Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Main Article Content

Thomas Winman corresponding author
Marie Westerlind

Abstract

This study concern how professional knowledge is discussed, understood and employed by integration workers in an integration activity in Sweden called Civic Orientation. The changing and complex nature of integration work imply that integration workers need specialized knowledge to ensure quality of the activity. Defining what is meant by professional knowledge is especially important and to address these issues, this study focuses on what constitutes professional knowledge with respect to the efforts made to support immigrant integration. Our study reveales that professional knowledge in Civic Orientation encompasses the understanding and responding to the heterogeneity of the groups in daily interactions, developing standardized procedures; and knowledge about how to establishing a cumulative approach to knowledge in the organization. We argue that these motives are embedded in different perspectives on culture and knowledge. Furthermore, these different perspectives are expressed as tensions between values of creativity and standardization as well as between equality and heterogeneity.

Keywords
professional knowledge, communication, integration work, standardization

Article Details

How to Cite
Winman, T., & Westerlind, M. (2019). Dimensions of professional knowledge. Social Work and Social Welfare, 1(1), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.25082/SWSW.2019.01.002

References

  1. Kim J and Kim EJ. Theorizing dialogic deliberation. Everyday political talk as communicative action. Communication Theory, 2008, 18(1): 51-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x
  2. McDonald C. Institutional transformation: the impact of performance measurement on professional practice in social work. Social Work & Society, 2006, 4(1). Series. http://www.socialwork.net/2006/1/series/professionalism/ mcdonald
  3. Nash M,Wong J and Trlin A. Civic and social integration: A new field of social work practice with immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers. International SocialWork, 2006, 49(3): 345-363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872806063407
  4. Taylor C. 1999, Det mngkulturella samhllet och erknnandets politik, Gteborg, Daidalos.
  5. Kymlicka W. 1995, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  6. Berkman LF and Glass T, 2000. Social integration, social networks, social support, and health, in Social epidemiology, LF Berman and I Kawachi, New York, Oxford, 137- 173.
  7. SFS 2010: 1138. Frordning om samhllsorientering fr vissa nyanlnda invandrare.
  8. Muzio D, Kirkpatrick I and Kipping M. Professions, organizations and the state: Applying the sociology of the professions to the case of management consultancy. Current Sociology, 2011, 59(6): 805-824. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392111419750
  9. Hopwood N. 2017, Agency, learning and knowledge work: Epistemic dilemmas in professional practices, in Agency at Work, Springer, Cham, 121-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60943-07
  10. Thng PO. 2004, Om arbetsintegrerat lrande, in Arbetsintegrerat lrande, Theliander J, Grunden K, Mrdn B, et al, 13-33.
  11. Engestrm Y. 2008, From teams to knots: activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619847
  12. Hall R and Horn IS. Talk and conceptual change at work: Adequate representation and epistemic stance in a comparative analysis of statistical consulting and teacher workgroups. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 2012, 19(3): 240-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2012.688233
  13. Akkerman SF and Bakker A. Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 2011, 81(2): 132-169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435
  14. Hermans HJM. The dialogical self: Toward a theory of personal and cultural positioning. Culture Psychology, 2001, 7(3): 243-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X0173001
  15. Engestrm, Y. Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 2001, 14(1): 133-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
  16. Akkerman SF and Van Eijck MW. Re-theorising the student dialogically across and between boundaries of multiple communities. British Educational Research Journal, 2013, 39(1): 60-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2011.613454
  17. Mkitalo . Professional learning and the materiality of social practice. Journal of Education and Work, 2012, 25(1): 59- 78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2012.644905
  18. Sahney S, Banwet D and Karunes S. Conceptualizing total quality management in higher education. The TQM Magazine, 2004, 16(2): 145-159. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780410523044
  19. Wittgenstein L,1958, Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan.
  20. Veillard L. Transfer of learning as a specific case of transition between learning contexts in a French work-integrated learning programme. Vocations and learning, 2012, 5(3): 251-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-012-9076-y
  21. Tanggaard L. Learning at trade vocational school and learning at work: boundary crossing in apprentices’ everyday life. Journal of Education and Work, 2007, 20(5): 453-466. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080701814414
  22. Akkerman SF, AdmiraalWand Simons RJ, 2012. Unity and diversity in a collaborative research project. Culture Psychology, 2012, 18(2): 227-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X11434835