Where Science Meets Art: Sociology and Social Work

DOI: 10.4236/sm.2012.24044   PDF   HTML     7,539 Downloads   11,520 Views   Citations


The nexus of neo-liberalist influences in our current risk society has produced a crisis for both New Zealand sociology and Social Work, playing out in practice domains and in the academy. This paper argues that by co-habituating and co-operating, we may have a tangible way forward. One of the biggest challenges for Social Work practitioners is to come to terms with the role of theory in the practice of their discipline—a discipline that is often fast-paced, but increasingly focused on dealing with one client at a time, and often reduced to a dyad emphasis in practise: that of client and worker. One of the biggest challenges for the sociologist embarking on a career in research is to come to terms with sociology as methodological toolkit for social activism where knowledge of theory can be applied toward sustained societal change. Both offer a methodological approach to understanding the human condition in context. Both disciplines are at risk because of neo-liberalisation, and this, we argue must be avoided by a move toward each other.

Share and Cite:

Kelly, S. & Stanley, T. (2012). Where Science Meets Art: Sociology and Social Work. Sociology Mind, 2, 335-341. doi: 10.4236/sm.2012.24044.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Adams, R., Dominelli, L., & Payne, M. (2002). Social work: Themes, issues and critical debates (2nd ed.), Basingstoke: Palgrave.
[2] Allen, R., & Stanley, T. (2011). Taking a marxist look at the framework for the assessment of children in need and their families: Practice gains. Practice, 23, 147-156. doi:10.1080/09503153.2011.569969
[3] Beddoe, E., & Maidment, J. (2009). Mapping knowledge for social work practice: Critical intersections, Cengage Learning. South Melbourne: Vic.
[4] Burawoy, M. (2005). 2004 Presidential Address for Public Sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, 4-28. doi:10.1177/000312240507000102
[5] Connolly, M., & Harms, L. (2009). Social work: Contexts and practice (2nd ed.). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
[6] Dominelli, L. (2004). Social work: Theory and practice for a changing profession. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell.
[7] Dominelli, L. (1997). Sociology for social work. Houndsmills: Macmillan.
[8] Elias, N., & Dunning, E. (2008). Quest for excitement: Sport and leisure in the civilising process. Collected Works of Norbert Elias, 7.
[9] Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology (5th ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
[10] Gray, M., & Webb, S. A. (2009). The return of the political in social work. International Journal of Social Welfare, 18, 111-115. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2008.00626.x
[11] Grogan, S. (2008). Body image: Understanding body dissatisfaction in men, women and children. London: Routledge.
[12] Healy, K. (2005). Social work theories in context: Creating frameworks for practice. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
[13] Kawahara, S. (2010) The body and the society. Does society make me fat? The Undergraduate Journal of Sociology, 4.
[14] Leonard, P. (1966). Sociology in social work. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
[15] McDonald, C. (2007). This is who we are and this is what we do: Social work education and self-efficacy. Australian Journal of Social Work, 60, 83-93. doi:10.1080/03124070601166737
[16] Macdonald, K. (2006). Professional work. In M. Korczynski, R. Hodson, & P. Edwards (Eds.), Social theory at work (pp. 356-387). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[17] McIver, R. (1931). Relation of sociology to social work (textbook).
[18] McManus, R. (2006). Shifting practices in New Zealand sociology. New Zealand Sociology, 21, 270-288.
[19] Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Penguin: Harmonds- worth.
[20] Munro, E. (2010). The munro review of child protection: Part one a systems analysis. URL (last checked 17 March 2012). http://www.education.gov.uk/munroreview/
[21] Munro, E. (2011). The munro review of child protection: Final report a child centred system. URL (last checked 17 March 2012). http://www.education.gov.uk/munroreview/
[22] Sibeon, R. (1991). Towards a new sociology of social work. Aldershot: Avebury.
[23] Silva, F. C. (2007). G. H. Mead: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Polity.
[24] Shemmings, D., & Shemmings, Y. (2011). Understanding disorganized attachment theory and practice for working with children and adults. London: Jessica Kinsglea Publishers.
[25] Somers, M. (1994). The narrative constitution of identity: A relational and network approach. Theory and Society, 23, 605-650. doi:10.1007/BF00992905
[26] Stanley, T. (2007). Risky work: child protection practice. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand Te Puna Whakaaro, 30, 163-177.
[27] Stanley, T., & Kelly, S. (2010). Weaving sociology into New Zealand social work education. The International Journal, 1470-1227.
[28] Stanley, T., & Kelly, S. (2008). Sociological analysis for social work: A teaching and practice toolkit. Social Work Review, Massey.
[29] Van Heugten, K. (2011). Registration and social work education: A golden opportunity or a Trojan horse? Journal of Social Work, 11, 174-190. doi:10.1177/1468017310386695
[30] Van Heugten, K. (2001). Social work: Its role and task. In M. Connolly (Ed.), New Zealand Social Work: Contexts and Practice (pp. 3-17). Auckland: Oxford University Press.
[31] Webb, S. A. (2006). Social work in a risk society: Social and political perspectives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[32] Weinberg, M. (2008). Structural social work: A moral compass for ethics in practice. Critical Social Work, 9.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.