Picture of virus

Open Access research that helps to deliver "better medicines"...

Strathprints makes available scholarly Open Access content by the Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences (SIPBS), a major research centre in Scotland and amongst the UK's top schools of pharmacy.

Research at SIPBS includes the "New medicines", "Better medicines" and "Better use of medicines" research groups. Together their research explores multidisciplinary approaches to improve understanding of fundamental bioscience and identify novel therapeutic targets with the aim of developing therapeutic interventions, investigation of the development and manufacture of drug substances and products, and harnessing Scotland's rich health informatics datasets to inform stratified medicine approaches and investigate the impact of public health interventions.

Explore Open Access research by SIPBS. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

Parallel processes : getting it write?

Emond, Ruth and Steckley, Laura and Roesch-Marsh, Autumn (2017) Parallel processes : getting it write? Journal of Social Work Practice. pp. 1-28. ISSN 1465-3885

[img] Text (Emond-etal-JSWP2017-Parallel-processes-getting)
Emond_etal_JSWP2017_Parallel_processes_getting.pdf
Accepted Author Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 30 November 2018.

Download (1MB) | Request a copy from the Strathclyde author

Abstract

This paper offers a critical reflection on the processes surrounding the writing of a book aimed at foster carers and residential workers. By utilising the concept of parallel process as well as the four modes of reflection identified by Ruch (2000), we explore the ways in which the wider context of both direct work with children and reflective practice have been impacted by the tensions between relationally based, child-centred practice and wider managerialist imperatives. The paper draws parallels between these practice tensions and those currently in play within the academy. By employing a dialogical and reflective analysis of the process and interactions surrounding the writing of a practitioner-targeted book, the paper demonstrates the ways in which critical and process reflection post event took place, considering the heretofore unexplored parallel processes between writing for practice, and practice. In so doing, it identifies the ways in which the authors mirrored practitioners in relation to the management of anxiety, a sense of constrained autonomy and confidence, and an avoidance of recognising and challenging structural and political context. Implications for the creation of practice literature and for the academy are considered.