Thank you to everyone who has responded so far.
Anyone who has not seen the original piece by me can email me and I will
attach a copy back. Unfortunately I do not have a scanner or an electronic
copy of Prof. Spicker's piece but perhaps someone else does. Otherwise I
am sure a colleague may have a copy. If I get lots and lots of requests (I
wish, lol) I can post it on the mailbase.
I really liked Prof. Taylor-gooby's suggestions and I support his approach
and the comments of Dee Cook. The suggestions are not only pragmatic but
right for the development of social policy and welfare. That in addition
to Lorraine Harding's response has made me rethink my position a little and
made me realise that Social Policy has two goals in fact.
On the one hand there is the 'big picture' goal of developing a more
welfare orientated society. But on the other we also produce educated
graduates and supply training. I was aware of this of course and supplied
my own suggestions took the same pragmatic approach. While I still feel as
passionate about the big picture I have perhaps over-estimated our ability
to pursue this goal. I must accept that providing personnel for public and
voluntary sectors is our core priority because it secures the existence of
social policy. Fortunately these goals are not incompatible and there is
significant room for doing both- one thing is for certain though, I believe
no change is no longer an option.
So my current position, liable to change at any point, lol, is this.
Social Policy faces two main problems which are; 1. Social Policy under
threat.
2. Big picture project of welfare under-
performing.
The first can be tackled by such measures as raising the profile of social
policy and the degree, networking with other disciplines and greater and
stronger genuine partnership working between other disciplines and between
other departments.
The second can be tackled by removing area boundaries concerning what is
and what is not social policy and defining as legitimate any area having
impact on human, animal or environmental welfare. More and better co-
ordination of research between disciplines and other departments.
Logistically this would appear to require possibly significant structural
and cultural change, the implications of which I am only beginning to think
about.
Again, if you have made it this far, congratulations and why not add your
opinion. So far we have had responses from academics and myself as a
research student but I know that local government workers, practitioners
and others listen in here and their opinion would be very helpful. Feel
free to tear a strip off me if you think I am on the wrong path or I just
talk too much.
Tim Clark
|