LIST OF FIGURES
1.3 AIMS AND STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY
The overall research objectives of this study are to investigate the nature and role of SSW within the context of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems based on theoretical examinations and empirical investigations, as well as to map the field of cross-national comparative research in SSW. The pair of countries simultaneously represents both the object and context of the study (Kohn, 1987, pp. 714–715). That is, on the one hand, the nature and role of SSW in both countries is to be compared;
however, on the other hand, the two countries are also seen as the context in
which the nature and role of SSW develop. The comparison has an idiographic and melioristic function (Hörner, 1997, p. 70); thus, it aims to clarify the characteristics of the nature and role of SSW in another country (Finland) as compared to one’s own (Germany) and that the reasons for them, as well as to identify alternative approaches that can lead to improvements in both countries. The entire construction is methodologically bound together by the
“multi-stage model of comparison” (Friesenhahn & Kniephoff-Knebel, 2011, pp. 41–48): after the findings of the study are systematised and juxtaposed, they will be interpreted against the background of the context of origin.
The theoretical perspectives applied in this study are Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory and Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. The systems theory enables insight into the functional differentiation in a modern society and into the relations between systems (Becker & Reinhardt-Becker, 2001, p. 63). Therefore, it provides insights into the interrelations between SSW, welfare regimes and child welfare systems and, thus, in the nature and role of SSW in the context of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems. In addition, the ecological systems theory focuses on the relations between a person and their environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1995, p.
623) and clarifies that not only a setting itself is of specific importance, but also the way in which it is subjectively perceived (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 22). It therefore supports the understanding of how school social workers perceive their assigned roles and the identification of potential conflicts between these assigned roles and subjective perceptions concerning these roles. Thus, both perspectives complement each other and are useful in providing the explanatory background for both countries to compare the nature and role of SSW within the context of welfare regimes and child welfare systems.
To achieve the overall research objectives, four sub-studies – referred to as sub-studies 1, 2, 3 and 4 – were conducted; two sub-studies are theory-oriented (sub-studies 1 and 2) and two sub-studies are empirically-theory-oriented (sub-studies 3 and 4). Each sub-study focuses on a specific aspect with respect to the set objectives. Sub-studies 1 and 2 theoretically examined relevant aspects of the two reference systems, namely education and CYW, as well as the terminological and conceptual diversity of SSW in Germany (sub-study 1), and mapped the field of cross-national comparative research in SSW
(sub-study 2). Sub-studies 3 and 4 empirically investigated the SSW’s role and nature in the context of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems by investigating the response of German and Finnish school social workers to a case vignette (sub-study 3) and by investigating the work-related stressors that accompany them while assessing children’s well-being (sub-study 4).
Sub-studies 1, 3 and 4 are built one upon the other, whereas sub-study 2 provides knowledge regarding the nature, role and tasks of SSW not only in Germany and Finland but also in a global context. Table 1 provides an overview of the four sub-studies/articles and the summary section (see Table 1).
Table 1 Overview of the four sub-studies/articles and the summary Journal of School Social Work, 2(1).
• To identify relevant aspects of the two
(2020). Mapping the field of international comparative school social workers to a case vignette
• To identify similarities and differences against
Sub-study/Article Publication Research aim
• To identify similarities and differences against
Summary • To provide the theoretical
foundations of this study
• To conceptualise the nature and role of SSW in the context of the
• To identify similarities and differences, to find explanations and to develop recommendations for both countries
Sub-study 1, the starting point of this study, is a single-country study. Its aim was to identify the relevant aspects of the two reference systems, namely, education and CYW, as well as to clarify the terminological and conceptual diversity of SSW in Germany based on a systematic approach to reviewing the literature and creating a narrative synthesis. In this study, a great heterogeneity of terminologies and concepts was expected due to the lack of a clear section in the SGB VIII concerning SSW and the cultural sovereignty of the federal states in the realms of education, science and culture. Both of these factors have, in turn, an influence on the nature, roles and tasks and methods used in SSW. As SSW in Finland is regulated by law, a greater homogeneity was presumed from a German perspective; therefore, this study focused solely on Germany. Hence, sub-study 1 was seen as an important and necessary step to allow a later juxtapositioning and comparison with Finland; in addition, the findings form the foundation of the first comparison with Finland.
Sub-study 2, which is a literature review, mapped the field of cross-national comparative research in SSW. Its aims were to discuss central issues within cross-national comparative research, particularly why, how, and what to compare, to clarify methodological challenges and to present main focus areas, comparative countries and SSW practice themes of previous studies and publications. These aims were achieved based on a systematic literature review, narrative synthesis and a coding process (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003). Gaps in existing research were identified and recommendations for future research and SSW practice developed. This study was considered an important contribution as there is, to the best knowledge of the author, no previous study that maps the field of cross-national comparative research in SSW. In addition, the identified practice themes provide knowledge concerning the nature, role and tasks of SSW in Germany and Finland, as well as globally.
The findings of sub-study 1 reveal that the role of SSW in cases of child maltreatment is hardly mentioned in the literature. Sub-study 3 researched and compared the responses of German and Finnish school social workers to an exemplary case of child maltreatment based on semi-structured interviews, the case vignette technique and computer-guided content-structuring content analysis (Kuckartz, 2016). Similarities and differences were identified, explanations for these developed, against the background
of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems, and recommendations made. This study was conducted as it was presumed that investigating the role of SSW in processing child maltreatment would provide insight into the nature and role of SSW within the contexts of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems.
Sub-study 4 researched and compared the work-related stressors that accompany the German and Finnish school social workers while assessing children’s well-being based on semi-structured interviews, the case vignette technique and a coding process (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003). Similarities and predominately differences were identified, explanations for these were developed against the background of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems and recommendations were made. This study was conducted as it was presumed that investigating work-related stressors that accompany school social workers while assessing children’s well-being would provide insight into the nature and role of SSW within the context of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems.
Linking the findings of the four sub-studies revealed extensive knowledge regarding the nature and role of SSW within the contexts of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems, as well as in the global context. Besides discussing the results of the four sub-studies, this summary aims to present the theoretical foundations of this study and to investigate the nature and role of SSW in the contexts of the welfare regimes and child welfare systems of the two focal countries. Since SSW is defined as social work that is practiced in schools, relevant aspects of the German and Finnish education systems and the organisation of the school were investigated to a reasonable extent.
In line with the overall methodological considerations of this study (Friesenhahn & Kniephoff-Knebel, 2011), chapters 2 and 3 provide country information separately and only brief concluding remarks for reasons of clarity. Chapter 2 is focused on practical and professional issues related to SSW. First, SSW in an international context is presented, after which SSW in Germany and Finland is outlined; a specific focus is placed not only on the roles, tasks and work methods used in SSW, but also on the formal requirements to act as a school social worker. Chapter 3 provides the theoretical perspectives
of this study with respect to SSW. The theoretical framework is presented first, with specific attention paid to the systems theory of Luhmann and the ecological systems theory of Bronfenbrenner. There follows an outline of SSW with respect to different societal systems, particularly the German and Finnish welfare regimes, child welfare systems and education systems and a juxtaposition and summarised presentation.
Chapter 4 shows the methodological aspects of this study; first, the research and comparative processes are presented, and thereafter the data collection and analysis methods. Finally, aspects regarding trustworthiness and ethical considerations are provided. Chapter 5 presents the findings of the theoretical examinations and empirical investigations of this study. First, the findings related to the nature and role of SSW within the context of the German and Finnish welfare regimes and child welfare systems are presented. A specific focus is on the characteristics of these societal systems from a comparative perspective, before the various roles, tasks and work methods of SSW are shown. The role of SSW in cases of child maltreatment, and the work-related stressors that accompany them while assessing children’s well-being, are also examined. Second, the findings related to cross-national comparative research in SSW, as well as the nature, roles and tasks of SSW in a global context, are outlined.
Chapter 6 provides the conclusion of this study. In line with the overall methodological considerations (Friesenhahn & Kniephoff-Knebel, 2011), the findings of this study will be embedded within their country-specific context.
The interrelations between SSW, welfare regimes and child welfare systems are provided, after which the interrelated nature of SSW is outlined. Chapter 7 provides a discussion of this study. First, the theoretical perspectives of this study and the model that emerged from the interrelated nature of SSW are reflected upon. Then, an evaluation of this study is undertaken before recommendations and suggestions for future research are presented and the value of comparing is discussed.