Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
Begrens søket
1 - 6 of 6
RefereraExporteraLink til resultatlisten
Permanent link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Treff pr side
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sortering
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Forfatter A-Ø
  • Forfatter Ø-A
  • Tittel A-Ø
  • Tittel Ø-A
  • Type publikasjon A-Ø
  • Type publikasjon Ø-A
  • Eldste først
  • Nyeste først
  • Skapad (Eldste først)
  • Skapad (Nyeste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Eldste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyeste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidligste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (siste først)
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Forfatter A-Ø
  • Forfatter Ø-A
  • Tittel A-Ø
  • Tittel Ø-A
  • Type publikasjon A-Ø
  • Type publikasjon Ø-A
  • Eldste først
  • Nyeste først
  • Skapad (Eldste først)
  • Skapad (Nyeste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Eldste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyeste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidligste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (siste først)
Merk
Maxantalet träffar du kan exportera från sökgränssnittet är 250. Vid större uttag använd dig av utsökningar.
  • 1.
    Nygren, Lennart
    et al.
    Umeå universitet, Samhällsvetenskapliga fakulteten, Institutionen för socialt arbete.
    White, Sue
    University of Sheffield, Department of Sociological Studies.
    Ellingsen, Ingunn T.
    Universitetet i Stavanger, Institutionen för socialt arbete.
    Investigating welfare regime typologies: Paradoxes, pitfalls and potentialities in comparative social work research2018Inngår i: Social Policy and Society, ISSN 1474-7464, E-ISSN 1475-3073, Vol. 17, nr 4, s. 665-677Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    The article reviews the relevance and methodological utility of welfare regime typologies for the study of professional sense-making in social work with families. Focus groups were carried out with social workers in European and Latin American countries representing four different policy regimes. A case vignette was used to elicit social workers’ descriptions of how welfare policy may influence how they understand their work task and the notion of family. The research team identified methodological challenges of general relevance in similar policy-practice studies. There were paradoxes in terms of homogeneity on the regime level vs. heterogeneity within and between national services. Pitfalls appeared in the selection of regime-typical cases, language/cultural barriers, and in deciding organisational level. The article shows that welfare typologies have potentialities in that they may provide a helpful analytical basis for theoretical and practical reasoning in which syntheses between policy and practice can be explored, discussed and challenged.

  • 2. Oltedal, Siv
    et al.
    Nygren, Lennart
    Umeå universitet, Samhällsvetenskapliga fakulteten, Institutionen för socialt arbete.
    Private and public families: Social workers’ views on children’s and parents’ position in Chile, England, Lithuania and Norway2019Inngår i: Journal of Comparative Social Work, E-ISSN 0809-9936, Vol. 14, nr 1, s. 115-140Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Social workers around the world work with families and family complexities in their everyday practice. In this cross-national study, we explore social workers’ family intervention practices related to family definitions and functions, and how social workers balance children’s and parents’ rights and social policies in the proper context. Data derives from focus group interviews with child welfare workers from Norway, Lithuania, Chile and England based on discussions of a common fictitious complex family case (vignette). The four countries chosen for this comparative study are examples of four different welfare systems/regimes. The findings related to this broad area of caring topics are related to how the dimensions of a ‘private’ and a ‘public’ family manifest in social work in the four countries. Social workers in Chile and Lithuania refer to the idea of the private family, while their Norwegian counterparts lean more to the public family. English social workers combine public and private family conceptions in their focus groups, reflecting a system that is partly de-familialized.

    Fulltekst (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 3.
    Ellingsen, Ingunn T.
    et al.
    Universitetet i Stavanger.
    Studsröd, Ingunn
    Universitetet i Stavanger.
    Muñoz-Guzmán, Carolina
    Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile.
    The child, the parents, the family and the state: Chile and Norway compared2019Inngår i: Journal of Comparative Social Work, E-ISSN 0809-9936, Vol. 14, nr 1, s. 93-114Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
  • 4.
    Oltedal, Siv
    et al.
    Department of Social Studies, University of Stavanger, Norway.
    Nygren, Lennart
    Umeå universitet, Samhällsvetenskapliga fakulteten, Institutionen för socialt arbete.
    The use of vignettes in an international comparative social work research: In-practice and on-practice reflections on practices2023Inngår i: Journal of Comparative Social Work, E-ISSN 0809-9936, Vol. 18, nr 2, s. 236-248Artikkel i tidsskrift (Annet vitenskapelig)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this article is to reflect on the strengths and challenges in qualitative comparative research on personal social services. The specific methodological approach that these reflections emerge from is the application of case vignettes in focus group interviews with social workers, working in different welfare regimes.

    We describe the process of vignette construction and implementation in focus group interviews, and relate this to findings in a large international project with researchers and data from Chile, Mexico, Norway, Sweden, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Ireland and the UK.

    Findings reveal that some globally spread professional norms prevail when they are applied locally, while others are more formed through welfare systems with strong contextual norms and legal and socio-economic barriers. Furthermore, the project showed that to use case vignettes and focus groups, in order to compare ‘social work’ in its totality between countries, is really difficult. It appears more fruitful to use such research methods to compare subsectors and sub-disciplines instead of social work as a whole. The strength of the data retrieved from the study is that it makes it possible to separate information on actual practice from information on principles and system norms, thus providing in-practice and on-practice reflections.

    Fulltekst (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 5.
    Nygren, Lennart
    et al.
    Umeå universitet, Samhällsvetenskapliga fakulteten, Institutionen för socialt arbete.
    Christie, Alastair
    University College Cork, Department of Applied Social Studies, Republic of Ireland.
    Muñoz Guzmán, Carolina
    School of Social Work, Universidad Catolica de Chile, Chile.
    Naujaniené, Rasa
    Social Work department, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania.
    Welfare regimes and social workers' conceptions of social problems and professional roles: a comparative study of Chile, Ireland, Lithuania and Sweden2023Inngår i: Journal of Comparative Social Work, E-ISSN 0809-9936, Vol. 18, nr 2, s. 207-235Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    This article compares social work in countries representing four different welfare regimes: Chile, the Republic of Ireland (refer to elsewhere as ‘Ireland’), Lithuania and Sweden. The aim is to examine how social workers in different contexts refer to families’ complex needs, how contextual factors influence social workers’ positions and actions, and how they make sense of their work. Social workers in 15 focus groups, 4 per country except for Chile with 3, were interviewed about their conceptions of ‘family’, ‘families with complex needs’, and reasoning about interventions in relation to a fictitious complex case vignette. The understanding of complex needs appears relatively individualized in Chile and Lithuania, while contextual factors were more pronounced in the Irish and Swedish material. Chile, exemplifying a familialized family policy regime, reflects a poverty-compensatory social worker role that also supports familial reproduction; Ireland, a partly de-familialized regime, reflects a supportive and risk-reactive role; Lithuania, a re-familialized regime reflects a patriarchal risk-reducing role and Sweden, a de-familialized policy regime, reflects a rights-oriented and technocratic role. Welfare regimes shape different social work practice contexts. However, to some extent, social workers around the world share a common work ethos in how they, for the best interest of the people they work with, deal with the cross-pressure from social problems and political-ideological priorities.

    Fulltekst (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 6.
    Oltedal, Siv
    et al.
    Universitetet i Stavanger.
    Pena, Angela
    University of Havana.
    Hean, Sarah C.P.D.
    Universitetet i Stavanger.
    Work division processes in social work with Cuban and Norwegian families2019Inngår i: Journal of Comparative Social Work, E-ISSN 0809-9936, Vol. 14, s. 165-190Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
1 - 6 of 6
RefereraExporteraLink til resultatlisten
Permanent link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf