosenberg, & Haynes, 2000.) Our Code of Ethicsrequires social workers to respect clients, to encourageself-determination, to honor informed consent requirements, and to"critically examine and keep current with emerging knowledgerelevant to social work" (National Association of Social Workers,1996, 4.01b). The accreditation standards require programs to teachstudents to learn how to evaluate their practice and to draw onpractice-related research and to use evidence-based interventions. Thesuggested indicators reflect these obligations and standards. Where are the arguments that the indicators suggested are notimportant and will "[mire mire(mer) [Fr.] one of the figures on the arm of an ophthalmometer whose images are reflected on the cornea; measurement of their variations determines the amount of corneal astigmatism. miren. ] social work education" (p. 184),rather than strengthen and enrich it and help clients? Consider thefirst one (p. 234): Ask answerable an��swer��a��ble?adj.1. Subject to being called to answer; accountable. See Synonyms at responsible.2. That can be answered or refuted: an answerable charge.3. questions related to importantpractice and policy decisions. If social workers can't poseanswerable questions related to important decisions, how can theyefficiently search for research findings related to their informationneeds, so honoring the NASW NASW National Association of Science WritersNASW National Association of Social Workers (Washington, DC)NASW National Association of Social WorkersNASW National Association for Social Work (UK)Code of Ethics and EPAS to draw onpractice-related research? And this is not solely my work. I certainlywould not want to take credit for the development of evidence-basedmedicine evidence-based medicineDecision-making 'The use of scientific data to confirm that proposed diagnostic or therapeutic procedures are appropriate in light of their high probability of producing the best and most favorable outcome'.See Meta-analysis. and health care, or for related efforts of other social workerswho have struggled to address practical and ethical issues regardingintegration of practice and research. This is not my work, it is thework of many others both past and present who were (and are) concernedabout the gap between practice/policy and ethical obligations toconsider clients' values and expectations, to involve them asinformed participants, and to draw on external research findings.Indeed, these concerns are reflected in obligations in the Code ofEthics and EPAS to draw on practice-related research. Where is the argument against indicator #14 (p. 234): Avoid makinginflated claims? Should we make inflated claims about the effectivenessof services? Does this respect clients? Does this contribute toself-determination and informed consent? Consider #13: Use validassessment methods that maximize the likelihood of choosing serviceslikely to result in outcomes valued by clients. Should we use invalidmethods that minimize the likelihood of choosing services likely toresult in outcomes clients value? How about #9: Use service methodsfound to be helpful via critical appraisal in maximizing the likelihoodof attaining hoped-for outcomes. Is it preferable to use service methodsof unknown effectiveness or that have been found to be harmful thatminimize the likelihood of attaining hoped-for outcomes? Does this honorour Code of Ethics or satisfy EPAS guidelines to use evidence-basedinterventions? What about #8: Accurately describe the evidentiary baseof services recommended to clients (including none). Doesn't thishonor obligations described in the NASW Code of Ethics and CSWE'saccreditation standards? Here we would have the opposite: "Do notaccurately describe the evidentiary base of recommended services ordeliberately mis-state it." I don't think such suggestions arecompatible either with our Code of Ethics or EPAS. Hoffman and Albers interpret suggested indicator #11 (p. 234):"Evaluate service outcomes in a timely, valid manner and use thisfeedback to select next steps" as "getting your work in ontime" and then attack this misinterpretation. If social workersevaluate the effects of services in an untimely manner (do not gatherongoing data regarding progress), how can they change plans in a timelymanner as needed as neededprn. See prn order. ? This indicator has nothing to do with submitting workon time. What is the argument for evaluating progress in an untimelymanner? I could have named the specific individuals who raised certainobjections described in my editorial, but protected their identity sinceI did not know if they would want to be publicly linked with theirobjection in print. These objections were raised during CSWE Board ofDirectors' meetings and meetings of the board's Subcommitteeon the Quality of Professional Education. Far from discounting them (asHoffman and Albers accuse me of), I take them seriously and suggestcounterarguments while protecting the confidentiality of the individual. At a number of points, Hoffman and Albers rely on emotive languagein place of providing ad rem arguments; affective language is used todiscount arguments in lieu of counterarguments: "mire,""narrow," "trick," "artfulgerrymandering gerrymanderingDrawing of electoral district lines in a way that gives advantage to a particular political party. The practice is named after Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry, who submitted to the state senate a redistricting plan that would have concentrated the voting ." For example, they characterize a call forattention to client outcomes as "her narrow quest for Verb 1. quest for - go in search of or hunt for; "pursue a hobby"quest after, go after, pursuelook for, search, seek - try to locate or discover, or try to establish the existence of; "The police are searching for clues"; "They are searching for the outcomeevidence" (p. 184). How is this narrow? What is more important? Thevalue of service to clients is stressed in the NASW Code of Ethics and Iwas under the impression that this is also of interest to the Council onSocial Work Education The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) is the national association for social work education in the United States of America.The CSWE sets and maintains standards of courses and accreditation of bachelor's degree's and Master's degree programs in social work. . What could be more fundamental to the valuesdescribed in the NASW Code of Ethics or the aims described in EPAS ifnot evidence that clients and significant others achieve outcomes ofimportance to them? And, what is the "larger conceptual argumentabout knowledge and teaching in social work" (p. 184) to whichHoffman and Albers refer? In initial studies it may be true that"whatever outcomes these procedures yield they cannot beconceptually traced back to specific content domains" (p. 184).However, the discovery of knowledge is a step-by-step procedure. Laterresearch may grapple with the relationship between certain content andformats and success in helping clients. If we compare school A and B andfind that school A produces social workers who help more clients attainmore outcomes they and involved others value than do social workers inschool B, we will not be able to say what particular content areas oreducational formats contributed (or not) to this difference. If we finda difference between schools, we could then conduct further studiesdesigned to peel away particular components of educational content andformats to systematically explore their effect on the success of socialworkers in helping clients. This gradual step-by-step process isreflected in many areas of inquiry (if not all), including those relatedto helping (e.g., see research history concerning systematicdesensitization systematic desensitization (sisˈ·t ). Some schools may choose to start small voluntaryprograms using problem-based learning, following Barrows (1994) andSackett et al. (2000), to compare the effects of this professionaleducation program with the usual format and content. Research in appliedsettings has always been a challenge (e.g., see Blenkner, 1950). Andindeed social work's research history shows that some people canmeet this challenge (e.g., see Blenkner, Bloom, & Nielson, 1971). Wecan draw on creative suggestions by others in pursuit of efforts thatmay yield valuable information (e.g., see Campbell, 1988). An interest in client outcome is not unique to me as implied by"in Gambrill's words, to `outcomes clients value'"(p. 181) or "her narrow quest" (p. 184). They are the words ofmany individuals and indeed organizations. This is another form ofmisrepresenting an argument--posing it as unique to an individual orfringe group, overlooking (or hiding) its much greater spread. Considerfor example calls for adult service reform adopted in November 1983 bythe Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps (TASH): CONSUMER ACCOUNTABILITY. Program management and resource allocation decisions in adult services should be based on information regarding the benefits that consumers receive from those services. An adequate constellation of services will result in performance of activities valued by the individual, contact with others in the community, income from work, individual exercise of choice, and maintenance of health status. Evaluation or accreditation on the basis of service procedures alone does not provide a sufficient index of accountability. Financial, policy, program, and management decisions should be linked directly to benefits received by consumers with disabilities. (Reprinted in Meyer, Peck, & Brown, 1991, pp. 491-492) At their October 2001 meeting, the CSWE Board of Directors approveda pilot project to examine services offered and outcomes achieved by asample of BSW BSW Bachelor of Social Work (degree)BSW Bundesverband Solarwirtschaft (German Solar Industry Association)BSW BrettspielWelt (online gaming site)BSW Biblical Studies on the Web and MSW (MicroSoft Word) See Microsoft Word. students. Appeals to good intentions or traditionare not persuasive in view of harming done in the name of helping in thehelping professions. The authors suggest reliance on "principled accounts of humanaction in the interests of others" (as to "why all socialworkers are obliged to meet this service requirement," p. 18 4).Such "principled accounts" seem to be a version of appeal togood intentions (good motivations). Who is to say what is a principledaccount? And might not these be used as excuses for avoidable mistakesand failures? Who is to say they may even be accurate? Don'tclients deserve more than principled accounts? The EPAS calls on socialworkers to use evidence-based interventions. I assume this term wasincluded in good faith. Do we want only the words (e.g.,"evidence-based interventions") without the substance? Use ofthe term "evidence-based" simply to continue authority-basedpractices has been raised as a concern by a number of individuals(Gambrill, in press; Gomory, 2000; Shahar, 1998). Correspondence betweenwords and deeds Words and Deeds is the eleventh episode of the third season of House and the fifty-seventh episode overall. This episode concludes the Michael Tritter story arc that began in the episode Fools for Love. is important in meeting ethical obligations. The authorsseem to suggest that we should not examine the relationship betweenprofessional education and the services students provide and the outcomes they achieve. This position seems to me counter to our Code ofEthics which calls on us to value service to clients, to evaluate ourpractice, and to draw on practice-related research--indeed to useevidence-based interventions. Thus, we both refer to ethics as a guideto practice but have a different view of what this would entail.According to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. the "principled account" criterion, a socialworker would be considered a successful professional even if she couldnot carry out certain requirements, let alone successfully, in relationto hoped for outcomes. Don't we want social workers who providehigh quality services and help clients achieve outcomes they value,rather than social workers who can merely describe why they should?Don't we want to encourage a close correspondence between words andactions? Don't we want to educate social workers who have theskills required to alter agency practices and policies that strainagainst ethical practices described in EPAS (e.g., to use evidence-basedinterventions)? Critical discussion designed to forward the growth of knowledgeabout what helps clients and students and what does not requiresaccurate descriptions of competing points of view and evidence ratherthan reliance on propaganda strategies such as straw man arguments andad hominem appeals. What accounts for misrepresentation misrepresentationIn law, any false or misleading expression of fact, usually with the intent to deceive or defraud. It most commonly occurs in insurance and real-estate contracts. False advertising may also constitute misrepresentation. of arguments?Many appeals used by Hoffman and Albers are authority-based ones:distortion of arguments, appeal to revelation sources (I should haveasked Nancy Randolph, I should have asked commission members why theydropped "efficient"). In addition we find ad hominem arguments(deeply distrust social work) in place of arguing ad rem, criticismwithout clarity of what is criticized (alleging text is inchoate with noexamples), confusing misunderstanding and disagreement and begging thequestion (asserting what should be argued). Does the use of propagandastrategies help clients? Will "head-in-sand mentality" (hiding concerningquestions) help clients? I argued that we should examine the evidentiarystatus of claims that affect the lives of social workers, students, andclients. There are many other grounds on which standards could be basedsuch as tradition or popularity. We seem to have a clash here between anauthority-based approach to knowledge concerning professional educationand an open, free one in which there is an interest in criticallytesting claims. "The norms of science are explicitlyanti-authoritarian, anti-traditional, anti-revelational, andpro-individualistic. Truth is yet to be discovered" (Campbell,1988, p. 290). Hard questions are raised because criticism is viewed asthe only way knowledge can grow--that is, to be honest about our stateof ignorance and to critically test claims. Such critical testing seemsespecially important in the helping professions in which history showsharming in the name of helping. Reliance on authority-based criteria such as tradition may reflectpursuit of different aims (e.g., pursuit of political, social andeconomic advantages versus knowledge growth). Disagreement, rather thanbeing viewed as essential to the growth of knowledge as reflected incritical dialogue including accurate description of competing views, isviewed as heresy. Munz (1985) suggests that the function of falseknowledge (beliefs that are not true and that are not questioned) is topreserve social bonds. However, because there is no critical appraisal,scientific knowledge cannot grow in such groups. Our clients deservemore than false knowledge. Honest brokering of knowledge and ignorance is not somethingeverybody is wild about. There are many pressures to overstate what is"known," what has been accomplished, and potential for thefuture--to hide our ignorance and lack of evidence for claims. However,both EPAS and our Code of Ethics call on us to be active and honestbrokers of knowledge and ignorance (e.g., to respect clients, to informthem, to draw on practice related research, to encourageself-determination). Shouldn't intellectual honesty and clarity bekey in professional ethics professional ethics,n the rules governing the conduct, transactions, and relationships within a profession and among its publics.professional ethics liability,n 1. (Popper, 1998)? Can't we be truthful aswell as hopeful (aspirational)? We could clearly note the aspirationalnature of statements in the EPAS while affirming the need for, and ourdeep interest in, exploring the evidentiary base of our hopes. Justbecause it has not been done before or it is not done by otherprofessional groups does not mean that this is not the best way toproceed. I think there is concern in the social work profession that wecould do a better job. We can take advantage of what is happeningoutside of our profession to do so. Pursuit of political, economic, andsocial aims and pursuit of knowledge growth do not have to be incompetition. Honest brokering of knowledge and ignorance may result inbetter services for clients and a well-deserved positive reputation forour profession that results in its growth. If there is any matter oftrust here, it is trusting ourselves to honor our code of ethics bydoing the hard work needed to evaluate our claims to knowledge andservice. I thank Hoffman and Albers for taking the time to write theirletter and for their concern about social work education. The criticaldiscussion of different points of view is vital for discovering how wecan do better. "Well done is better than well said." --Ben Franklin References Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps. (1991). Document V.1TASH calls for adult service reform. Reprinted in L. H. Meyer, C. A.Peck, & L. Brown (Eds.), Critical issues in the lives of people withsevere disabilities (pp. 491-492). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks. Baldwin, S. (1999). Applied behavior analysis Some of the information in this article may not be verified by . It should be checked for inaccuracies and modified to cite reliable sources.Applied behavior analysis (ABA) in the treatment ofADHD Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)DefinitionAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a developmental disorder characterized by distractibility, hyperactivity, impulsive behaviors, and the inability to remain focused on tasks or : A review and reapproachment. Ethical Human Sciences and Services,1, 35-39. Bandolier's Law of Inverse Claims (Editorial). (1998, May).National Health Service Research and Development Directorate [Online].Available at http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/ band51/b51-1.html. Barrows, H. W. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-basedlearning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: SouthernIllinois University School of Medicine. Blenkner, M. (1950). Obstacles to evaluative research in casework case��work?n.Social work devoted to the needs of individual clients or cases.casework :Part I. Social Casework, 31,54-60. Reprinted in M. Bloom (Ed.). (1989).Tough and tender: The selected writings of Margaret Blenkner. Cleveland,OH: Benjamin Rose Institute. Blenkner, M., Bloom, M., & Nielson, M. (1971). A research anddemonstration of protective services. Social Casework, 52(8), 483-499. Campbell, D. T. (1988). The experimenting society. In E. S. Overman o��ver��man?n.1. A person having authority over others, especially an overseer or a shift supervisor.2. See superman.tr.v. (Ed.), Methodology and epistemology epistemology(ĭpĭs'təmŏl`əjē)[Gr.,=knowledge or science], the branch of philosophy that is directed toward theories of the sources, nature, and limits of knowledge. Since the 17th cent. for social science, selected papers(pp. 290-314). Chicago: University of Chicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including . Christiansen, A., & Jacobson, N. S. (1994). Who (or what) cando psychotherapy: The status and challenge of nonprofessional non��pro��fes��sion��al?n.One who is not a professional.nonpro��fes therapies.Psychological Science, 5(1), 8-14. Council on Social Work Education. (2001). Educational policy andaccreditation standards [Online]. Alexandria, VA: Author. Available athttp://www.cswe.org/accreditation/EPAS /epas.pdf. Dawes, R. M. (1994). House of cards house of cardsn. pl. houses of cardsA flimsy structure, arrangement, or situation that is in danger of collapsing or failing: "The collapse of the rupiah . . . : Psychology and psychotherapybuilt on myth. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Free Press. Dawes, R. M. (2001). Everyday irrationality: How pseudoscientists,lunatics and the rest of us systematically fail to think rationally.Boulder, CO: Westview. Engel, S. M. (1994). With good reason: An introduction to informalfallacies (5th ed.). New York: St. Martin's St. Martin's or St. Martins may refer to: St. Martins, Missouri, a city in the USA St Martin's, Isles of Scilly, an island off the Cornish coast, England St Martin's, Shropshire, a village in England . Gambrill, E. (2001). Educational policy and accreditationstandards: Do they work for clients? Journal of Social Work Educaiton,37, 226-239. Gambrill, E. (in press). Evidence-based practice: Implications forknowledge development and use in social work. In A. Rosen & E.Proctor (Eds.), Developing practice guidelines practice guidelinesMedical practice A set of recommendations for Pt management that identifies a specific or range of range of management strategies. See Peer review organization, Practice standards. Cf 'Cookbook' medicine. for social workintervention: Issues, methods and research agenda. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press Columbia University Press is an academic press based in New York City and affiliated with Columbia University. It is currently directed by James D. Jordan (2004-present) and publishes titles in the humanities and sciences, including the fields of literary and cultural studies, . Gomory, T. (2000, May). Social work practice in the real world: Anargument for evidence-tested practice. Paper presented at the Conferenceon Practice Guidelines at the George Warren Brown School of Social Work The George Warren Brown School of Social Work more commonly known as the Brown School of Social Work is one of the world's leading schools for the training of social workers, ranking 2nd (US News)and 9th (Gourman Report). ,Washington University, St. Louis, MO. Gomory, T. (in press). The origins of coercion in "AssertiveCommunity Treatment Assertive community treatment, or ACT, is a form of total in-community care for people with serious, long-term mental illness.[1][2] DefinitionThe defining characteristics of ACT include: " (ACT): A review of early publications from theSpecial Treatment Unit (STU STU StudentSTU Secure Telephone UnitSTU St. Thomas University (Fredericton, New Brunswick)STU St. Thomas University (Miami, Florida)STU SHDSL ) of Mendota State Hospital. Ethical HumanSciences and Services. Hastie, R. & Dawes, R. M. (2001). Rational choice in anuncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making (2nded.). Thousand Oaks Thousand Oaks,residential city (1990 pop. 104,352), Ventura co., S Calif., in a farm area; inc. 1964. Avocados, citrus, vegetables, strawberries, and nursery products are grown. , CA: Sage. Kahane, H. (1995). Logic and contemporary rhetoric: The use ofreason in everyday life (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Munro, E. (1996). Avoidable and unavoidable mistakes in childprotection work. British Journal of Social Work, 26, 793-808. Munz, P. (1985). Our knowledge of the growth of knowledge: Popperon Wittgenstein. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. National Association of Social Workers. (1996). Code of ethics ofthe National Association of Social Workers. Washington, DC: Author. Ofshe, R., & Watters, E. (1994). Making monsters: Falsememories, psychotherapy and sexual hysteria. New York: CharlesScribner's. Popper, K. R. (1972). Conjectures and refutations: The growth ofscientific knowledge (4th ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.(Originally published in 1963.) Popper, K. (1998). The world of Parmenides: Essays on presocraticenlightenment. New York: Routledge. Rosen, A., Proctor, E. E., Morrow-Howell, N., & Staud, M.(1995). Rationales for practice decisions: Variations in knowledge useby decision task and social work service. Research on Social WorkPractice, 15, 501-523. Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (1993).Evaluation: A systematic approach (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Sackett, D. L., Straus, S. E., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W.,& Haynes, R. B. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice andtach EBM EBM Evidence-Based MedicineEBM Electronic Body MusicEBM ecosystem-based managementEBM Evidence Based Medical (statistics)EBM Environmentally Benign ManufacturingEBM Expressed Breast MilkEBM Executive Board Meeting (2nd ed.). New York: Churchill Livingstone Imprint of a medical publishing company owned by Elsevier Ltd, but previously owned by Harcourt and Pearsons. Originally formed from Livingstone, Edinburgh, Scotland, and J & A Churchill, London, UK, and subsequently with an office in New York, but now integrated with the rest of . Schuerman, J. R., Rzepnicki, T. L., & Littell, J. H. (1994).Putting families first: An experiment in family preservation Family preservation was the movement to help keep children at home with their families rather than in foster homes or institutions. This movement was a reaction to the earlier policy of Family Breakup, which pulled children out of unfit homes. . New York:Aldine de Gruyter. Schwartz, I. S., & Baer, D. M. (1991). Social validityassessments: Is current practice state of the art? Journal of AppliedBehavior Analysis The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) was established in 1968 as a The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis is a peer-reviewed, psychology journal, that publishes research about applications of the experimental analysis of behavior to problems of social importance. , 24, 189-204. Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park,CA: Sage Shahar, E. (1998). Evidence-based medicine: A new paradigm New ParadigmIn the investing world, a totally new way of doing things that has a huge effect on business.Notes:The word "paradigm" is defined as a pattern or model, and it has been used in science to refer to a theoretical framework. or theemperor's new clothes Emperor’s New Clothessupposedly invisible to unworthy people; in reality, nonexistent. [Dan. Lit.: Andersen’s Fairy Tales]See : IllusionEmperor’s New Clothes ? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice,4, 277-282. Sutter VNA VNAabbr.Visiting Nurse Association & Hospice. (2001). Mission/vision/ values statementof Sutter VNA & Hospice. Sacramento, CA: Author. Thouless, R. H. (1974). Straight and crooked thinking: Thirty-eightdishonest tricks of debate. London: Pan Books.