Gordon Versus the Working Definition: Lessons from a Classic Critique

Abstract

The author critiques Gordon's influential analysis of the National Association of Social Workers' working definition of social work practice (WD). Gordon's critique contains well-founded objections leading to the elimination of the WD's method, purpose, and sanction components. However, Gordon's implied conclusion that social work can be defined by a broad value (i.e., self-realization) and a distinctive knowledge domain (i.e., social transactions) involves fundamental errors repeated in subsequent definitional attempts. Rather than being distinguished by a unique knowledge domain, social work, like other professions, must be defined by a value that is distinctive of the profession yet shared by all social work fields.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bartlett, H. M. (1970). The common base of social work practice. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of Social Workers.

Boehm, W. W. (1958). The nature of social work. Social Work, 3, 10-18.

Gordon, W. E. (1962). A critique of the working definition. Social Work, 7(4), 3-13.

Gordon, W. E. (1965). Knowledge and value: Their distinction and relationship in clarifying social work practice. Social Work, 10(3), 32-35.

Holosko, M. J. (2003). The history of the working definition of practice. Research in Social Work Practice, 13(3), XX

Meyer, C. H. (Ed.) (1983). Clinical social work in the eco-systems perspective. New York: Columbia University Press.

National Association of Social Workers. (1958). Working definition of social work practice. Social Work, 3, 5-8.

Wakefield, J. C. (1988a). Psychotherapy, distributive justice, and social work: Part 1. Distributive justice as a conceptual framework for social work. Social Service Review, 62, 187-210.

Wakefield, J. C. (1988b). Psychotherapy, distributive justice, and social work: Part 2. Psychotherapy and the pursuit of justice. Social Service Review, 62, 353-382.

10.

Wakefield, J. C. (1996a). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective? Part 1. Is the perspective clinically useful? Social Service Review, 70, 1-32.

11.

Wakefield, J. C. (1996b). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective?: Part 2. Does the perspective save social work from incoherence? Social Service Review, 70, 183-213.