The history of the working definition of practice

Research on Social Work Practice

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 271-283

  Holosko, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

Definition of practice; Social work

Indexed keywords

EID: 26044475437     PISSN: 10497315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1049731503013003003     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Albers, D. (2001). Reclaiming social work: Why definitions matter. Paper presented at the Kentucky Conference, "Re-Working the Working Definition," Lexington.
2. American Association of Social Workers. (1935). Social casework: Generic and specific: A report of the Milford conference. Studies in the Practice of Social Work, 3-31.
3. Austin, D. (1983). The Flexner myth and the history of social work. Social Service Review, 57, 1357-1376.
4. Austin, D. (2001). Special issue: Flexner revisited. Research on Social Work Practice, 11(2), 147-151.
5. Bartlett, H. (1958). Working definition of practice. Social Work, 3(2), 5-8.
6. Bartlett, H. (1961). Analyzing social work practice by fields. New York: National Association of Social Workers.
7. Bartlett, H. (1970). The common base of social work practice. New York: National Association of Social Workers.
8. Bitensky, R. (1978). Social work: A non-existent profession in search of itself. New University Quarterly, 33, 65-73.
9. Bochm, W. (1958). The nature of social work. Social Work, 12, 10-18.
10. Boehm, W. (1959). Objectives of the social work curriculum of the future (Vol.1). New York: Council on Social Work Education.
11. Brieland, D. (1977). Historical overview. Social Work, 22, 340-346.
12. Briar, S. (1977). In summary. Social Work, 22, 415-416, 444.
13. Cheyney, A. (1923). A definition of social work. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
14. Delahanty, D. (1961). Forward. In H. M. Bartlett (Ed.), Forward to analyzing social work practice by fields (pp. v-xiii). New York: National Association of Social Workers.
15. Flexner, A. (1915, May). Education for social work. Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Correction, 42, 576-590.
16. Gordon, W. E. (1962). A critique of the working definition. Social Work, 7(4), 3-13.
17. Hollis, E. V., & Taylor, A. L. (1951). Social work education in the United States: A report of a study made for the National Council on Social Work Education. New York: Columbia University Press.
18. International Federation of Social Workers. (2000). International Federation of Social Workers definition of social work. Berne: Author.
19. James, W. (1906). What pragmatism means. Pragmatism and other essays. New York: Washington Square.
20. Minahan, A. (1981). Purpose and objectives of social work revisited. Social Work, 26, 5-6.
21. National Association of Social Workers. (1977). Special issue on conceptual frameworks. Social Work, 22(5), 338-444.
22. Ramsay, R. (1988). Is social work a profession ? A 21st century answer to a 20th century question. Futurist paper projected as a presentation at the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Association of Social Workers, Ottawa.
23. Ramsay, R. (2001). Revisiting the working definition. Paper presented at the Kentucky conference, "Re-Working the Working Definition," Lexington.
24. Richmond, M. (1917). Social diagnosis. New York: Russell Sage.
25. Richmond, M. (1922). What is social casework? New York: Russell Sage.
26. United Nations. (1950). Training for social work: An international survey. New York: United Nations Press.
27. University of Kentucky. (2001). Re-working the working definition. Lexington: University of Kentucky, School of Social Work.
28. Wakefield, J. (2001). Social work as the pursuit of minimal distributive justice. Paper presented at the Kentucky conference, "Re-Working the Working Definition," Lexington.
29. Younghusband, E. (1949). Report on the employment and training of social workers. London: Dumfermline, Fife.