Practitioners who undertake PhDs find themselves in a unique research position. They have a dual role of being a researcher, a doctoral candidate and also a practitioner. This paper describes my reflections on the journey of doing a PhD as an experienced social work practitioner. First, I describe my study which designed, developed and evaluated a psychoeducational intervention for foster carers in Ireland. Then, I discuss my reflections on my position in the research and how I theoretically framed my study in a pragmatist approach. I discuss the challenges I experienced as a practitioner and doctoral candidate. I conclude that my position as a practitioner and doctoral candidate was likely to have enhanced my research and the contribution it has made to social work practice.
AkinBATestaMFMcDonaldTP, et al. (2014)
Formative evaluation of an evidence-based intervention to reduce long-term foster care: Assessing readiness for summative evaluation.Journal of Public Child Welfare8(4): 354–374.
2.
BiestaG (2014)
Pragmatising the curriculum: Bringing knowledge back into the curriculum conversation, but via pragmatism.Curriculum Journal25(1): 29–49.
3.
BlytheSWilkesLJacksonD, et al. (2013)
The challenges of being an insider in storytelling research.Nurse Researcher21(1): 8.
4.
BreenL (2007)
The researcher in the middle: Negotiating the insider/outsider dichotomy.The Australian Community Psychologist19(1): 163–174.
5.
BrierleyJA (2017)
The role of a pragmatist paradigm when adopting mixed methods in behavioural accounting research.International Journal of Behavioural Accounting and Finance6(2): 140–154.
6.
Brookman-FrazeeLStahmerAStadnickN, et al. (2016)
Characterizing the use of research-community partnerships in studies of evidence-based interventions in children’s community services.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research43(1): 93–104.
7.
BrysonSAAkinBABlaseKA, et al. (2014)
Selecting an EBP to reduce long-term foster care: Lessons from a university–child welfare agency partnership.Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work11(1–2): 208–221.
CrosseRCanavanJ (2016) Tusla–Child and Family Agency research needs analysis report. Tusla, Child and Family Agency, Dublin, Ireland.
12.
DeweyJ (2008) The Early Works, 1882-1898: 1882-1888. Early Essays and Leibniz’s New Essays Concerning the Human Understanding.
vol. 1.
Carbondale, IL:
SIU Press.
13.
EnglandK (2006)
Producing feminist geographies: Theory, methodologies and research strategies. Approaches to Human Geography1: 361–373.
14.
ErbayE (2017)
Importance of research in social work practice: A pilot study from Turkey. Journal of Social Service Research43(3): 395–403.
15.
FinlayL (2002)
Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice.Qualitative Research2(2): 209–230.
16.
GambrillE (1999)
Evidence-based practice: An alternative to authority-based practice. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services80(4): 341–350.
17.
GoemansAvan GeelMVedderP (2018)
Variability in developmental outcomes of foster children: Implications for research and practice.Children Australia43(2): 116–123.
18.
GommRHammersleyM (2002) Research and Practice: Two Worlds Forever at Odds. Educational Research: Policy making and Practice.
London:
Paul Chapman Publishing.
19.
GreeneJC (1989)
Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis11(3): 255–274.
20.
GringeriCBaruschACambronC (2013)
Epistemology in qualitative social work research: A review of published articles, 2008-2010.Social Work Research37(1): 55–63.
21.
GrixJ (2002)
Introducing students to the generic terminology of social research.Politics22(3): 175–186.
22.
HaightWLBidwellLN (2016) Mixed Methods Research for Social Work: Integrating Methodologies to Strengthen Practice and Policy.
Chicago, IL:
Lyceum.
23.
Heslehurst N, Dinsdale S, Sedgewick G, Simpson H, Sen S, Summerbell CD and Rankin J (2015) An evaluation of the implementation of maternal obesity pathways of care: a mixed methods study with data integration. PloS one 10(5): e0127122.
HopkinsPE (2007)
Positionalities and knowledge: Negotiating ethics in practice. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies6(3): 386–394.
26.
HothersallSJ (2016)
Epistemology and social work: Integrating theory, research and practice through philosophical pragmatism.Social Work and Social Sciences Review18(3): 33–67.
27.
JohnsonRBOnwuegbuzieAJ (2004)
Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come.Educational Researcher33(7): 14–26.
28.
JohnsonRBOnwuegbuzieAJTurnerLA (2007)
Toward a definition of mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(2): 112–133.
29.
KaushikVWalshCA (2019)
Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research.Social Sciences8(9): 255.
30.
LincolnYSLynhamSAGubaEG (2011)
Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited.The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research4: 97–128.
31.
LottyMDunn-GalvinABantry-WhiteE (2020)
Effectiveness of a trauma-informed care psychoeducational program for foster carers – Evaluation of the fostering connections program.Child Abuse & Neglect102: 104390.
32.
LuntNShawI (2017)
Good practice in the conduct and reporting of practitioner research: Reflections from social work and social care.Practice29(3): 201–218.
33.
McDermottF (2005)
Researching groupwork: Outsider and insider perspectives.Groupwork15(1): 90–108.
34.
MalterudK (2001)
The art and science of clinical knowledge: Evidence beyond measures and numbers.The Lancet358(9279): 397–400.
35.
MegaheadHALeeRE (2012)
Adaptation to stress: A common model and method to facilitate within- and cross-cultural evaluation of foster families.Journal of Comparative Family Studies43(5): 773–XIII.
36.
MooreGFAudreySBarkerM, et al. (2015)
Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance.BMJ350: h1258.
37.
MorganDL (2007)
Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods.Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(1): 48–76.
38.
MorganDL (2013) Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: A Pragmatic Approach.
Atlanta, GA:
SAGE.
39.
MorganDL (2014)
Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research.Qualitative Inquiry20(8): 1045–1053.
40.
NadinSCassellC (2006)
The use of a research diary as a tool for reflexive practice.Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management3(3): 208–217.
41.
OnwuegbuzieAJJohnsonRBCollinsKMT (2009)
Call for mixed analysis: A philosophical framework for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches.International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches3(2): 114–139.
42.
OrtlippM (2008)
Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process.The Qualitative Report13(4): 695–705.
43.
RitchieJLewisJNichollsCM, et al. (2013) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers.
London:
SAGE.
44.
RuchGJulkunenI (eds) (2016) Relationship-Based Research in Social Work.
London, UK:
Jessica Kinglsley Publishers.
45.
SanchiricoALauWJJablonkaK, et al. (1998)
Foster parent involvement in service planning: Does it increase job satisfaction?Children and Youth Services Review20(4): 325–346.
46.
Schiellerup (2008)
Stop making sense: The trials and tribulations of qualitative data analysis.Area40(2): 163–171.
47.
Scott PJ and Briggs JS (2009) A Pragmatist Argument for MIxed Methodology in Medical Informatics. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 3(3): 223–41.
48.
Shannon-BakerP (2016)
Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research10(4): 319–334.
49.
StigeBMalterudKMidtgardenT (2009)
Toward an agenda for evaluation of qualitative research.Qualitative Health Research19(10): 1504–1516.
50.
TashakkoriATeddlieC (2010)
Putting the human back in “Human Research Methodology”: The researcher in mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research4(4): 271–277.
51.
TrocméNRoyCEspositoT (2016)
Building research capacity in child welfare in Canada.Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health10(1): 16.
