I have read the benchmark and I think it is a good document that has been
carefully crafted. Can I suggest that we avoid the pitfall of adding new
themes and subjects to it. The suggestions make by Paul Spicker and Roy
Greenhalgh are interesting, and we could fruitfully discuss them as part of
the wider activity of reflecting on the development of our subject. But that
is another enterprise. The political task of the benchmark is to prevent
educational bureaucracy stifling our work and our courses. For this reason
we need to avoid any more prescription.
Julia Twigg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Greenhalgh" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: Social Policy and Administration
>I would like to support Paul's proposal. I would also like to see a solid
>strand that looks at not just the delivery of social services derived from
>policy, but delivery from the receiver's viewpoint. For too long policy
>makers have imposed a policy, frequently with little piloting and with even
>less volume or stress testing (my background is in IT software development
>and delivery). Whether or not the delivery form meets the demands of the
>consumer, and how it matches the value placed on it by the consumer are
>hardly considered. But an examination of the change in delivery of, for
>example, domestic housing benefits caused by policy changes in turn caused
>by adoption of front-office/back-office or the use of electronic document
>management systems will illustrate well that these changes have hardly
>benefited the customer, nor have they done much to reduce costs of
>delivery.
>
> Roy Greenhalgh
> University of Bath
>
> Paul Spicker wrote:
>
>> There is scope for rather more emphasis on the analysis of social
>> administration. The title of the paper is "Social Policy and
>> Administration". In relation to the detailed description of content,
>> however, there is only one mention of "administration", in the line
>> referring to the "Organisation, administration, governance and management
>> of welfare institutions." There should be reference to
>>
>> * public sector management,
>> * service delivery, and * Social Administration, as the study of the
>> institutions,
>> mechanisms and processes by which social services are provided.
>> I've argued elsewhere that the benchmarks, and our current presentation
>> of the subject, makes too little of the vocational aspects of Social
>> Policy and Administration, which was initially conceived as a preparation
>> for work in public service and the voluntary sector. It's in our
>> interests to re-assert that position. Paul Spicker
>
|