are however, some recognised examples of good practice evident in parts of the country. In Haringey, community social workers play a positive role in promoting a positive educational experience for the children of Travellers, Gypsies and Roma families. Here, social workers have adopted a community social work model to ensure that these children can access education and achieve academically, and they promote positive cultural role models (Davis 2010). The community model of social work has been recognised as being one of the most successful ways of working
that would support candidates promoting far-right, anti-democratic, anti-worker and baldly racist policies. This political base – rural, white and male – ends up voting to dismantle the community structures designed to empower them in the hope of some benefit from powerful leaders. This is the exact opposite of the community model that organises people to define and pursue their collective self-interest towards an expanded democracy. How can we understand such behaviour? We can start by thinking about it as a result of the Janus-faced nature of populism that allows
five years earlier from Edward Cowper, an inventor and engineer, to Robert Owen, which described a mutual friend as a socialist. Early British socialists came to be called Owenites. Owen was a successful industrialist who became renowned for reforms he introduced at the factory he ran at New Lanark in Scotland, as a campaigner for Factory Acts, which would improve the conditions of workers, and as the advocate of planned communities modelled on New Lanark, which would serve as sanctuary islands of socialism in an ocean of capitalism. Owen’s proposals were rooted in
experience can be positive ( Dawson, 2020 ; McCulloch and Webb, 2020 ). This lends support to the idea that social workers are at their best when involved directly in interventions with people rather than engaging in brief assessments and handovers to other services. A feature found in all the examples were attempts, not always very conscious ones, to reimagine the language used around services offered (an issue discussed in Chapter 3 ). In community models that see service users as partners and co-creators of services, language that signifies an ‘us’ and ‘them
appears to be a powerful predictor of use is direct contact between researchers and practitioners (Ball, 2012). However, how this might work in reality is unclear. In this section we look to conceptual models to promote collaboration in evidence use through productive contact between researchers and users. Regarding approaches for addressing the knowing-doing gap in education, Broekkamp and van Hout-Walters (2007) identify various models including the Evidence-Based Practice Model; the Research Development Diffusion Model, and the Knowledge Communities Model
sharing, fairness and reciprocal engagement in the preschool years, and the differences found across cultures. Being helpful, reciprocally sharing resources and concern for one’s reputation within the community are aspects of social encounters that young children can witness, especially if they are exposed to the daily activities within the community. Modelling by adults and older children undoubtedly facilitates children’s incorporation of these norms for themselves. Additionally, in many indigenous societies, children, even very young children, have roles to play as
influence political priorities, ‘systematic approaches to gathering and analysing information’ as well as knowledge of policy implementation (Weiss, 1979: 6). Not included in Weiss’ original list of policy models, the two-communities model suggested by Caplan (1979) is frequently invoked when describing the relationship between policymaking and research. This model highlights the cultural and institutional gaps between policy-making and research (most recently, Cairney, 2016; Stoker and Evans, 2016; Parkhurst, 2017). According to Mead, most academic research on
, professional and interprofessional ethics an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their families facing the problem associated with life- threatening illness, through the prevention and relief of suffering by means of early identification and impeccable assessment and treatment of pain and other problems, physical, psychosocial and spiritual. (p 1) The authors will explore two very different volunteering models: a community model in Kerala, South India and the UK hospice model. There are different issues affecting palliative care in the developing
such as sustainable development, permaculture, balanced nutrition, well-being, and so on. As a result, ecovillages have been attracting particular attention from the editors of Communities . 1 We must not be deceived by the differentiation between intentional community models. The oppositions that are impossible to miss when examining the details of their respective structures should not obscure the existence of common interests and values. These cement the rhetoric of community all the more for the fact that, through the work of organizations such as the
means through which research is targeted at users). The idea that pull and push alone could account for the adoption of knowledge was problematised, however, both by the conceptualisation of the Enlightenment Model (Weiss, 1998) and through the development of the Two Communities Model (Amara et al, 2004). Within the Enlightenment Model, for example, knowledge adoption was posited, not as a consequence of the findings of a single study or a body of knowledge, but from the percolation of evidence into the policy-making domain, causing policy makers to think
