social work research principles

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Fundamentals of Social Work Research

• Rafael J. Engel - University of Pittsburgh, USA
• Russell K. Schutt - University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
• Description

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Supplements

The open-access Student Study Site includes the following:

• Mobile-friendly eFlashcards reinforce understanding of key terms and concepts that have been outlined in the chapters.
• Mobile-friendly web quizzes allow for independent assessment of progress made in learning course material.
• EXCLUSIVE! Access to certain full-text SAGE journal articles that have been carefully selected for each chapter. Each article supports and expands on the concepts presented in the chapter. This feature also provides questions to focus and guide student interpretation. Combine cutting-edge academic journal scholarship with the topics in your course for a robust classroom experience.
• Carefully selected, web-based video resources feature relevant interviews, lectures, personal stories, inquiries, and other content for use in independent or classroom-based explorations of key topics.
• Web resources are included for further research and insights.
• Web exercises direct you to useful and current web resources, along with creative activities to extend and reinforce learning or allow for further research on important chapter topics. 
• Interactive Exercises based on real research examples allow for improving understanding of methodological concepts.
• GSS Datasets for quantitative data analysis practice.

The open-access Instructor Resource Site includes the following:

·  A Microsoft® Word   test bank is available containing multiple choice, true/false, short answer, and essay questions for each chapter. The test bank provides you with a diverse range of pre-written options as well as the opportunity for editing any question and/or inserting your own personalized questions to effectively assess students’ progress and understanding.

·  A Respondus electronic test bank  is available and can be used on PCs. The test bank contains multiple choice, true/false, short answer, and essay questions for each chapter and provides you with a diverse range of pre-written options as well as the opportunity for editing any question and/or inserting your own personalized questions to effectively assess students’ progress and understanding. Respondus is also compatible with many popular learning management systems so you can easily get your test questions into your online course.

·  Editable, chapter-specific Microsoft® PowerPoint® slides offer you complete flexibility in easily creating a multimedia presentation for your course. Highlight essential content, features, and artwork from the book.

·    Lecture notes summarize key concepts on a chapter-by-chapter basis to help with preparation for lectures and class discussions.

·  EXCLUSIVE! Access to certain full-text SAGE journal articles that have been carefully selected for each chapter. Each article supports and expands on the concepts presented in the chapter. This feature also provides questions to focus and guide student interpretation. Combine cutting-edge academic journal scholarship with the topics in your course for a robust classroom experience.

·  Sample course syllabi provide suggested models for use when creating the syllabi for your courses.

·  Suggested course projects are designed to promote students’ in-depth engagement with course material.

·  Carefully selected, web-based video resources feature relevant interviews, lectures, personal stories, inquiries, and other content for use in independent or classroom-based explorations of key topics.

·  Web resources are included for further research and insights.

NEW TO THIS EDITION:

• A new chapter devoted to research ethics lays the foundation for the specific ethics sections in the individual chapters and includes coverage of internet-based research with more on netnography and interviewing online.
• New sections discuss mixed methods research and community-based participatory research .
• An added focus on qualitative research includes questions to use in evaluating a qualitative research study and a new Appendix D, "How to Read a Qualitative Research Article.”
• Updated examples integrate content on diversity and evidence-based practice.
• A new matrix links the topics covered in the book with CSWE Core Competencies.
• Additional content on evidence-based practice includes the steps associated with the EBP decision model and the challenges in implementing EBP.
• Coverage of emerging research efforts that use the Internet and other electronic media as a research tool has been added.
• Many findings are now presented through presentations, publications, and reports .

KEY FEATURES:

• Text content is fully integrated with CSWE Competencies .
• An engaging writing style coupled with real, applied examples demonstrates why a study of research methods is relevant and interesting to future social workers.
• Research with diverse populations is infused into every chapter.
• Ethical concerns are highlighted in each chapter, along with chapter-ending ethics exercises.
• Evidence-based practice is integrated throughout the text.
• Chapter-ending exercises ask students to critically evaluate quantitative and qualitative research studies.
• An expansive Student Study Site helps students master key topics through a variety of contemporary research examples, interactive exercises, quizzes, e-flashcards, web exercises, and more.

Sample Materials & Chapters

For instructors, select a purchasing option.

• Skip to header navigation
• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• Member login

International Federation of Social Workers

Global Online conference

Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles

July 2, 2018

Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles: 

This Statement of Ethical Principles (hereafter referred to as the Statement) serves as an overarching framework for social workers to work towards the highest possible standards of professional integrity.

Implicit in our acceptance of this Statement as social work practitioners, educators, students, and researchers is our commitment to uphold the core values and principles of the social work profession as set out in this Statement.

An array of values and ethical principles inform us as social workers; this reality was recognized in 2014 by the International Federation of Social Workers and The International Association of Schools of Social Work in the global definition of social work, which is layered and encourages regional and national amplifications.

All IFSW policies including the definition of social work stem from these ethical principles.

Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that facilitates social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people. Principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities are central to social work. Underpinned by theories of social work, social sciences, humanities and indigenous knowledge, social work engages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing . http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work/  

Principles:

• Recognition of the Inherent Dignity of Humanity

Social workers recognize and respect the inherent dignity and worth of all human beings in attitude, word, and deed. We respect all persons, but we challenge beliefs and actions of those persons who devalue or stigmatize themselves or other persons.

• Promoting Human Rights

Social workers embrace and promote the fundamental and inalienable rights of all human beings. Social work is based on respect for the inherent worth, dignity of all people and the individual and social /civil rights that follow from this. Social workers often work with people to find an appropriate balance between competing human rights.

• Promoting Social Justice

Social workers have a responsibility to engage people in achieving social justice, in relation to society generally, and in relation to the people with whom they work. This means:

3.1 Challenging Discrimination and Institutional Oppression

Social workers promote social justice in relation to society generally and to the people with whom they work.

Social workers challenge discrimination, which includes but is not limited to age, capacity, civil status, class, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, language, nationality (or lack thereof), opinions, other physical characteristics, physical or mental abilities, political beliefs, poverty, race, relationship status, religion, sex, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, spiritual beliefs, or family structure.

3.2 Respect for Diversity

Social workers work toward strengthening inclusive communities that respect the ethnic and cultural diversity of societies, taking account of individual, family, group, and community differences.

3.3 Access to Equitable Resources

Social workers advocate and work toward access and the equitable distribution of resources and wealth.

3.4 Challenging Unjust Policies and Practices

Social workers work to bring to the attention of their employers, policymakers, politicians, and the public situations in which policies and resources are inadequate or in which policies and practices are oppressive, unfair, or harmful. In doing so, social workers must not be penalized.

Social workers must be aware of situations that might threaten their own safety and security, and they must make judicious choices in such circumstances. Social workers are not compelled to act when it would put themselves at risk.

3.5 Building Solidarity

Social workers actively work in communities and with their colleagues, within and outside of the profession, to build networks of solidarity to work toward transformational change and inclusive and responsible societies.  

• Promoting the Right to Self-Determination

Social workers respect and promote people’s rights to make their own choices and decisions, provided this does not threaten the rights and legitimate interests of others.

• Promoting the Right to Participation

Social workers work toward building the self-esteem and capabilities of people, promoting their full involvement and participation in all aspects of decisions and actions that affect their lives.

• Respect for Confidentiality and Privacy

6.1  Social workers respect and work in accordance with people’s rights to confidentiality and privacy unless there is risk of harm to the self or to others or other statutory restrictions.

6.2 Social workers inform the people with whom they engage about such limits to confidentiality and privacy.

• Treating People as Whole Persons

Social workers recognize the biological, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions of people’s lives and understand and treat all people as whole persons. Such recognition is used to formulate holistic assessments and interventions with the full participation of people, organizations, and communities with whom social workers engage.

• Ethical Use of Technology and Social Media

8.1 The ethical principles in this Statement apply to all contexts of social work practice, education, and research, whether it involves direct face-to-face contact or through use of digital technology and social media.

8.2 Social workers must recognize that the use of digital technology and social media may pose threats to the practice of many ethical standards including but not limited to privacy and confidentiality, conflicts of interest, competence, and documentation and must obtain the necessary knowledge and skills to guard against unethical practice when using technology.

• Professional Integrity

9.1 It is the responsibility of national associations and organizations to develop and regularly update their own codes of ethics or ethical guidelines, to be consistent with this Statement, considering local situations. It is also the responsibility of national organizations to inform social workers and schools of social work about this Statement of Ethical Principles and their own ethical guidelines. Social workers should act in accordance with the current ethical code or guidelines in their country.

9.2 Social workers must hold the required qualifications and develop and maintain the required skills and competencies to do their job.

9.3 Social workers support peace and nonviolence. Social workers may work alongside military personnel for humanitarian purposes and work toward peacebuilding and reconstruction. Social workers operating within a military or peacekeeping context must always support the dignity and agency of people as their primary focus. Social workers must not allow their knowledge and skills to be used for inhumane purposes, such as torture, military surveillance, terrorism, or conversion therapy, and they should not use weapons in their professional or personal capacities against people.

9.4 Social workers must act with integrity. This includes not abusing their positions of power and relationships of trust with people that they engage with; they recognize the boundaries between personal and professional life and do not abuse their positions for personal material benefit or gain.

9.5 Social workers recognize that the giving and receiving of small gifts is a part of the social work and cultural experience in some cultures and countries. In such situations, this should be referenced in the country’s code of ethics.

9.6 Social workers have a duty to take the necessary steps to care for themselves professionally and personally in the workplace, in their private lives and in society.

9.7 Social workers acknowledge that they are accountable for their actions to the people they work with; their colleagues; their employers; their professional associations; and local, national, and international laws and conventions and that these accountabilities may conflict, which must be negotiated to minimize harm to all persons. Decisions should always be informed by empirical evidence; practice wisdom; and ethical, legal, and cultural considerations. Social workers must be prepared to be transparent about the reasons for their decisions.

9.8 Social workers and their employing bodies work to create conditions in their workplace environments and in their countries, where the principles of this Statement and those of their own national codes are discussed, evaluated, and upheld. Social workers and their employing bodies foster and engage in debate to facilitate ethically informed decisions.

Spanish translation – Traducción Español

Chinese Translation 全球社會工作倫理原則聲明 (繁體字譯本)

The Global Statement of Ethical Principles was approved at the General Meetings of the International Federation of Social Workers and the General Assembly of the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW) in Dublin, Ireland, in July 2018. IASSW additionally endorsed a longer version:  Global-Social-Work-Statement-of-Ethical-Principles-IASSW-27-April-2018-1

National Code of Ethics

National Codes of Ethics of Social Work adopted by IFSW Member organisations. The Codes of Ethics are in the national languages of the different countries. More national codes of ethics will soon be added to the ones below:

• Canada | Guidelines for ethical practice
• Finland (Englis)
• Finland (Finish)
• Puerto Rico English | Spanish
• South Korea English | Korean
• Sweden English | Swedish
• Switzerland English |  German | French | Italian
• Turkey English | Turkish
• United Kingdom
• Login / Account
• Documentation
• Online Participation
• Constitution/ Governance
• Secretariat
• Our members
• General Meetings
• Executive Meetings
• Meeting papers 2018
• Global Definition of Social Work
• Meet Social Workers from around the world
• Frequently Asked Questions
• IFSW Africa
• IFSW Asia and Pacific
• IFSW Europe
• IFSW Latin America and Caribbean
• IFSW North America
• Education Commission
• Ethics Commission
• Indigenous Commission
• United Nations Commission
• Information Hub
• Upcoming Events
• Keynote Speakers
• Global Agenda
• Archive: European DM 2021
• The Global Agenda
• World Social Work Day

A guide to social work ethics

You might have heard the phrase “social work ethics” but may be confused by what the term means and how it applies to the social work profession. This guide covers social work ethics, how ethics guide social workers’ behaviors and actions, and how professionals build their knowledge and skills around ethical dilemmas. In addition, state requirements for ethics training are covered, as is a discussion around how social work ethics apply to our now largely remote working world.   

IN THIS GUIDE

• Where do social work ethics come from?

How are social workers trained in ethics?

State requirements for ethics training.

• Ethics in a remote work world

What are social work ethics?

Ethics are a code of morals or a moral philosophy that governs an individual’s behaviors and actions. It is also considered a set of standards or code of conduct set forth by a company or profession. Social work ethics are guidelines that social workers must abide by when acting in their professional capacity. Ethics differentiate between right and wrong and describe actions that are permissible or forbidden. 

Who develops social work ethics?

The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) develops ethical guidelines for social workers. NASW is the largest membership organization of professional social workers around the world. The NASW establishes the principles, values, and standards that guide the profession. In addition, the organization strives to enhance the professional development and growth of its members and promote sound social policies. 

The first NASW Code of Ethics was developed and approved in 1960. Revisions were made in 1967, 1979, 1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, and 2008. The latest revision occurred to the NASW Code of Ethics in August 2017.  

A social worker does not need to be a member of NASW to be accountable to the professional ethical standards. However, NASW members are required to uphold the Code of Ethics. In addition, as will be discussed later in this guide, many states incorporate the Code of Ethics into their licensing requirements, so any licensed social worker in that state must also abide by the ethical guidelines set forth by NASW. 

NASW states that the profession has overarching core values that guide the development of ethical principles. In turn, these create the format for social work ethical standards. 

What are the social work ethical principles?

Social work ethics are based on the profession’s core values of social justice, service, dignity, and worth of each person, integrity, the importance of human relationships, and competence. These are the overarching ideals to which all social work professionals should aspire. These ethical principles lay the foundation for specific ethical standards that social workers need to follow.

Social work ethical principles include:

• Social justice: social workers are to challenge social injustice and seek social change on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individuals and groups of people. 
• Service: the primary goals of the profession are to address social problems and help people in need. 
• Dignity and worth: social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of each person, being mindful of diversity, and interact with each individual in a caring and respectful manner.
• Integrity: social workers are trustworthy, understanding the profession’s ethical responsibilities and acting in ways that are consistent with those requirements.
• Importance of human relationships: social workers understand that relationships are a critical vehicle of change and work to include clients as partners in the helping process.
• Competency: social workers are constantly increasing their skills and knowledge to apply these improved skills in practice. Social workers also contribute to the professions’ knowledge base by conducting, reading, and promoting research.     

What are the social work ethical standards?

According to the Code of Ethics , the ethical standards categories concern social workers’ ethical responsibilities:

• To colleagues
• In practice settings
• As professionals
• To the social work profession
• To the broader society

Within each category are several standards that guide how a social worker is to act. Each standard also has a number of both enforceable and aspirational guidelines within it for social workers to follow. 

Under Ethical Standard Category 1, Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to Clients fall the following standards:

• Commitment to clients
• Self-determination
• Informed consent
• Cultural awareness and diversity
• Conflicts of interest
• Privacy and confidentiality
• Access to records
• Sexual relationships
• Physical contact
• Sexual harassment
• Derogatory language
• Payment for services
• Clients who lack decision-making capacity
• Interruption of services
• Referral for services
• Termination of services

Standard Category 2, which is Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to Colleagues includes:

• Confidentiality
• Interdisciplinary collaboration
• Disputes involving colleagues
• Consultation
• Impairment of colleagues
• Incompetence of colleagues
• Unethical conduct of colleagues

Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities in Practice Settings is Standard Category 3 and includes:

• Supervision and consultation
• Education and training
• Performance evaluation
• Client records
• Client transfer
• Administration
• Continuing education and staff development
• Commitments to employers
• Labor-management disputes

Standard Category 4 is Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities as Professionals, which includes:

• Discrimination
• Private conduct
• Dishonesty, fraud, and deception
• Misrepresentation
• Solicitations
• Acknowledging credit

Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to the Social Work Profession is Standard Category 5 and encompasses:

• Integrity of the profession
• Evaluation and research

Standard Category 6 is Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to the Broader Society and includes: 

• Social welfare
• Public participation
• Public emergencies
• Social and Political action

Social workers receive ethical training both while in school and after graduation via their workplace through professional development training or continuing education opportunities.  Ethics training is a necessary component of the profession and requires ongoing knowledge and skills development, particularly as advances happen with technology, and changes occur in the social climate. 

Most social work education programs are accredited through the Council for Social Work Education . This organization certifies that the bachelor’s or master’s degree program has met the standards set forth for professional social work education. To be accredited, the educational program must demonstrate its commitment to educating and assessing students in their adherence to following CSWE’s nine social work competencies.  

Each competency ties back into various portions of the NASW Code of Ethics.  Educators must weave ethical discussions, simulations, lectures, and readings into their courses and provide students opportunities to consider or role play ethical dilemmas and scenarios that might arise in their work.  

As a component of continued accreditation, instructors review students at the end of the course on how well each student met the course’s social work competency or competencies. This task also helps instructors review their own work and make adjustments as necessary to improve future students’ knowledge and skills in recognizing and adhering to the NASW Code of Ethics.  

Graduates of social work programs interested in obtaining social work licensure must complete a licensure examination. Professionals studying to take the exam often learn or refresh their knowledge about ethical responsibilities and requirements through exam study guides or study groups, as the exam contains questions about ethical standards and hypothetical ethical scenarios.

Agencies also further a social workers’ knowledge and skills via informal staff supervision and professional development training. Supervisors should work with new professionals to discuss concerning situations and talk about how the social worker should handle ethical dilemmas. Continuing education is also a method for ongoing training in the field of ethics. Conferences, webinars, and online courses are all methods by which someone can complete ethics training.  These training programs often provide continuing education credits necessary to maintain employment or professional certifications or licensure.

In addition, NASW offers free online training on the latest changes to the Code of Ethics. Members can also earn two continuing education credits for free by completing this training module. Non-NASW members can earn continuing education credits with a nominal fee.

As previously mentioned, states require specific numbers of ethics continuing education hours or credits for social work certification or licensure. These hours are part of more extensive credit requirements that the professional must complete within a specific timeframe. Most states require a social worker to complete three hours of ethics training every two years.  Below are some other examples from states that have different requirements:

• Idaho mandates an hour of ethics training annually
• Virginia insists on 1.5 hours of training every two years
• Two hours of ethics training every two years is required by Minnesota and North Dakota
• in Maine , Mississippi, North Carolina , and Wisconsin mandate four hours of training every two years.
• Georgia and New Jersey require five hours every two years
• California , New Hampshire , Oregon , Texas , and Washington mandate six hours of training every two years
• Michigan requires 5 hours of ethics training every three years
• Connecticut and West Virginia do not specifically mandate ethics training in their annual training hour requirements but rather recommend ethics training to social work professionals

Be sure to check the websites of each states’ licensing board for the most up-to-date requirements.

How do social work ethics apply in a remote work world?

Now that more people, both social work professionals, and their clients, are working remotely, adaptations were needed to accommodate these changes. Telehealth, which provides health and mental health services virtually either by phone or via computer, has quickly become the norm in the time of social distancing.  Despite services not being provided face to face with clients, social workers must still follow the Code of Ethics.  

Thankfully, several standards already address technology and social work, including:

Standard 1.03 – Informed Consent: (e) Social workers should discuss with clients the social workers’ policies concerning the use of technology in the provision of professional services. (g) Social workers who use technology to provide social work services should assess the clients’ suitability and capacity for electronic and remote services. Social workers should consider the clients’ intellectual, emotional, and physical ability to use technology to receive services and the clients’ ability to understand the potential benefits, risks, and limitations of such services. If clients do not wish to use services provided through technology, social workers should help them identify alternate methods of service.

Standard 1.04 – Competence: (d) Social workers who use technology in the provision of social work services should ensure that they have the necessary knowledge and skills to provide such services in a competent manner. This includes understanding the special communication challenges when using technology and the ability to implement strategies to address these challenges.

Standard 1.05 – Cultural Awareness and Social Diversity: (d) Social workers who provide electronic social work services should be aware of cultural and socioeconomic differences among clients and how they may use electronic technology. Social workers should assess cultural, environmental, economic, mental or physical ability, linguistic, and other issues that may affect the delivery or use of these services.

Standard 1.07 – Privacy and Confidentiality: (m) Social workers should take reasonable steps to protect the confidentiality of electronic communications, including information provided to clients or third parties. Social workers should use applicable safeguards (such as encryption,firewalls, and passwords) when using electronic communications such as e-mail, online posts, online chat sessions, mobile communication, and text messages.

The committee that helped develop the latest round of revisions to the Code of Ethics in 2017 could not have predicted the reasons for remote service provision that we face today. Thankfully, however, the committee considered technology and how it could and might be used to serve clients as they drafted revisions. These standards have and continue to serve the profession well. 

Social work ethics are guidelines that social workers must abide by when acting in their professional capacity. Ethics differentiate between right and wrong and describe actions that are permissible or forbidden. Social workers have ethical responsibilities to clients, colleagues, practice settings, professionals, the social work profession, and the broader society.  The National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics is the guidebook on how social workers can meet those essential ethical responsibilities.

Aadam, B., Petrakis, M. (2020). Ethics, values, and recovery in mental health social work practice. In: Ow R., Poon, A. (eds) Mental Health and Social Work. Springer.

McCarthy, L.P., Imboden, R., Shdaimah, C.S., & Forrester, P. (2020). ‘Ethics are messy’: Supervision as a tool to help social workers manage ethical challenges. Ethics and Social Welfare, 14 (1):118-134.

National Association of Social Workers. (2017). Code of Ethics. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics .

Reamer, F.G. (2018). Social Work Values and Ethics. Columbia University Press.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

3.2: Overview of the Research Process

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 26219

• Anol Bhattacherjee
• University of South Florida via Global Text Project

So how do our mental paradigms shape social science research? At its core, all scientific research is an iterative process of observation, rationalization, and validation. In the observation phase, we observe a natural or social phenomenon, event, or behavior that interests us. In the rationalization phase, we try to make sense of or the observed phenomenon, event, or behavior by logically connecting the different pieces of the puzzle that we observe, which in some cases, may lead to the construction of a theory. Finally, in the validation phase, we test our theories using a scientific method through a process of data collection and analysis, and in doing so, possibly modify or extend our initial theory. However, research designs vary based on whether the researcher starts at observation and attempts to rationalize the observations (inductive research), or whether the researcher starts at an ex ante rationalization or a theory and attempts to validate the theory (deductive research). Hence, the observation-rationalization-validation cycle is very similar to the induction-deduction cycle of research discussed in Chapter 1.

Most traditional research tends to be deductive and functionalistic in nature. Figure 3.2 provides a schematic view of such a research project. This figure depicts a series of activities to be performed in functionalist research, categorized into three phases: exploration, research design, and research execution. Note that this generalized design is not a roadmap or flowchart for all research. It applies only to functionalistic research, and it can and should be modified to fit the needs of a specific project.

The first phase of research is exploration . This phase includes exploring and selecting research questions for further investigation, examining the published literature in the area of inquiry to understand the current state of knowledge in that area, and identifying theories that may help answer the research questions of interest.

The first step in the exploration phase is identifying one or more research questions dealing with a specific behavior, event, or phenomena of interest. Research questions are specific questions about a behavior, event, or phenomena of interest that you wish to seek answers for in your research. Examples include what factors motivate consumers to purchase goods and services online without knowing the vendors of these goods or services, how can we make high school students more creative, and why do some people commit terrorist acts. Research questions can delve into issues of what, why, how, when, and so forth. More interesting research questions are those that appeal to a broader population (e.g., “how can firms innovate” is a more interesting research question than “how can Chinese firms innovate in the service-sector”), address real and complex problems (in contrast to hypothetical or “toy” problems), and where the answers are not obvious. Narrowly focused research questions (often with a binary yes/no answer) tend to be less useful and less interesting and less suited to capturing the subtle nuances of social phenomena. Uninteresting research questions generally lead to uninteresting and unpublishable research findings.

The next step is to conduct a literature review of the domain of interest. The purpose of a literature review is three-fold: (1) to survey the current state of knowledge in the area of inquiry, (2) to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and (3) to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area. Literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases. Keywords can be combined using “and” and “or” operations to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a shortlist of relevant articles is generated from the keyword search, the researcher must then manually browse through each article, or at least its abstract section, to determine the suitability of that article for a detailed review. Literature reviews should be reasonably complete, and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables, and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix. A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature (which would obviate the need to study them again), whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review. The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions.

Since functionalist (deductive) research involves theory-testing, the third step is to identify one or more theories can help address the desired research questions. While the literature review may uncover a wide range of concepts or constructs potentially related to the phenomenon of interest, a theory will help identify which of these constructs is logically relevant to the target phenomenon and how. Forgoing theories may result in measuring a wide range of less relevant, marginally relevant, or irrelevant constructs, while also minimizing the chances of obtaining results that are meaningful and not by pure chance. In functionalist research, theories can be used as the logical basis for postulating hypotheses for empirical testing. Obviously, not all theories are well-suited for studying all social phenomena. Theories must be carefully selected based on their fit with the target problem and the extent to which their assumptions are consistent with that of the target problem. We will examine theories and the process of theorizing in detail in the next chapter.

The next phase in the research process is research design . This process is concerned with creating a blueprint of the activities to take in order to satisfactorily answer the research questions identified in the exploration phase. This includes selecting a research method, operationalizing constructs of interest, and devising an appropriate sampling strategy.

Operationalization is the process of designing precise measures for abstract theoretical constructs. This is a major problem in social science research, given that many of the constructs, such as prejudice, alienation, and liberalism are hard to define, let alone measure accurately. Operationalization starts with specifying an “operational definition” (or “conceptualization”) of the constructs of interest. Next, the researcher can search the literature to see if there are existing prevalidated measures matching their operational definition that can be used directly or modified to measure their constructs of interest. If such measures are not available or if existing measures are poor or reflect a different conceptualization than that intended by the researcher, new instruments may have to be designed for measuring those constructs. This means specifying exactly how exactly the desired construct will be measured (e.g., how many items, what items, and so forth). This can easily be a long and laborious process, with multiple rounds of pretests and modifications before the newly designed instrument can be accepted as “scientifically valid.” We will discuss operationalization of constructs in a future chapter on measurement.

Simultaneously with operationalization, the researcher must also decide what research method they wish to employ for collecting data to address their research questions of interest. Such methods may include quantitative methods such as experiments or survey research or qualitative methods such as case research or action research, or possibly a combination of both. If an experiment is desired, then what is the experimental design? If survey, do you plan a mail survey, telephone survey, web survey, or a combination? For complex, uncertain, and multifaceted social phenomena, multi-method approaches may be more suitable, which may help leverage the unique strengths of each research method and generate insights that may not be obtained using a single method.

Researchers must also carefully choose the target population from which they wish to collect data, and a sampling strategy to select a sample from that population. For instance, should they survey individuals or firms or workgroups within firms? What types of individuals or firms they wish to target? Sampling strategy is closely related to the unit of analysis in a research problem. While selecting a sample, reasonable care should be taken to avoid a biased sample (e.g., sample based on convenience) that may generate biased observations. Sampling is covered in depth in a later chapter.

At this stage, it is often a good idea to write a research proposal detailing all of the decisions made in the preceding stages of the research process and the rationale behind each decision. This multi-part proposal should address what research questions you wish to study and why, the prior state of knowledge in this area, theories you wish to employ along with hypotheses to be tested, how to measure constructs, what research method to be employed and why, and desired sampling strategy. Funding agencies typically require such a proposal in order to select the best proposals for funding. Even if funding is not sought for a research project, a proposal may serve as a useful vehicle for seeking feedback from other researchers and identifying potential problems with the research project (e.g., whether some important constructs were missing from the study) before starting data collection. This initial feedback is invaluable because it is often too late to correct critical problems after data is collected in a research study.

Having decided who to study (subjects), what to measure (concepts), and how to collect data (research method), the researcher is now ready to proceed to the research execution phase. This includes pilot testing the measurement instruments, data collection, and data analysis.

Pilot testing is an often overlooked but extremely important part of the research process. It helps detect potential problems in your research design and/or instrumentation (e.g., whether the questions asked is intelligible to the targeted sample), and to ensure that the measurement instruments used in the study are reliable and valid measures of the constructs of interest. The pilot sample is usually a small subset of the target population. After a successful pilot testing, the researcher may then proceed with data collection using the sampled population. The data collected may be quantitative or qualitative, depending on the research method employed.

Following data collection, the data is analyzed and interpreted for the purpose of drawing conclusions regarding the research questions of interest. Depending on the type of data collected (quantitative or qualitative), data analysis may be quantitative (e.g., employ statistical techniques such as regression or structural equation modeling) or qualitative (e.g., coding or content analysis).

The final phase of research involves preparing the final research report documenting the entire research process and its findings in the form of a research paper, dissertation, or monograph. This report should outline in detail all the choices made during the research process (e.g., theory used, constructs selected, measures used, research methods, sampling, etc.) and why, as well as the outcomes of each phase of the research process. The research process must be described in sufficient detail so as to allow other researchers to replicate your study, test the findings, or assess whether the inferences derived are scientifically acceptable. Of course, having a ready research proposal will greatly simplify and quicken the process of writing the finished report. Note that research is of no value unless the research process and outcomes are documented for future generations; such documentation is essential for the incremental progress of science.

Principles of Social Research Methodology

• © 2022
• M. Rezaul Islam 0 ,
• Niaz Ahmed Khan 1 ,
• Rajendra Baikady 2

Centre for Family and Child Studies, Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

You can also search for this editor in PubMed   Google Scholar

Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Department of social work, school of humanities, university of johannesburg, johannesburg, south africa.

• Emphasizes the essentials and fundamentals of research methodologies
• Covers the entire research process, beginning with the conception of the research problem
• Combines theory and practical application to familiarize the reader with the logic of research design

76k Accesses

32 Citations

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (35 chapters)

Front matter, introduction to social research, inquiry: a fundamental concept for scientific investigation.

M. Rezaul Islam

Research: Meaning and Purpose

• Kazi Abusaleh, Akib Bin Anwar

Social Research: Definitions, Types, Nature, and Characteristics

• Kanamik Kani Khan, Md. Mohsin Reza

Theory in Social Research

• Mumtaz Ali, Maya Khemlani David, Kuang Ching Hei

Philosophy of Social Science and Research Paradigms

Inductive and/or deductive research designs.

• Md. Shahidul Haque
• Premalatha Karupiah

Critical Theory in Social Research: A Theoretical and Methodological Outlook

• Ashek Mahmud, Farhana Zaman

Narrative Inquiry, Phenomenology, and Grounded Theory in Qualitative Research

• Rabiul Islam, Md. Sayeed Akhter
• Md. Rafiqul Islam

Quantitative Research Approach

Designing research proposal in quantitative approach.

• Md. Rezaul Karim

Experimental Method

• Syed Tanveer Rahman, Md. Rabiul Islam

Social Survey Method

• Isahaque Ali, Azlinda Azman, Shahid Mallick, Tahmina Sultana, Zulkarnain A. Hatta

Survey Questionnaire

• Shofiqur Rahman Chowdhury, Mohammad Ali Oakkas, Faisal Ahmmed

Interview Method

• Hazreena Hussein

Sampling Techniques for Quantitative Research

• Moniruzzaman Sarker, Mohammed Abdulmalek AL-Muaalemi

Data Analysis Techniques for Quantitative Study

• Social Science Research
• Social Research Methods
• Qualitative Research
• Quantitative Research
• Mixed Method Research
• Research Design

About this book

This book is a definitive, comprehensive understanding to social science research methodology. It covers both qualitative and quantitative approaches. The book covers the entire research process, beginning with the conception of the research problem to publication of findings. The text combines theory and practical application to familiarize the reader with the logic of research design, the logic and techniques of data analysis, and the fundamentals and implications of various data collection techniques. Organized in seven sections and easy to read chapters, the text emphasizes the importance of clearly defined research questions and well-constructed practical explanations and illustrations. A key contribution to the methodology literature, the book is an authoritative resource for policymakers, practitioners, graduate and advanced research students, and educators in all social science disciplines.

Editors and Affiliations

Niaz Ahmed Khan

Rajendra Baikady

About the editors

Bibliographic information.

Book Title : Principles of Social Research Methodology

Editors : M. Rezaul Islam, Niaz Ahmed Khan, Rajendra Baikady

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2

Publisher : Springer Singapore

eBook Packages : Social Sciences

Copyright Information : The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022

Hardcover ISBN : 978-981-19-5219-7 Published: 27 October 2022

Softcover ISBN : 978-981-19-5524-2 Published: 28 October 2023

eBook ISBN : 978-981-19-5441-2 Published: 26 October 2022

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XXXI, 508

Number of Illustrations : 24 b/w illustrations, 45 illustrations in colour

Topics : Social Work , Education, general

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Scientific Inquiry in Social Work

(9 reviews)

Matthew DeCarlo, Radford University

Copyright Year: 2018

ISBN 13: 9781975033729

Publisher: Open Social Work Education

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Shannon Blajeski, Assistant Professor, Portland State University on 3/10/23

This book provides an introduction to research and inquiry in social work with an applied focus geared for the MSW student. The text covers 16 chapters, including several dedicated to understanding how to begin the research process, a chapter on... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

This book provides an introduction to research and inquiry in social work with an applied focus geared for the MSW student. The text covers 16 chapters, including several dedicated to understanding how to begin the research process, a chapter on ethics, and then eight chapters dedicated to research methods. The subchapters (1-5 per chapter) are concise and focused while also being tied to current knowledge and events so as to hold the reader's attention. It is comprehensive, but some of the later chapters covering research methods as well as the final chapter seem a bit scant and could be expanded. The glossary at the end of each chapter is helpful as is the index that is always accessible from the left-hand drop-down menu.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The author pulls in relevant current and recent public events to illustrate important points about social research throughout the book. Each sub-chapter reads as accurate. I did not come across any inaccuracies in the text, however I would recommend a change in the title of Chapter 15 as "real world research" certainly encompasses more than program evaluation, single-subject designs, and action research.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

Another major strength of this book is that it adds currency to engage the reader while also maintaining its relevance to research methods. None of the current events/recent events that are described seem dated nor will they fade from relevance in a number of years. In addition, the concise nature of the modules should make them easy to update when needed to maintain relevancy in future editions.

Clarity rating: 5

Clarity is a major strength of this textbook. As described in the interface section, this book is written to be clear and concise, without unnecessary extra text that detracts from the concise content provided in each chapter. Any lengthy excerpts are also very engaging which lends itself to a clear presentation of content for the reader.

Consistency rating: 5

The text and content seems to be presented consistently throughout the book. Terminology and frameworks are balanced with real-world examples and current events.

Modularity rating: 5

The chapters of this textbook are appropriately spaced and easily digestible, particularly for readers with time constraints. Each chapter contains 3-5 sub-chapters that build upon each other in a scaffolding style. This makes it simple for the instructor to assign each chapter (sometimes two) per weekly session as well as add in additional assigned readings to complement the text.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The overall organization of the chapters flow well. The book begins with a typical introduction to research aimed at social work practitioners or new students in social work. It then moves into a set of chapters on beginning a research project, reviewing literature, and asking research questions, followed by a chapter on ethics. Next, the text transitions to three chapters covering constructs, measurement, and sampling, followed by five chapters covering research methods, and a closing chapter on dissemination of research. This is one of the more logically-organized research methods texts that I have used as an instructor.

Interface rating: 5

The modular chapters are easy to navigate and the interface of each chapter follows a standard presentation style with the reading followed by a short vocabulary glossary and references. This presentation lends itself to a familiarity for students that helps them become more efficient with completing reading assignments, even in short bursts of time. This is particularly important for online and returning learners who may juggle their assignment time with family and work obligations.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

No grammatical errors were noted.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

At first glance at the table of contents, the book doesn't seem to be overtly committed to cultural representation, however, upon reading the chapters, it becomes clear that the author does try to represent and reference marginalized groups (e.g., women, individuals with disabilities, racial/ethnic/gender intersectionality) within the examples used. I also am very appreciative that the bottom of each introduction page for each chapter contains content trigger warnings for any possible topics that could be upsetting, e.g., substance abuse, violence.

As the author likely knows, social work students are eager to engage in learning that is current and relevant to their social causes. This book is written in a way that engages a non-researcher social worker into reading about research by weaving research information into topics that they might find compelling. It also does this in a concise way where short bits of pertinent information are presented, making the text accessible without needing to sustain long periods of attention. This is particularly important for online and returning learners who may need to sit with their readings in short bursts due to attending school while juggling work and family obligations.

Reviewed by Lynn Goerdt, Associate Professor, University of Wisconsin - Superior on 9/17/21

Text appears to be comprehensive in covering steps for typical SWK research class, taking students from the introduction of the purpose and importance of research to how to design and analyze research. Author covers the multitude of ways that... read more

Text appears to be comprehensive in covering steps for typical SWK research class, taking students from the introduction of the purpose and importance of research to how to design and analyze research. Author covers the multitude of ways that social workers engage in research as way of building knowledge and ways that social work practitioners conduct research to evaluate their practice, including outcome evaluation, single subject design, and action research. I particularly appreciated the last section on reporting research, which should be very practical.

Overall, content appears mostly accurate which few errors. Definitions and citations are mostly thorough and clear. Author does cite Wikipedia in at least one occasion which could be credible, depending on the source of the Wikipedia content. There were a few references within the text to comic or stories but the referenced material was not always apparent.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

The content of Scientific Inquiry for Social Work is relevant, as the field of social work research methods does not appear to change quickly, although there are innovations. The author referenced examples which appear to be recent and likely relatable to interests of current students. Primary area of innovation is in using technology for the collection and analysis of data, which could be expanded, particularly using social media for soliciting research participants.

Style is personable and content appears to be accessible, which is a unique attribute for a research textbook. Author uses first person in many instances, particularly in the beginning to present the content as relatable.

Format appears to be consistent in format and relative length. Each chapter includes learning objectives, content advisory (if applicable), key takeaways and glossary. Author uses color and text boxes to draw attention to these sections.

Modularity rating: 4

Text is divided into modules which could easily be assigned and reviewed in a class. The text modules could also be re-structured if desired to fit curricular uniqueness’s. Author uses images to illuminate the concepts of the module or chapter, but they often take about 1/3 of the page, which extends the size of the textbook quite a bit. Unclear if benefit of images outweighs additional cost if PDF version is printed.

Textbook is organized in a very logical and clear fashion. Each section appears to be approximately 6-10 pages in length which seems to be an optimal length for student attention and comprehension.

Interface rating: 4

There were some distortions of the text (size and visibility) but they were a fairly minor distraction and did not appear to reduce access to the content. Otherwise text was easy to navigate.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

No grammatical errors were noted but hyperlinks to outside content were referenced but not always visible which occasionally resulted in an awkward read. Specific link may be in resources section of each chapter but occasionally they were also included in the text.

I did not recognize any text which was culturally insensitive or offensive. Images used which depicted people, appeared to represent diverse experiences, cultures, settings and persons. Did notice image depicting homelessness appeared to be stereotypical person sleeping on sidewalk, which can perpetuate a common perception of homelessness. Would encourage author to consider images representing a wider range of experiences of a social phenomena. Content advisories are used for each section, which is not necessarily cultural relevance but is respectful and recognizes the diversity of experiences and triggers that the readers may have.

Overall, I was very impressed and encouraged with the well organized content and thoughtful flow of this important textbook for social work students and instructors. The length and readability of each chapter would likely be appreciated by instructors as well as students, increasing the extent that the learning outcomes would be achieved. Teaching research is very challenging because the content and application can feel very intimidating. The author also has provided access to supplemental resources such as presentations and assignments.

Reviewed by elaine gatewood, Adjunct Faculty, Bridgewater State University on 6/15/21

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to completion, with examples. read more

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to completion, with examples.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

From my perspective, content is highly accurate in the field of learning research method and unbiased. It's all there!

The content is highly relevant and up-to-date in the field. The book is written and arranged in a way that its easy to follow along with adding updates.

The book is written in clear and concise. The book provides appropriate context for any jargon/technical terminology used along with examples which readers are able to follow along and understand.

The contents of the book flow quite well. The framework in the book is consistent.

The text appears easily adaptable for readers and the author also provides accompanying PowerPoint presentations; these are a good foundation tools for readers to use and implement.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The contents of the book flow very well. Readers would be able to put into practice the key reading strategies shared in the book ) because its organization is laid out nicely

Interface rating: 3

The interface is generally good, but I was only able to download the .pdf. This may present issues for some student readers.

There are no grammatical errors.

The text was culturally relevant and provided diverse research and practice examples. The text could have benefited from sexamples of intersectional and anti-oppressive lenses for students to consider in their practice.

This text is a comprehensive introduction to research that can be easily adapted for a BSW/MSW research course.

Reviewed by Taylor Hall, Assistant Professor, Bridgewater State University on 6/30/20

This text is more comprehensive than the text I currently use in my Research Methods in Social Work course, which students have to pay for. This text not only covers both qualitative and quantitative research methods, but also all parts of the... read more

This text is more comprehensive than the text I currently use in my Research Methods in Social Work course, which students have to pay for. This text not only covers both qualitative and quantitative research methods, but also all parts of the research process from thinking about research ideas to questions all the way to evaluation after social work programs/policies have been employed.

Not much to say here- with research methods, things are black and white; it is or isn't. This content is accurate. I also like to way the content is explained in light of social work values and ethics. This is something our students can struggle with, and this is helpful in terms of showing why social work needs to pay attention to research.

There are upcoming changes to CSWE's competencies, therefore lots of text materials are going to need to be updated soon. Otherwise, case examples are pertinent and timely.

Clarity rating: 4

I think that research methods for social workers is a difficult field of study. Many go into the field to be clinicians, and few understand (off the bat) the importance of understanding methods of research. I think this textbook makes it clear to me, but hard to rate a 5 as I know from a student's perspective, lots of the terminology is so new.

Appears to be so- I was able to follow, seems consistent.

Yes- and I think this is a strong point of this text. This was easy to follow and read, and I could see myself easily divvying up different sections for students to work on in groups.

Yes- makes sense to me and the way I teach this course. I like the 30,000 ft view then honing in on specific types of research, all along the way explaining the different pieces of the research process and in writing a research paper.

I sometimes struggle with online platforms versus in person texts to read, and this OER is visually appealing- there is not too much text on the pages, it is spaced in a way that makes it easier to read. Colors are used well to highlight pertinent information.

Not something I found in this text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

This is a place where I feel the text could use some work. A nod to past wrongdoings in research methods on oppressed groups, and more of a discussion on social work's role in social justice with an eye towards righting the wrongs of the past. Updated language re: person first language, more diverse examples, etc.

This is a very useful text, and I am going to recommend my department check it out for future use, especially as many of our students are first gen and working class and would love to save money on textbooks where possible.

Reviewed by Olubunmi Oyewuwo-Gassikia, Assistant Professor, Northeastern Illinois University on 5/5/20

This text is an appropriate and comprehensive introduction to research methods for BSW students. It guides the reader through each stage of the research project, including identifying a research question, conducting and writing a literature... read more

This text is an appropriate and comprehensive introduction to research methods for BSW students. It guides the reader through each stage of the research project, including identifying a research question, conducting and writing a literature review, research ethics, theory, research design, methodology, sampling, and dissemination. The author explains complex concepts - such as paradigms, epistemology, and ontology - in clear, simple terms and through the use of practical, social work examples for the reader. I especially appreciated the balanced attention to quantitative and qualitative methods, including the explanation of data collection and basic analysis techniques for both. The text could benefit from the inclusion of an explanation of research design notations.

The text is accurate and unbiased. Additionally, the author effectively incorporates referenced sources, including sources one can use for further learning.

The content is relevant and timely. The author incorporates real, recent research examples that reflects the applicability of research at each level of social practice (micro, meso, and macro) throughout the text. The text will benefit from regular updates in research examples.

The text is written in a clear, approachable manner. The chapters are a reasonable length without sacrificing appropriate depth into the subject manner.

The text is consistent throughout. The author is effective in reintroducing previously explained terms from previous chapters.

The text appears easily adaptable. The instructions provided by the author on how to adapt the text for one's course are helpful to one who would like to use the text but not in its entirety. The author also provides accompanying PowerPoint presentations; these are a good foundation but will likely require tailoring based on the teaching style of the instructor.

Generally, the text flows well. However, chapter 5 (Ethics) should come earlier, preferably before chapter 3 (Reviewing & Evaluating the Literature). It is important that students understand research ethics as ethical concerns are an important aspect of evaluating the quality of research studies. Chapter 15 (Real-World Research) should also come earlier in the text, most suitably before or after chapter 7 (Design and Causality).

The interface is generally good, but I was only able to download the .pdf. The setup of the .pdf is difficult to navigate, especially if one wants to jump from chapter to chapter. This may present issues for the student reader.

The text was culturally relevant and provided diverse research and practice examples. The text could have benefited from more critical research examples, such as examples of research studies that incorporate intersectional and anti-oppressive lenses.

This text is a comprehensive introduction to research that can be easily adapted for a BSW level research course.

Reviewed by Smita Dewan, Assistant Professor, New York City College of Technology, Department of Human Services on 12/6/19

This is a very good introductory research methodology textbook for undergraduate students of social work or human services. For students who might be intimidated by social research, the text provides assurance that by learning basic concepts of... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

This is a very good introductory research methodology textbook for undergraduate students of social work or human services. For students who might be intimidated by social research, the text provides assurance that by learning basic concepts of research methodology, students will be better scholars and social work or human service practitioners. The content and flow of the text book supports a basic assignment of most research methodology courses which is to develop a research proposal or a research project. Each stage of research is explained well with many examples from social work practice that has the potential to keep the student engaged.

The glossary at the end of each chapter is very comprehensive but does not include the page number/s where the content is located. The glossary at the end of the book also lacks page numbers which might make it cumbersome for students seeking a quick reference.

The content is accurate and unbiased. Suggested exercises and prompts for students to engage in critical thinking and to identify biases in research that informs practice may help students understand the complexities of social research.

Content is up-to-date and concepts of research methodology presented is unlikely to be obsolete in the coming years. However, recent trends in research such as data mining, using algorithms for social policy and practice implications, privacy concerns, role of social media are topics that could be considered for inclusion in the forthcoming editions.

Content is presented very clearly for undergraduate students. Key takeaways and glossary for each section of the chapter is very useful for students.

Presentation of content, format and organization is consistent throughout the book.

Subsections within each chapter is very helpful for the students who might be assigned readings just in parts for the class.

Students would benefit from reading about research ethics right after the introductory chapter. I would also move Chapter 8 to right after the literature review which might inform creating and refining the research question. Content on evaluation research could also be moved up to follow the chapter on experimental designs. Regardless of the organization, the course instructors can assign chapters according to the course requirements.

PDF version of the book is very easy to use especially as students can save a copy on their computers and do not have to be online. Charts and tables are well presented but some of the images/photographs do not necessarily serve to enhance learning. Image attributions could be provided at the end of the chapter instead of being listed under the glossary. Students might also find it useful to be able to highlight the content and make annotations. This requires that students sign-in. Students should be able to highlight and annotate a downloaded version through Adobe Reader.

I did not find any grammatical errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

Content is not insensitive or offensive in any way. Supporting examples in chapters are very diverse. Students would benefit from some examples of international research (both positive and negative examples) of protection of human subjects.

Reviewed by Jill Hoffman, Assistant Professor, Portland State University on 10/29/19

This text includes 16 chapters that cover content related to the process of conducting research. From identifying a topic and reviewing the literature, to formulating a question, designing a study, and disseminating findings, the text includes... read more

This text includes 16 chapters that cover content related to the process of conducting research. From identifying a topic and reviewing the literature, to formulating a question, designing a study, and disseminating findings, the text includes research basics that most other introductory social work research texts include. Content on ethics, theory, and to a lesser extent evaluation, single-subject design, and action research are also included. There is a glossary at the end of the text that includes information on the location of the terms. There is a practice behaviors index, but not an index in the traditional sense. If using the text electronically, search functions make it easy to find necessary information despite not having an index. If using a printed version, this would be more difficult. The text includes examples to illustrate concepts that are relevant to settings in which social workers might work. As most other introductory social work research texts, this book appears to come from a mainly positivist view. I would have appreciated more of a discussion related to power, privilege, and oppression and the role these play in the research topics that get studied and who benefits, along with anti-oppressive research. Related to evaluations, a quick mention of logic models would be helpful.

The information appears to be accurate and error free. The language in the text seems to emphasize "right/wrong" choices/decisions instead of highlighting the complexities of research and practice. Using gender-neutral pronouns would also make the language more inclusive.

Content appears to be up-to-date and relevant. Any updating would be straightforward to carry out. I found at least one link that did not work (e.g., NREPP) so if you use this text it will be important to check and make sure things are updated.

The content is clearly written, using examples to illustrate various concepts. I appreciated prompts for questions throughout each chapter in order to engage students in the content. Key terms are bolded, which helps to easily identify important points.

Information is presented in a consistent manner throughout the text.

Each chapter is divided into subsections that help with readability. It is easy to pick and choose various pieces of the text for your course if you're not using the entire thing.

There are many ways you can organize a social work research text. Personally, I prefer to talk about ethics and theory early on, so that students have this as a framework as they read about other's studies and design their own. In the case of this text, I'd put those two chapters right after chapter 1. As others have suggested, I'd also move up the content on research questions, perhaps after chapter 4.

In the online version, no significant interface issues arose. The only thing that would be helpful is to have chapter titles clearly presented when navigating through the text in the online version. For example, when you click through to a new chapter, the title simply says "6.0 Chapter introduction." In order to see the chapter title you have to click into the contents tab. Not a huge issue but could help with navigating the online version. In the pdf version, the links in the table of contents allowed me to navigate through to various sections. I did notice that some of the external links were not complete (e.g., on page 290, the URL is linked as "http://baby-").

Cultural representation in the text is similar to many other introductory social work research texts. There's more of an emphasis on white, western, cis-gendered individuals, particularly in the images. In examples, it appeared that only male/female pronouns were used.

Reviewed by Monica Roth Day, Associate Professor, Social Work, Metropolitan State University (Saint Paul, Minnesota) on 12/26/18

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, then developing research as producers of knowledge. It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to... read more

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, then developing research as producers of knowledge. It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to completion, with appropriate examples. More specific social work links would be helpful as students learn more about the field and the uses of research.

The book is accurate and communicates information and largely without bias. Numerous examples are provided from varied sources, which are then used to discuss potential for bias in research. The addition of critical race theory concepts would add to this discussion, to ground students in the importance of understanding implicit bias as researchers and ways to develop their own awareness.

The book is highly relevant. It provides historical and current examples of research which communicate concepts using accessible language that is current to social work. The text is written so that updates should be easy. Links need to be updated on a regular basis.

The book is accessible for students at it uses common language to communicate concepts while helping students build their research vocabulary. Terminology is communicate both within the text and in glossaries, and technical terms are minimally used.

The book is consistent in its use of terminology and framework. It follows a pattern of development, from consuming research to producing research. The steps are predictable and walk students through appropriate actions to take.

The book is easily readable. Each chapter is divided in sections that are easy to navigate and understand. Pictures and tables are used to support text.

Chapters are in logical order and follow a common pattern.

When reading the book online, the text was largely free of interface issues. As a PDF, there were issues with formatting. Be aware that students who may wish to download the book into a Kindle or other book reader may experience issues.

The text was grammatically correct with no misspellings.

While the book is culturally relevant, it lacks the application of critical race theory. While students will learn about bias in research, critical race theory would ground students in the importance of understanding implicit bias as researchers and ways to develop their own awareness. It would also help students understand why the background of researchers is important in relation to the ways of knowing.

Reviewed by Jennifer Wareham, Associate Professor, Wayne State University on 11/30/18

The book provides a comprehensive introduction to research methods from the perspective of the discipline of Social Work. The book borrows heavily from Amy Blackstone’s Principles of Sociological Inquiry – Qualitative and Quantitative Methods open... read more

The book provides a comprehensive introduction to research methods from the perspective of the discipline of Social Work. The book borrows heavily from Amy Blackstone’s Principles of Sociological Inquiry – Qualitative and Quantitative Methods open textbook. The book is divided into 16 chapters, covering: differences in reasoning and scientific thought, starting a research project, writing a literature review, ethics in social science research, how theory relates to research, research design, causality, measurement, sampling, survey research, experimental design, qualitative interviews and focus groups, evaluation research, and reporting research. Some of the more advanced concepts and topics are only covered at superficial level, which limits the intended population of readers to high school students, undergraduate students, or those with no background in research methods. Since the book is geared toward Social Work undergraduate students, the chapters and content address methodologies commonly used in this field, but ignore methodologies that may be more popular in other social science fields. For example, the material on qualitative methods is narrow and focuses on commonly used qualitative methods in Social Work. In addition, the chapter on evaluation is limited to a general overview of evaluation research, which could be improved with more in-depth discussion of different types of evaluation (e.g., needs assessment, evaluability assessment, process evaluation, impact/outcomes evaluation) and real-world examples of different types of evaluation implemented in Social Work. Overall, the author provides examples that are easy for practitioners in Social Work to understand, which are also easily relatable for students in similar disciplines such as criminal justice. The book provides a glossary of key terms. There is no index; however, users can search for terms using the find (Ctrl-F) function in the PDF version of the book.

Overall, the content inside this book is accurate, error-free, and unbiased. However, the content is limited to the Social Work perspective, which may be considered somewhat biased or inaccurate from the perspective of others in different disciplines.

The book describes classic examples used in most texts on social science research methods. It also includes contemporary and relevant examples. Some of the content (such as web addresses and contemporary news pieces) will need to be updated every few years. The text is written and arranged in such a way that any necessary updates should be relatively easy and straightforward to implement.

The book is written in clear and accessible prose. The book provides appropriate context for any jargon/technical terminology used. Readers from any social science discipline should be able to understand the content and context of the material presented in the book.

The framework and use of terminology in the book are consistent.

This book is highly modular. The author has even improved upon the modularity of the book from Blackstone’s open text (which serves as the basis of the present text). Each chapter is divided into short, related subsections. The design of the chapters and their subsections make it easy to divide the material into units of study across a semester or quarter of instruction.

Generally, the book is organized in a similar manner as other texts on social science research methods. However, the organization could be improved slightly. Chapters 2 through 4 describe the process of beginning a research project and conducting a literature review. Chapter 8 describes refining a research question. This chapter could be moved to follow the Chapter 4. Chapter 12 describes experimental design, while Chapter 15 provides a description and examples of evaluation research. Since evaluation research tends to rely on experimental and quasi-experimental design, this chapter should follow the experimental design chapter.

For the online version of the book, there were no interface issues. The images and charts were clear and readable. The hyperlinks to sources mentioned in the text worked. The Contents menu allowed for easy and quick access to any section of the book. For the PDF version of the book, there were interface issues. The images and charts were clear and readable. However, the URLs and hyperlinks were not active in the PDF version. Furthermore, the PDF version was not bookmarked, which made it more difficult to access specific sections of the book.

I did not find grammatical errors in the book.

Overall, the cultural relevance and sensitivity were consistent with other social science research methods texts. The author does a good job of using both female and male pronouns in the prose. While there are pictures of people of color, there could be more. Most of the pictures are of white people. Also, the context is generally U.S.-centric.

Table of Contents

• Chapter 1: Introduction to research
• Chapter 2: Beginning a research project
• Chapter 3: Reading and evaluating literature
• Chapter 4: Conducting a literature review
• Chapter 5: Ethics in social work research
• Chapter 6: Linking methods with theory
• Chapter 7: Design and causality
• Chapter 8: Creating and refining a research question
• Chapter 9: Defining and measuring concepts
• Chapter 10: Sampling
• Chapter 11: Survey research
• Chapter 12: Experimental design
• Chapter 13: Interviews and focus groups
• Chapter 14: Unobtrusive research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches
• Chapter 15: Real-world research: Evaluation, single-subjects, and action research
• Chapter 16: Reporting and reading research

Ancillary Material

• Open Social Work Education

About the Book

As an introductory textbook for social work students studying research methods, this book guides students through the process of creating a research project. Students will learn how to discover a researchable topic that is interesting to them, examine scholarly literature, formulate a proper research question, design a quantitative or qualitative study to answer their question, carry out the design, interpret quantitative or qualitative results, and disseminate their findings to a variety of audiences. Examples are drawn from the author's practice and research experience, as well as topical articles from the literature.

There are ancillary materials available for this book.  

About the Contributors

Matt DeCarlo earned his PhD in social work at Virginia Commonwealth University and is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at Radford University. He earned an MSW from George Mason University in 2010 and a BA in Psychology from the College of William and Mary in 2007. His research interests include open educational resources, self-directed Medicaid supports, and basic income. Matt is an Open Textbook Network Campus Leader for Radford University. He is the founder of Open Social Work Education, a non-profit collaborative advancing OER in social work education.

Contribute to this Page

The International Association Of Schools Of Social Work Est. 1928

• IASSW — A Brief History
• IASSW — 90 Years Journey
• IASSW Presidents
• Mission & Vision
• IASSW Structure
• President of IASSW
• Board Orientation Powerpoint
• IASSW: Executive Members
• IASSW: Regional, Sub regional & National Representatives
• [Archived] IASSW: List of Committees
• IASSW Constitution
• IASSW Annual Reports
• Capacity Building
• Final Report: First International Military Social Work Conference
• Final Report-Developing Social Work Education and Practice in Malawi
• IASSW Funded project- Ecuador (UNEMI – Universidad Estatal de Milagro)
• IASSW Funded Projects – 2017
• IASSW Advocacy Statement on Human Rights
• Global Agenda
• Sustainability, Climate Change, Disaster Intervention Committee
• Concept Note on Human Rights
• Women’s Interest Group
• Language Committee
• Theme: Administrative
• IASSW — UN International Committee
• Get a School Membership
• Get an Individual Membership
• Get an Individual Life Membership
• Get a Affiliate Membership
• Get a Student Membership
• Bulk Membership for Schools
• (Optional) Multi-Year Membership Payments
• View School Members
• View Individual Members
• View Individual Life Members
• View Affiliate members
• Global Definition of Social Work

Ethics in Social Work, Statement of Principles

• Global Standards for Social Work Education and Training
• IASSW definition on Clinical Social Work
• Latin America
• COVID-19 Updates
• Our Resources
• IASSW Newsletters
• IASSW UN NY Newsletters
• Ethics in Social Work, Statement…

This is the IASSW version of the Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles which was unanimously adopted at the General Assembly of IASSW on 5th July 2018 in Dublin, Ireland.

The IASSW Ethics Taskforce thanks our colleagues for their dedicated and considered feedback on the earlier draft of the Statement. Developing a statement of global ethics is extremely complex and we appreciate that there might be some national and/or regional contextual realities that are not reflected. We, therefore, encourage national and/or regional amplifications that are in accordance with the spirit and intent of this Statement. We intend that the document be a dynamic and evolving one, and we would appreciate your feedback upon application of the principles in research, education and practice.

Please send your responses to Prof. Vishanthie Sewpaul, Chair of the IASSW Ethics Taskforce. E-mail: [email protected]

Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles

All versions.

A briefer version of the Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles was adopted at the General Meeting of the International Federation of Social Workers in Dublin, Ireland in July 2018.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Introductory Principles of Social Work Research

Related Papers

Susan Robbins

This article discusses the philosophical and ideological nature of theory and examines the ways ideology becomes infused into social work theory and practice. The use of critical thought and specific evaluation criteria based on consistency with social work values are proposed. IN RECENT TIMES, SOCIAL W O R K and many of the helping professions have placed a heavy emphasis on practice that is based on scientifically derived theories and knowledge. The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics explicitly mandates that professional practice include empirically based knowledge, the evaluation of programs and interventions, and that social workers "critically examine and keep current with emerging knowledge relevant to social work and fully use evaluation and research evidence in their professional practice" (NASW, 1996, p. 4) Thus, in our attempt to shape and mold professional practice, theories of causation, prevention, and intervention are expected to be ...

Bruce Thyer

Tracy Wharton PhD, LCSW

Ibrahim A Ragab

Social work needs to rid its knowledge base from the obsolete empiricist/ positivist paradigm. A framework for the integration of spiritual/religious concepts in social work practice theories, and testing innovations in the real world for their effectiveness is outlined.

Tomi Gomory

Sociology Study

For social workers who are interested in research associated with validating methodology for the amelioration of human problems, or the mastery of intervention models, used in direct practice; definitive consensus, on guidelines, remains elusive. Much has been written in recent years about the necessity of the profession to be guided by either empirical research, which has validated specific interventions, or by the theory, heuristic rules, and the decision-making schema of experienced practitioners. The debate is not simply limited to clinical practice issues, or factions defending or refuting, a particular theoretical stance. On one hand, social research has in recent years, invalidated some long held practice models, and has modified our understanding of core social problems. Yet, social research is an often difficult and arduous pursuit, which may require some time to make thorough evaluation, as compared to the immediacy of emerging social concerns. This transmission of scholarly research findings takes time and considerable effort to disseminate and gain understanding and acceptance within the practice community even when well received. On the other hand, practitioners serve as the wellspring of observations, which are often translated into models or theory, and frequently become the subject matter of empirical research. However, few in the practice community are encouraged or committed, to systematically review research findings so as to modify practice approaches, which have not been well validated by recent research findings.

Journal of Social Work Education

Kathryn Adams

Social Service Review

Edward Mullen

Jane Gilgun

Edward Joseph Mullen

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of the College …

Azizun Khoirun Nisa

erick rivera

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Peter Gardner

The Ulster medical journal

Jonathan Gorman

Pirkko Siklander prev. Hyvönen

Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation

Mohammadreza Mallakzadeh

Sander Rigter

Chem. Commun.

P. Hillesheim

مجلة بحوث کلیة الآداب . جامعة المنوفیة

rania mageed

Stathis Klonaris

Muhammad Syaiful Nizam

Scientific reports

Seung-Yeol Jeon

Agricultural Science Digest, Volume 43 Issue 1: 102-104 (February 2023)

Arcc Journals , Shamshad Ali Talpur

parimal bapat

Facturacion Electronica II

arXiv (Cornell University)

Ashutosh dixit

Government Information Quarterly

Journal of Physical Therapy Science

Bambang Sujatmiko

SAKiNE BOYRAZ

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Ronald Leow

American Journal of Neuroradiology

philippe gailloud

Synthesis: an Anglophone Journal of Comparative Literary Studies

Angeliki Spiropoulou

Frontiers in Neuroscience

Claire-Dominique Walker

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Intergenerational Relations - Contemporary Theories, Studies and Policies [Working Title]

Research Principles in Social Work for Sustainable Human in Long-Term Care for Older People

Submitted: 22 August 2023 Reviewed: 09 September 2023 Published: 22 November 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1003177

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Intergenerational Relations - Contemporary Theories, Studies, and Policies [Working Title]

Dr. Andrzej Klimczuk

Chapter metrics overview

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

The well-being of older people is the main goal of research on the needs of older people in social work. To ensure the autonomy and integrity of older people in need of care, the various helping professions must develop and apply ethically sensitive methodological approaches in research and in the development and implementation of practises today and in the future. In alienated systems of care, many people lose their humanity. As social work professionals, we need to understand philosophies of care and people’s daily lives from multiple perspectives. A comprehensive insight into the lives of older people is only possible if we use participatory dialog, respect people’s autonomy, and understand life on the planet as inseparable from all forms of the environment. Research, as the main human strategy to understand life, is a tool to get in touch with people’s everyday knowledge and inner wisdom, which are indispensable sources for creating an ecologically and socially sustainable human society. It discusses in an exploratory manner the development of the global aging and sustainable development agendas, the concepts of intergenerational solidarity and human needs, and discuss the principles of human needs research from a social work perspective.

• aging policy
• intergenerational solidarity
• human needs
• sustainable development

Author Information

Vera grebenc *.

• Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

With social work research, we strive to understand everyday life situations as the mission of social work is to develop the well-being of all people in pursuit of a socially just society that respects human dignity and autonomy [ 1 , 2 ]. The most fundamental task of social work is to help and support people in moments of distress in their lives. As social work professionals, we are daily entering people’s lives and our interventions always have an impact on people’s futures. We cannot respond to any challenge without considering all the possible impacts of our intervention on people’s lives. Article 9.7 of the Global Statement of Ethical Principles of Social Work states, “Decisions should always be based on empirical evidence; practice wisdom, and ethical, legal, and cultural considerations. Social workers must be prepared to be transparent about the reasons for their decisions [ 1 ]. This ethical principle burdens social workers on a professional and personal level, causing our lives to be permeated with constant re-evaluation of our professional practice and endless self-questioning about the appropriateness of our decisions and motives. Social work, like other helping professions, is confronted with the immense human suffering in the world today. The world is in the midst of a deep and global political, environmental, and social crisis that threatens basic security conditions and is unable to meet the basic needs of its growing population [ 3 , 4 , 5 ]. Billions of people are struggling; hundreds of millions are at risk of hunger and even famine. People in the richest countries can expect to live up to 30 years longer than people in the poorest countries. Countries in the Global South are drowning in debt, and poverty and hunger are increasing, while they face the growing impacts of the climate crisis – a case study in inequality [ 5 ].

The chronology of WHO and UN aging and sustainable development policy documents adoption.

War conflicts, health crises, natural disasters, the violation of basic human rights, and the destruction of our planet’s ecosystem are interrelated and interdependent problems. We can observe the struggle for the remaining natural and human resources. Planet Earth is “shrinking” into a “glocal village”. The biophysical boundaries of the planet are being exceeded, and along with destructive human activities (imposed aggression, violence, exploitation), climate change is the most dangerous threat to the natural environment and societies [ 5 ]. In today’s context of ecological and humanitarian crises, humanity faces a double task: on the one hand, to ensure absolute respect for the human rights inherent in all people, and on the other hand, to respect the planet as an indisputable value in itself. The area where sustainable development issues and global security challenges are most relevant is the issue of population aging, as this phenomenon involves a range of changes that communities around the world are dealing with differently.

What are the characteristics of global policy agendas on aging and sustainable development, how have these global policies evolved, and how are the needs of older people and intergenerational solidarity addressed in these documents?

What research principles of social work are important to create a deeper knowledge about the needs of older people and to understand the everyday experiences of older people as an opportunity for the development of an ecologically and socially just society?

The methodology used to answer the research questions is a combination of literature review, textual analysis, and interpretive discussion. The results are presented in two parts:

The first part of the paper answers the first research question and presents the results of the review 1 of global policy documents and the results of the textual analysis of global documents on the occurrence and description of older people’s needs and intergenerational solidarity as themes or concepts in these documents.

The second part of the paper answers the second research question and presents a critical discussion of the findings of global policy document review, current perceptions of the needs of older people, and long-term care models in the context of social work research ethics and principles developed through practical research experience. 2

2. Global agendas for aging and sustainable development as a policy framework for the daily lives of older people

The increasing aging of the population is considered one of the greatest global and sustainable challenges, and many questions arise about how society should adapt to this situation [ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. A general overview of global policy attention reveals a focus on questions such as: How should society meet the needs of the growing number of older people? How can sustainable public budgets and health and social security systems be created to meet the needs of older people? How can areas of daily life, work, financial markets, education, housing, long-term care, and transportation be adapted to prevent exploitation of the natural and human worlds? How can an adequate quality of life be provided for people living today without endangering future generations?

The growth of an aging population and the environmental crisis entered the public debate as separate issues, but since the early 1970s, they have frequently appeared together in legal and policy documents and in the research literature. In particular, the definition of sustainable development written in the “Brundtland Report” in 1987 [ 10 ] inevitably links the two issues: “Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable, that is, to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. The most commonly cited classical definition of sustainable development, which focuses on needs-based approaches and intergenerational equity, provides common ground for both agendas. It established the principle of intergenerational justice in meeting human needs as the guiding principle of sustainable development and the promotion of intergenerational solidarity as one of the objectives of aging policies. In this way, intergenerational solidarity becomes a fundamental guarantee for meeting the needs of all generations, and meeting the needs of current and future generations becomes the central theme of the politics of aging and sustainable development [ 10 ]. Thus, intergenerational solidarity, as social cohesion between generations at the societal and community levels, and especially within families, has become, on the one hand, an important principle of integrated environmental, economic, and social strategies in the development agenda, and, on the other hand, a key objective of global aging policies.

Although the sustainable development definition is strong in its value perspective, it includes two elusive concepts, intergenerational solidarity, and human needs, opening up endless possibilities for interpretation. In particular, the concept of human needs has taken a self-evident deterministic position in people’s perceptions, as the satisfaction of human needs has become synonymous with well-being. Over the decades of welfare policy development, the concept of human needs has found its place in political, professional, and everyday language as a generalized concept [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. It is, therefore, no exaggeration to say that meeting human needs is a stated professional goal in all social and health professions, that all policy programs identify meeting human needs as their goal, and that ordinary people would argue that meeting needs activates them in their daily lives [ 15 , 16 ].

The concept of universal human needs is linked to the concept of human rights and is presented as such in the policy on aging [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. The universality of needs is based on the belief that all people everywhere in the world, at all times, in the present and in the future, have certain basic needs and that these needs must be met in order to avoid serious harm to an objective nature, to participate in society, and to think critically about the conditions in which they find themselves [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. The recognition of universal human needs as human rights is associated with the adoption of the Declaration of Human Rights [ 21 ]. However, it took several decades for the needs and rights of older people to be concretely addressed at the global level. The decisive moment was a “World Assembly on the Elderly” organized in 1982 in Vienna on the initiative of the United Nations (UN) [ 21 ]. The Assembly was a milestone in the creation of a global policy instrument on aging. The Vienna International Plan of Action on Aging [ 22 ] became the most important document that raised awareness of the need for special protection of the human rights of older persons and of the responsibility of states to respond to the needs of older populations. This document recognized aging as one of the most important social, economic, and demographic phenomena of modern times. It included the following areas: health and nutrition, protection of older consumers, housing and environment, family, social assistance, income security and employment, and education. Its recommendations included preventing the segregation of older people, providing home-based care for older people, rejecting stereotypical concepts in government policy, and recognizing the value of age.

The next important milestone was the adaptation of the United Nations Principles for Older Persons in 1991 [ 23 ]. By defining human principles such as independence, participation, care, self-fulfillment, and dignity of older people as their fundamental rights, this document provides a guide for understanding the well-being of older people and becomes a global document in the development of aging policy. It influenced all further international and regional documents, including the Madrid International Plan of Action on Aging (MIPAA) which was adopted at the Second World Conference on Aging, in Madrid in 2002 [ 24 ]. The three priority areas identified in Madrid were development, health and well-being, and an enabling and supportive environment. In the same year, a Regional Implementation Strategy (RIS) [ 25 ] was also adopted at the United Nations Economy Commission for Europe (UNECE) Ministerial Conference on Aging in Berlin. The strategy contains a set of concrete actions in the form of 10 commitments. 3 The MIPPA/RIS called for a change in attitudes, policies, and practices to ensure that older people are seen not just as welfare recipients but as active participants in the development process whose rights must be respected. The document, entitled “Building a Society for All Ages,” therefore offered a blueprint for responding to population aging in the 21st century [ 24 ].

The tenth anniversary of the adoption of MIPAA/RIS was celebrated in Vienna in 2012 under the theme ”Ensuring a society for all ages: promoting quality of life and active aging [ 26 ]. The conference adopted four priority goals: (1) promoting long working lives and maintaining working capacity; (2) promoting participation, non-discrimination, and social inclusion of older people; (3) promoting and protecting dignity, health, and independence in old age; (4) maintaining and strengthening intergenerational solidarity. Five years later, the 2017 Lisbon Ministerial Declaration on Aging, under the theme “Realizing the potential of living longer to achieve a sustainable society for all ages,” reaffirmed three priority goals in slightly reverse order: (1) recognizing the potential of older people; (2) promoting longer working lives and ability to work; (3) ensuring aging with dignity [ 27 ]. In 2022, the Ministerial Conference was held in Rome under the title “A Sustainable World for All Ages.” Joining Forces for Solidarity and Equal Opportunities Throughout Life” adjust the priority goals in the following order: (1). promoting active and healthy aging throughout life; (2). ensuring access to long-term care and support for family and family caregivers; (3). mainstreaming aging to advance society for all ages [ 7 ].

In the meantime, international sustainable development policies have gradually taken into account the issue of aging populations, starting with “Our Common Future” [ 10 ] and at the turn of the millennium from the 20th to the 21st century with the Millennium Development Goals in 2000 [ 28 ] and in 2015 with the adaptation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – “Transforming our world”. [ 29 ] At the heart of the sustainable development perspective is the consideration of older people and their needs in terms of their contribution to society in order to achieve sustainable development in a balanced way [ 28 , 29 ]. The 2030 Agenda calls for ‘leaving no one behind’ and recognizes that older people are among the most vulnerable and need special attention. It calls for the aging agenda to be mainstreamed into all policies and programs, as all segments of society should be involved in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4 [ 29 ].

From a sustainable development perspective, aging is likely to have far-reaching impacts on all sectors of society, including labor markets, financial and health systems, political participation, demand for goods and services, urban planning and infrastructure development, and family structures and intergenerational relations [ 30 ]. The implementation of the SDGs is consistent with the implementation of aging policies: in order to prepare society for the economic and social changes associated with aging and old age, the necessary conditions must be created to enable older people to lead self-determined, healthy, and productive lives and to enable them to exercise their right to make decisions and choices in all areas that affect their lives [ 30 ].

2.1 The political narrative on aging and intergenerational solidarity

The concept of intergenerational solidarity links the issues of sustainability and aging, particularly in the area of the social and economic impact of population aging on sustainable development, in order to protect the rights and needs of future generations while meeting the needs of today’s older people. Intergenerational solidarity is directly related to society’s current attempt to act and develop under the paradigm of sustainability. Sustainability itself has a moral core that relates to equity and points to the intergenerational obligation of today’s people to “strive for development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [ 10 ].

At the turn of the millennium, younger and older generations had reciprocal relationships in aging policy documents, both responsible for caring for each other, e.g., the opening paragraph of the 2002 Madrid Report of the Second World Assembly on Aging states, “We recognize the need to strengthen intergenerational solidarity and partnerships, taking into account the special needs of both older and younger people, and to promote intergenerational relationships based on reciprocity” [ 24 ].

The rhetoric in sustainable development documents is less conciliatory toward current generations, emphasizing the rights of unborn generations under the threat of “profligacy “by living generations that are “rapidly closing options for future generations”. In particular, there is a frustration on the side of sustainable development and environmental protection that has persisted since 1987 when the World Commission on Environment and Development determined that drastic action was needed [ 31 ]. Current sustainability documents emphasize that there is no sign of major improvements and that the world must think about future generations who, by definition, are not represented in today’s decision-making and cannot articulate their needs [ 31 ].

From the perspective of old-age policy, it is interesting to note how intergenerational solidarity has become an important policy objective over the decades. For example, analysis of the MIPAA/RIS synthesis reports shows how intergenerational solidarity became a focus of aging policy and a goal in itself. In the first two implementation cycles (2002–2012), intergenerational solidarity activities can be found mainly in the areas of activities against age discrimination, promoting the integration of older people into society, and supporting families in caring for older people [ 26 , 31 ]. Especially in 2007–2012, during the global financial and economic crisis, the issue of intergenerational solidarity was mainly addressed in the areas of social security system transformation, health care improvement, mainstreaming of aging, and labor market adjustment [ 32 , 33 , 34 ].

Older generations were seen at the time as an economically strong cohort that could contribute to economic growth after the years of the global financial crisis. Intensive policy efforts were made at the time to refute the notion that older people were a burden on society: “As Europeans live longer and healthier lives, governments are looking for ways to increase older people’s involvement in society and keep them active; these changes could lead to economic benefits for society as a whole” [ 29 ]. For example, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) report states, “Our collective future is one in which there will be more older people than children […] Political will is needed to ensure that aging is a time of opportunity for all” [ 35 ]. In the last decade (2012–2022), intergenerational solidarity has been established as a specific goal of aging policy and has become the focus of action plans [ 3 , 4 , 7 , 8 , 34 , 36 ].

In the political rhetoric of aging, intergenerational solidarity has recently been more closely linked to the sustainable development agenda, and current generations are expected to protect natural and economic conditions for future generations. It is recognized that older people can participate in society not only financially, but also through their voluntary contribution to caring for younger generations or through other forms of active participation in all areas of life (e.g., culture, education, family care, etc.). The intergenerational solidarity as an influential principle had an important impact on economic development and the development of alternatives in the field of welfare and health care. The importance of intergenerational solidarity is particularly seen in the area of financially sustainable social protection and welfare systems, active engagement of older people in society, promotion of healthy aging and independent living, and promotion of a positive image of aging. The last MIPPA/RIS decade has promoted deinstitutionalization and ‘aging in place’ (various forms, such as intergenerational or assisted living), as well as the use of technology and digitization as a means for older people to live independently in the community [ 7 ].

2.1.1 Shift from active aging toward healthy aging policy agenda

Currently, the most important document in the field of aging policy is the Decade of Healthy Aging (2021–2030) 5 [ 9 ]. The Decade of Healthy Aging is in line with all major global documents on aging and sustainable development. Healthy aging is defined as “the process of developing and maintaining the functional capabilities that enable well-being in older age” [ 9 ], This document introduces the “ policy agenda of ‘healthy aging’ as a new conceptual model in the field of aging policy. ‘Healthy aging’ replaces the World Health Organization’s previous focus on ‘active aging,’ a policy framework developed in 2002 [ 19 ]. The concept of active aging was primarily about expecting physically active older people to participate not only in working life but also in social, economic, cultural, spiritual, and civic affairs. Like active aging, healthy aging emphasizes the expectation that older people remain a resource for their families, communities, and the economy, but now the focus is on older people’s abilities to meet their basic needs in order to realize their visions of living with dignity [ 9 ].

The capabilities model used in the current aging policy combines three components of healthy aging: the intrinsic capabilities of the individual, the environment in which a person lives, and the way people interact with their environment [ 9 ]. This concept of aging introduces a functioning-based approach to aging policy. The functioning-based approach, as the most basic ability of older people to manage and meet their immediate and future needs, determines their ability to provide an adequate standard of living. This ability includes ensuring that older people can afford adequate food, clothing, suitable housing, and health and care services. The concept of healthy aging focuses on the ability of older people to meet their basic needs and assumes that older people have the desire to contribute to society and are willing to achieve their personal goals for well-being. Functioning is understood as the set of capabilities that enable all people to be and do what they rightly value. Because people’s abilities change over the life course, the capabilities approach focuses on the abilities of older people to minimize the impact of changes that may be associated with illness, disability, loss of financial or social networks, or livelihood.

2.1.2 Normative and economistic view of older people needs

Analysis of selected documents reveals a trend of customization of goals from one implementation cycle to the next, following changes in the global socioeconomic situation (e.g., the world has gone through a deep financial and health crisis and faces global security, political, and environmental crises) and instrumentalizing global policy documents for adaptation in regional and national policies. The needs of older people are placed in the context of broader and mostly pragmatic issues, such as the sustainability of social security systems, the challenges of an aging workforce and a declining number of working-age people, higher demand for health and social care services, and long-term care, and thus the need for more trained health and social care professionals. All of these issues have become common topics of public and private discussion in more than 50 years of global aging policies and sustainable development, and as such have influenced the rhetoric of human needs and intergenerational solidarity. Older people have an image as a consumer cohort that is both attractive to the care industry and a constant threat to future generations due to their growing needs.

Human needs are argued in the global policy agenda as an ethical imperative based on human rights. This policy advocates the model of universal human needs and that there is a collective responsibility for the optimal use of natural and human resources to meet human needs. Human needs are addressed in the Decade of Healthy Aging through a capability approach. The capability approach understands human well-being in terms of essential freedoms and opportunities that people possess [ 13 ]. The freedom to achieve well-being is a matter of what people can do and be and thus creates a moral framework for assessing whether a person has certain competencies and whether there are opportunities in their environment to live well [ 18 ]. However, the rhetoric of universal human needs in this policy overlaps with economic and moral rhetoric. The current politics of aging implies an exclusively economistic view of human need satisfaction, as the “subject” should tend to be self-sufficient in meeting his or her needs through participation in the economy and the free market.

The capacity approach to human functioning is based on the assumption that people will do whatever it takes to fulfill their identity project and does not allow for critical reflection on the consumerist nature of contemporary identity formation. Consequently, the function-based approach neglects the limits of sustainability by failing to provide much-needed critical reflection on non-finite consumption, and by providing little space for reflection on preferred choices for satisfying needs. Using the capability model as a counterpart to the deficit model, an aging policy cannot move beyond “repeating the same”. Although the ability concept advocates autonomy and the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions about their lives, it establishes a normative logic of standardized abilities that a person must have in order to be recognized as capable of participating successfully in society.

2.1.3 Politicization of intergenerational responsibility

Healthy aging as a political concept is an economic and moral justification for enacting policies and seeking programs to promote how to age well. By avoiding harmful behaviors, people demonstrate their commitment to taking responsibility for their own health and the health of others. The concept of healthy aging places the responsibility on people to strive to make healthy choices throughout their lives and, if they are in good health, helps to reduce the cost of health care in old age [ 37 , 38 ]. The older generation is portrayed as a large group that can be a strong economic force in society: ”The available evidence suggests that caring for older people is not as costly to finance and that older people, especially when healthy and active, provide significant economic and societal benefits, e.g., through direct participation in the formal and informal labour force, through taxes and consumption, social security contributions, through transfers of money and assets to younger generations, volunteering, etc. [ 18 ]. Key issues in the development of long-term care are therefore accompanied by an emphasis on opportunities for the economy. ‘Opportunity’ is a magic word used in the politics of aging and sustainability.

Intergenerational solidarity is a cultural and religious value that has been present in the relationships between family and community members since the existence of humanity. It is a basic requirement for communities to survive at all. The analysis of the main international documents on aging and sustainable development shows the politicization of the principle of intergenerational solidarity. In international strategies and action plans, it has become an alienated political goal over the last 50 years. For example, the documents analyzed report the exclusion and vulnerability of older people during the COVID-19 pandemic, although intergenerational solidarity is a catchword in policy documents. Declared goals are not a guarantee of their implementation. However, on the sustainable development side of global politics, the search for a response to implement intergenerational solidarity as a sentiment and value of humanity is evident: “A new global contract to provide global public goods and address major risks” is needed: “A renewed social contract at the national level and greater intergenerational solidarity must find expression in a new contract at the global level” [ 31 ].

The political rhetoric of international declarations is based on the principle of intergenerational justice – the recognition of responsibility toward future generations. Under phrases such as “ensuring a society for all ages”, “a sustainable world for all ages,” or “our common future”, “leaving no one behind,” or “transforming our future,” features of shared responsibility and a moral duty of all people can be discerned. At the same time, however, the strategies and goals in these documents reveal a continued individualization of health or social risks and a moral panic about older people who might not benefit society in old age because of their economic or health impairments. The politics of aging and sustainable development are inherently contradictory because there is an expectation of a more modest life while at the same time, there is constant pressure on people to participate in the economic race. The moral appeal to all people of all generations is presented as an individual ”debt“ to future generations, with no thought given to how consumer culture is sustained in a forced global market economy.

3. Principles of social work research to deepen knowledge of understanding the needs of older people

Political statements about older people have a strong influence on the perception of older people in society. The dominant discourses of science, if they do not critically engage with their own production of knowledge, might also remain trapped in the dominant forms of objectifying knowledge and political ideologies [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. Social work research faces the challenge of creating critical reference points to taken-for-granted constructions of reality and deciphering given meanings. Generalized political discourse is an interpretatively narrow and regulated language [ 40 , 42 ]. Objectifying reality in a generalized, universalistic, and technical political language facilitates an easy adaptation into mainstream public narratives. Indeed, global political documents exhibit all the attributes of metanarratives that create a comprehensive and universal truth as a grand theory [ 39 , 41 ]. This kind of political language creeps into everyday language and triggers a “looping effect” of self-referential descriptions of reality [ 42 ]. Generalized language in global policy documents influences not only the attitudes and opinions of ordinary people but also the discourses of academia and experts [ 41 ]. Expert texts tend to translate lived human experience into a linguistic form acceptable to relations of domination [ 44 ]. The production of knowledge is always a political act and a manifestation of a privileged position in society. The words of the dominant narrative have immense power in people’s lives and ‘leave their mark everywhere’ [ 39 , 41 ]. Influencing the interpretation of reality is indeed the most powerful position in society.

Critical theories in social work point to the problem of traditional ‘universal truth’ [ 45 , 46 ]. There are ‘voices that are traditionally silenced’ [ 45 , 46 , 47 ]. Correcting deficient forms of interpretation can only be done by recognizing people’s particular knowledge and using language that is sensitive to lived experience [ 44 , 47 , 48 ]. The lack of interpretive schemes is not only related to taboo subjects (not talked about out loud) but part of the silence is related to maintaining the status quo in a society [ 47 , 49 , 50 , 51 ]. For example, the political metarhetoric of integrating older people into society by emphasizing happy and healthy aging silences the voices of the less happy and less affluent older people as ‘social problems’.

Social work as a value-based profession derives entirely from the principles of human rights and the improvement of social well-being and quality of life for all people [ 48 , 49 , 51 ]. The global definition of social work explains in detail the mission of social work, “Social work is a practise-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and human empowerment and liberation. The principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility, and respect for diversity are central to social work. Drawing on theories of social work, social sciences, humanities, and indigenous knowledge, social work engages people and structures to address life’s challenges and improve well-being” [ 2 ].

The definition of social work promotes a holistic person-in-environment approach to social work, and in order to accomplish the complex task, social workers must grasp people’s real-life situations from all possible angles [ 44 , 51 , 52 ]. Social work research is an inevitable part and the first step in the social work mission for improving the well-being of people. Therefore, the premise of social work research is that social work, as theory and practise, must explore the specifics of people’s everyday lives and incorporate the findings into social work interventions (transform the findings into knowledge for “doing”). The challenge for social work is to take up this premise and create the conditions for research-opportunities, methods, knowledge, and expertise-that enable, first, dialog with people and, second, ongoing reflexive dialog between social work theory and practice as both provide a conceptual framework for understanding people’s realities. In conducting research and planning interventions, therefore, social workers face the practical challenge of how to create opportunities for dialog with people and how to learn as much as possible about people’s everyday lives in order to authentically capture their conceptions of their reality.

3.1 Principle 1 of social work research: critical perspective on scientific and political generalizations

Political narratives in global documents create an influential framework for a simplified generalization of reality. Images of people and definitions of needs will always contain the assumptions that researchers and experts make about people and realities. The anthropological and ethnographic research tradition warns us of the pitfalls of creating colonizing knowledge [ 16 , 53 , 54 ]. The pitfalls of patronizing objectification of reality into which researchers concerned with the needs of older people and planners of social welfare interventions can easily fall are precisely those of selectivity and generalization [ 37 , 44 , 55 ]. Analyzing and collating information inevitably leads to generalization, selection, and grouping of information, while the demands of the feasibility of ideas and the pragmatics of human life lead to the reduction of people’s expectations, desires, and needs. If we ignore narrative and language, which is a powerful transmitter of cultural and social patterns, we can quickly get caught up in stereotypes when exploring needs and, in fact, help to perpetuate simplistic, stereotypical ideas about people’s everyday lives [ 56 ].

In the 21st century, criticism of prevailing social, political, or moral discourses is no longer enough. In social science research, and especially in social work research, there is a long tradition of radical and transformative research practice and knowledge [ 44 , 49 , 51 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. The intention for research to move beyond tokenistic, self-referential scholarship is evident in various research activities (action research, citizen science, participatory user research, ethnographic research, etc.) in which researchers have been intensively involved in community and institutional transformation processes [ 44 , 49 , 51 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 ].

When researching the lives of older people and their needs from a social work perspective, we must be aware of the importance of research procedures in creating emancipatory knowledge about life. As holders of privileged knowledge in contemporary society, professionals have a great responsibility to critically evaluate their own knowledge [ 53 ]. The self-sufficiency of expert knowledge and the self-confidence of professionals in their own “omniscience” are today the greatest obstacles to creating a dialog with people. In this respect, social work, which is in direct contact with people every day, is a discipline that should take advantage of this possibility of infinite dialog with people to constantly reflect on the knowledge of life [ 43 , 44 , 53 ]. Complementarity of knowledge is only possible when we express different experiences and perspectives. By exploring particular life experiences, exploring individual survival strategies, comparing different life contexts, and testing alternatives, we discovered not only individual particular life strategies but also situations of collective activation in developing responses [ 44 , 49 , 51 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 ].

Social work research is therefore always complex and involves multiple knowledge holders (people from the community, professionals, service users, and other knowledgeable people). Multiple perspectives and interpretations of interrelated situations help find the “blind spots” and identify the ideologies that underlie different bodies of knowledge. In this way, we can systematically and continuously correct social work theories and practices. Research, then, is always a critical look at the established cultural and civilizational forms of a society [ 16 , 38 , 43 , 44 ]. By “dissecting” the features of people’s everyday lives, we also “dissect” the self-evident and invisible social forms. It is therefore not irrelevant who studies everyday life and how, and on the basis of which theoretical and value-related assumptions they make statements about life [ 16 ,  43 , 44 , 53 , 63 ].

Exploring needs from a critical social work perspective is therefore always an exploration of traditions of thought and systems of constructing and justifying knowledge about the world. Adding to or correcting the stereotypical political and scientific narrative of people in need of care can only be done through an analysis of the language and constructions of one’s experience [ 44 , 49 ]. Exploring needs requires looking beyond the ‘similarly sad or similarly successful story’ as well as beyond the ‘binding identity project” [ 37 ]. Improved interpretive schemes for explaining the world (new ideas and language) can only emerge in dialogic encounters with the “other” and otherness (helping us to see our invisible selves) and in the dialectical process of shaping personal theories and practices of everyday life [ 37 , 43 , 62 ]. Social work research is therefore constantly searching for unknown to correct conclusions about reality in order to correct and improve limited or inadequate interpretive schemes.

3.2 Principle 2 of social work research: transformation of mechanistic models of long-term care

Policy documents have a strong influence on the perception of what should be under the radar of science and the professions. For example, the concept of healthy aging and the associated capability model create a specific perspective on the needs of older people and the ideas of long-term care that should meet those needs. Today, we can state that long-term care for older people is a complex system of activities and services for people in institutions or in the community [ 48 , 49 , 51 , 52 , 60 ]. The complex organization in systems of care is trapped in the people processing management. The long-term care industry, organized on the model of sequential care on an assembly line, with different caregivers providing fragments of care, uses categorization tools as input information for organizing work [ 44 , 55 ]. The tendency to develop mechanistic tools for managing people is therefore pervasive, as care providers and care institutions must adapt to the rules of the corporate business. In an effort to simplify management, capability information, as basic deficit information, introduces the immediate and causal logic of imposed or assumed needs. The procedural model of work does not go beyond an alienated form of care. Assistance is not about dialogically co-creating responses in the context of people’s lives, but about finding arguments about how to adapt a person’s situation to the system of care. Standardized needs are not something personal, inherent in the individual as part of their life experience, but become part of the imposed reality enforced by the service system and standard forms of assistance [ 44 ].

Therefore, the assessment of abilities in their selected categories can be very reductionist. Measuring people’s abilities can be a moment of depersonalization of human life. Together with the selection of indicators of basic needs, this can be a moment of total reduction of human existence to a few measurable categories (e.g., the ability to dress, take medication, and handle money) [ 9 ]. There is an illusion of ‘objectivity’ in the ability to measure because all measurement instruments are arbitrarily determined. By using standardized assessment tools, professionals attempt to create the impression of equality in decision-making processes about people’s social and health rights [ 44 ]. However, the models used to assess people’s abilities are selective and arbitrary, depending on who sets the criteria and what the model measures. Psychophysical ability assessment scales are an example. Although these assessment scales (e.g., disease progression scales, physical mobility assessment) are practical, transparent, and provide a relatively quick indication of a person’s basic psychophysical abilities, they are generally an “ability set” that does not contribute to an understanding of personal needs or support operationalization of need satisfaction [ 44 ].

In everyday professional practice, there are many examples of attribution of needs where professionals do not recognize people’s needs but argue that users need a particular service. Example: When someone is homeless, professionals conclude that they need to be placed in a group home (perhaps they need their own place to live in the first place); when a person with dementia loses orientation to the environment, the conclusion is that they need to be placed in a safe facility (perhaps they just need companionship to go for a walk); when an older woman experiences violence, the conclusion is that she needs to be placed in a safe house (in reality, she may want the perpetrator of violence to stop harassing her) [ 44 ]. In the person-processing logic of work, causal logic and standardized offers trigger a scenario in which “an older person with a chronic illness needs to be placed in a nursing home,” “the dementia patient needs a day centre,” “people living alone need volunteers”,” “a person who cannot prepare her own meals needs a home delivery service,” “the unemployed person needs a course on how to write a job application,” and so on. If one understands needs as purely administrative categories, one quickly falls into a cause-and-effect logic, similar to the way diagnoses are made in medicine. Needs are a “disease” to be diagnosed and services are a “prescription” If we as professionals focus only on the services we can provide, the actual circumstances of need and sources of power (capabilities) become irrelevant. A person in the role of ‘user/client’ is in a take-it-or-leave-it situation” [ 39 , 44 , 55 ].

Understanding needs must overcome the simplistic causal logic. However, people do not want to question the taken-for-granted, ‘natural obviousness’ of everyday life [ 66 ]. Human beings physical appearance in the world and awareness of physical vulnerability and transience of human being life bring feelings of uncertainty and unpredictability to our existence. Truths and ideas about the world help us make sense of existence and support the belief that all is well with life [ 66 , 67 , 68 ]. There is a link between routines and understanding needs. Many needs relate to daily rhythms and activities, but also to the predictability of the future. A sudden disruption in the familiar scenario causes people to find ways to restore the previous routine (needs expressed as repair tactics) or to adapt to a new situation (needs expressed as adaptation tactics) [ 69 ]. These behaviors are adapted to daily rhythms that are part of the daily routine (e.g., taking care of hygiene, preparing a meal, contacting relatives, visiting friends, etc.), as well as to life rhythms associated with turning points in life (e.g., moving to an institution, retirement, death of a partner, moving to another town, serious illness, etc.).

From a purely practical perspective of daily routines and activities, needs can be identified as anchor points for creating plans to operationalize strategies for daily living [ 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Images of human needs, in their basic nature and universality, provide a sense of a shared world and support individual feelings of ontological security [ 66 ]. One could say that in the modern era, the concept of human needs has provided codified knowledge about daily life [ 44 ]. Therefore, we constantly create more or less reliable and credible conceptions of the world as we try to understand ourselves and the world in which we live [ 66 , 69 ]. Social work research should incorporate sensitivity to the unique life of every person. Older people want a tranquil life and not a constant intrusion into their everyday life. They want to be cared for and nurtured in a home environment; under the conditions they find meaningful for them. Most of their needs can be grouped around three axes: the activity axis (activities of daily living), the integration axis (connectedness with other people, relationships, sociability, and contacts), and the social power axis, which is about society’s attitude toward older people and its influence on planning their future [ 44 ]. These three axes are crucial for the creation of long-term care focused on the overall security not only of old people but also of younger generations (because the experience of security is an individual balance of health, respect, satisfactory material conditions, and decision-making opportunities) [ 44 ].

The advantage of social work research oriented to personal everyday scenarios and contexts is that it offers the opportunity to understand that people have very different ideas about what they need, how urgently they need something, and to what extent. By talking about people’s lives, researchers learn more about people’s personal desires, what is important to them, and what the important goals are in their lives [ 44 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Therefore, in order to understand the needs of older people, the needs of other generations must also be explored and understood, because intergenerational solidarity is about the values of all people - what people want for themselves and for those around them, what they value, and what they consider important in life. Forcing institutionalized solutions to people’s everyday needs creates discomfort, paralyzes people’s resilience, and disempowers them to develop their own capacities [ 44 ].

3.3 Principle 3 of social work research: the exploration of needs as a moment of profound reflection of reality

Human existence is embedded in an ever-changing reality to which individuals seek to adapt or change. We must understand needs as part of this ever-changing reality. People today are confronted with two definitive facts: First, unlimited satisfaction of human needs is not possible on a finite planet, and second, intergenerational ethics have reinforced the realization that the effects of our ecological actions today will negatively impact those who come after us [ 70 ]. As awareness of the devastating effects of human exploitation of the planet’s resources emerged, the concept of human needs became the subject of critical and reflective discussion [ 71 ]. The interaction between planetary boundaries and human well-being is seen as an important framework for shaping sustainable socioeconomic and other policies [ 71 ,  72 ]. Human well-being and planetary well-being become dual and inseparable goals for any human activity. The anthropocentric vision of social justice is reflected in the demands for environmental justice to preserve the planet [ 14 , 71 , 72 , 73 ]. Understanding basic human needs within planetary boundaries means that creating a safe, fair, and equitable space for humanity requires greater global equity in the transfer of natural resources to meet human needs and absolute efficiency to return to planetary boundaries [ 71 , 73 ].

Exploring needs is a moment of critical reflection on everyday life scenarios and as such can become transformative in the process of developing alternative solutions for practical (and ecological) change [ 43 ]. Ecological awareness of the urgent task of changing our habits confronts us with the task of overcoming entrenched ideas about our perception of needs and rethinking our value systems. Exploring human needs is an act that directly clashes with our established patterns of behavior [ 16 ]. It is the issue of the perception of human needs that confronts us with the inner tendency of humans to control and influence the future in order to suppress feelings of insecurity [ 66 , 67 ]. But life on earth and the future as such remain unpredictable, despite our constant efforts to create knowledge to control and direct all aspects of life [ 66 , 67 , 68 ]. The future is “available” only at the level of assumptions. The profound discrepancy between perceptions of ecological and social needs confronts the human sciences and helps practice with the ethical demand and inescapable task of moving beyond ecologically blind studies of the social world and human needs. It is not possible to discuss the social dimensions of well-being without considering ecological issues. Climate change and other environmental issues remind us that human well-being depends on the well-being of the entire planet. Like all helping professions, social work is at a crossroads to rethink its ethical human rights foundations and professional mandate. The ethical and moral question is how professional knowledge can contribute to a socially and environmentally just society [ 72 , 74 ].

Exploring and discussing people’s needs is a powerful force that encourages people to think about their lives. By exploring needs, we are constantly questioning the seemingly obvious and taken for granted, reflecting and articulating everyday routines [ 60 , 69 ]. Talking about people’s everyday lives and their personal stories is always a moment of reflection of the world in which we live [ 66 , 68 ]. The question about needs stimulates thinking about the future. People think about needs in terms of situations in the present, but they connect the ideas to the future. The concept of risk has an important influence on the question of needs. Risk refers to future events where it is not certain what will happen in the future [ 67 ]. People rely on experience, knowledge, and available resources to manage risk and hope that the desired scenario will occur. Needs thus become part of the scenario plan (they are an idea of what they need to achieve the desired outcome). As such, needs have the property of having a response and a path to the response. Exploring the situation of older people, which includes a contextual consideration (e.g., characteristics of place, time, social network, etc.), allows the practical ideas to be integrated into an operationalized plan (as a path to a desired outcome) [ 44 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. When assessing needs by how certain it is that people’s expectations will be met, understanding the context makes it easier to imagine how events (situations that follow in response to needs) might occur.

Social work research aims to identify people’s individual, intimate plans regarding their desires for need satisfaction. In an ideal research situation, it would therefore be necessary to include action elements and testing of solutions (proposals and ideas) in any social work research [ 44 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 75 ]. In this case, it always turns out that solutions are never final, because only when we test the solution or idea can gaps in the plan be discovered and the plan be revised (or the idea can be reversed based on new understanding) [ 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. By exploring and recording everyday life and the needs articulated in it, we become attentive to the question of what knowledge individuals and communities have created as meaningful [ 43 , 49 , 56 ]. Therefore, sharing visions of needs can also be understood as a dynamic force for connecting communities and building social fabric [ 61 ].

3.4 Principle 4 of social work research: understanding needs as a changing concept

Science usually creates objectified factual knowledge. The challenging task of changing a limited anthropocentric and colonizing view of human needs so that it becomes more relevant in the context of a socially and ecologically just society is a demanding one and involves the reconstruction of scientific knowledge creation. The guiding principle of social work research for the possibility of creating transformative knowledge and values is rooted in human wisdom. There is a constant dialog and dialectic that takes place in people’s everyday lives and is reflected in the development of intimate knowledge formation. We can say that when we theorize about everyday life, we select and observe certain situations, attribute certain features to them, identify certain relationships between those features, and then see if the thing as we understand it stands up to comparison with other theories of everyday life, works in practice, and helps us achieve or understand what we want to achieve or understand [ 59 ].

When the political agenda gives preference to certain solutions, it sets the normative framework for interpreting reality and underscores the perception of needs. However, like any small or large personal theory about life, people develop their own personal theories about needs. Social work research can identify both how curtain concepts creep into everyday knowledge and how certain people’s values and beliefs live beyond popular and dominant concepts of life. Social work needs research, then, is first and foremost hermeneutic research because it is concerned with interpretation in knowledge formation. Secondly, social work research follows the heuristic approach in research design, as it is based on dialog as a specific form of dialectic that reflects and contradicts stereotypical public, scientific, and political beliefs.

We can conclude that social work research works under the paradigm of maximum structural variation of perspectives, while its analysis is focused on the discovery of similarities and differences in their temporal validity, as long as new and better explanations are created [ 76 ]. The complex exploration of the everyday world of older people leads to explanations of the contexts, and the circumstances in which their needs arise. It can help to gain insights into the specifics of different people’s lives and their environments [ 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Social work research connects the different actors in shaping the idea of a common future based on concrete life situations [ 44 , 45 , 75 ]. The ideal outcome of a dialogical study of needs is an agreement negotiated between different actors in the community (residents, professionals, local policy representatives, the public, etc.) on the design of responses to the assumed needs. Therefore, the study of the needs of older people and the development of solutions to their needs is a strategy for creating knowledge about the characteristics of a particular place and time.

Exploring the needs of older people is a search for a delicate balance between individual freedom and respect for others, between autonomy and connectedness [ 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. “Thus, solving problems in the domain of wisdom requires more than the domain-relevant knowledge identified in research on other types of expertise; it requires qualities unique to the domain of wisdom. In addition to factual and procedural knowledge (heuristics) about the human condition and how to live a good life, competence in the domain of wisdom requires, in particular, consideration of context, tolerance of differing values, and the ability to deal with uncertainty” [ 77 ]. The satisfaction of needs is a creative act of human beings. It is a dialectic that takes place between experience, the interpretation of experience, and a new idea. The possibility of forming one’s own opinion is the basis for individual freedom and the meaning of life. In this way, social work research directly implements the goal of the Global Strategy on Aging: “The strategy aims to foster the ability of older people themselves to invent the future in ways that we and previous generations might never have imagined” [ 18 ].

Lived human experience teaches us that wisdom comes from gaining deep insights into oneself and one’s life based on procedural knowledge (strategies and heuristics for dealing with life and its meaning and for making life choices), contextualism across the lifespan (knowledge of the many contexts of life), consideration of value relativism (recognition of and tolerance for different values held by other people and other societies), and tolerance of ambiguity: the ability to recognize and cope with the uncertainties in one’s life that arise from uncertainty [ 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ]. Therefore, social work is always in search of understanding an ever-changing context of reality and striving for the necessary stability in people’s lives. Social work research is a never-ending story.

4. Conclusions

The world today has to cope with humanitarian and environmental problems. Social work research can help to discover the creative inner wisdom of people, as we need transformative ideas for sustainable and humane solutions. Global political agendas determine the priorities of research topics and shape the dominant narratives. A careful look at the international documents studied showed us the content and areas of interest pursued by different global and regional actors. Although terminology and rhetoric have changed slightly and priorities shift, the focus of aging policy has remained the same over the past 50 years: Recognition of the potential of older people (the potential of longevity for the economy and society), health promotion (functioning-based approaches in maintaining the ability of older people), and long-term care (sustainable and equitable systems of care for older people with significant declines in the physical and mental capacity that limit their ability to care for themselves and participate in society).

Current global aging policies are based on the healthy aging agenda, which justifies economic and moral reasons for promoting quality of life in old age by maintaining good health throughout the life course. In conjunction with the concept of intergenerational solidarity, the guarantee of meeting the needs of all generations lies in the reciprocity between the younger and older generations. Universal human needs and human rights are presented almost as synonyms in global policy documents, so we should not confuse the universality of human rights with the idea of universal needs. While human rights are considered universal by definition - they apply equally to all human beings - the universality of human needs should be understood as an interconnected and interactive system of basic human needs that are satisfied in an infinite and insatiable context of life.

The healthy aging agenda’s concept of capability advocates for the autonomy and freedom of individuals to make their own decisions about their lives, creating a normative logic of standardized capabilities that a person must have in order to be recognized as capable of participating successfully in society. It is important for helping professions to be alert to alienating, people-processing practices in long-term care systems, as the organization of work, and categorization of people can lead to mechanistic work with people. Social work as theory and practice is critical of generalized conceptions of older people and promotes those research strategies that allow for the discovery of the diversity of life experiences and the correction of different kinds of knowledge (especially hidden, ignored knowledge).

The experience of exclusion is the experience of invisibility. In today’s society, older people are marginalized unless they have economic power, but within this group, older women, people with dementia, and poor older people are even more marginalized. By exploring the everyday lives of older people and understanding their needs beyond socially dictated identities, we create narratives and a language that provides the opportunity to address experiences and issues that are otherwise outside of mainstream lifestyles. The hidden, the unspoken, are not only illness, death, and loneliness, but also the experience of systematic neglect and abuse, and depersonalization, especially among people living in institutions.

The overarching idea of social work theory and practice is a socially and environmentally just society. Starting from the anti-oppressive and radical scholars of social work, there is a social work knowledge and experience of critical research. Thus, social work research is not only about collecting data and interpreting information but also about finding concrete and useful practical solutions for people. In its pragmatic objective, social work should always benefit people. It can be said that needs have assumed a representative and symbolic function in the interpretation of what should be fulfilled in the life of each person. In a generalized and stereotyped way, human needs have become ideas that people exchange among themselves to explain the characteristics of individual and collective life situations. Survival itself requires a constant process of articulating the experience of reality between people, and by describing needs we can create a universal system of exchanging practical and concrete information. Needs as schemas, codes, symbols, and concepts are there to explain to each other what we need in life to live at all, and what we aspire to in order to feel fulfilled. Identifying and naming needs is how we co-create the truths of reality and agree to represent our position in this world. Or, to put it another way, needs have their place in daily life as common markers of reality, and as ideas, they help us generalize the basic human experience of being.

All people need a basic sense of security to make their lives predictable and manageable. An empowering social work research is that which allows people to develop their own theories of life, their personal models of knowing how the world works, and how to make sense of life. Freedom comes from the personal inner power of judgment [ 81 ]. The ability to independently decide what is good for us and the ability to make choices are linked to an autonomous sense of knowing what we need and want. Thus, each of us spends a lifetime developing and testing our own theories about the world and ourselves. We cannot escape this theorizing because life experience forces us to constantly adapt to life’s challenges. Social science, and social work science in particular, has a unique opportunity to open up to the excluded, ignored, and neglected experiences of human existence. Older people are the ones who can contribute to providing the necessary reference points for reflecting on reality since their world has changed several times during their own lives.

Acknowledgments

This paper is related to research that is financially supported by the Slovenian Research Agency within the research project (J5-2567) Long-term Care of People with Dementia in Social Work Theory and Practice.

Conflict of interest

“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

• 1. International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW) [Internet]. Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles. [S.l.] IASSW; 2018. Available from: https://www.iassw-aiets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Global-Social-Work-Statement-of-Ethical-Principles-IASSW-27-April-2018-1.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 2. International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW). Global Definition of Social Work [Internet]. [S.l.] IASSW; 2014. Available from: https://www.iassw-aiets.org/global-definition-of-social-work-review-of-the-global-definition/ [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 3. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Ageing Policy in Europe, North America and Central Asia in 2017-2022: Synthesis Report on the Implementation of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing in the ECE Region between 2017 and 2022 [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2022. Available from: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-08/Synthesis-report_0.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 4. United Nations. MIPAA/RIS+20 20 Years of Action towards Creating Societies for all Ages in the UNECE Region [Internet]. Geneva: United Nations; 2022. Available from: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/ECE_WG.1_40_WEB.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 5. United Nations. Global Sustainable Development Report 2023, Advance, United Version [Internet]. New York: United Nations; 2023. Available from: https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/Advance%20unedited%20GSDR%2014June2023.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 6. World Health Organization. Ageing and Health [Internet]. [S.l.] World Health Organization; 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 7. United Nations. Rome Ministerial Declaration: A Sustainable World for all Ages: Joining Forces for Solidarity and Equal Opportunities throughout Life [Internet]. Geneva: United Nations; 2022. Available from: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/Rome__Ministerial_Declaration.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 8. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). MIPAA/RIS+20 20 Years of Action towards Creating Societies for all Ages in the UNECE Region [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2022. Available from: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/ECE_WG.1_40_WEB.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 9. World Health Organization. Decade of Healthy Ageing: Baseline Report [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240017900 [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 10. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our Common Future: Brundtland Report [Internet]. Geneva: WCED; 1987. Available from: https://www.are.admin.ch/are/en/home/media/publications/sustainable-development/brundtland-report.html [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 11. Doyal L, Gough I. A Theory of Human Needs. Basingstoce: Palgrave Macmillan; 1991. 374 p
• 12. Max-Neef M, Elizalde A, Hopenhayn M. Human Scale Development: An Option for the Future. Development Dialogue. Uppsala, Santiago: Dag Hammarskjold Foundation; 1989. pp. 5-80
• 13. Sen A. Comodities and Capabilities. Oxford: Elsevier Science Publishers; 1985
• 14. Gough I. Heat, Greed and Human Need: Climate Change, Capitalism and Sustainable Wellbeing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2017. 264 p
• 15. Macarov D. Social Welfare: Structure and Practice. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications; 1995. 341 p
• 16. Dover MA. Human needs: overview. In: Encyclopedia of Social Work [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press and National Association of Social Workers; 2016. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael-Dover/publication/301542601_Human_Needs_Overview/links/5c040a9e299bf1a3c15da9ad/Human-Needs-Overview.pdf [Accessed: March 13, 2018]
• 17. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Berlin Ministerial Declaration: A Society for all Ages in the UNECE Region [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2002. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/_images/Berlin_ministerial_declaration_2002.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 18. World Health Organization. Global Strategy and Action Plan on Ageing and Health [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/329960 [Accessed: July 28, 2023]
• 19. World Health Organization. Active Ageing: A Policy Framework. World Health Organization [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2002. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67215 [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 20. World Health Organization. Global Campaign to Combat Ageism [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2019. Available from: https://www.who.int/ageing/ageism/campaign/en/ [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 21. United Nations (UN). Universal Declaration of Human Rights [Internet]. New York, Geneva, Nairobi, Vienna: UN; 1948. Available from: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 22. United Nations General Assembly. World Assembly on the Elderly a/CONF.113/31 [Internet]. New York: United Nations General Assembly; 1982. Available from: https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ageing/documents/Resources/VIPEE-English.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 23. United Nations General Assembly. The United Nations Principles for Older Persons Resolution 46/91 [Internet]. Geneva, New York: United Nations General Assembly; 1991. Available from: https://olderpeople.wales/about/publication-scheme/our-policies/un-principles/ [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 24. United Nations. Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing: Report of the Second World Assembly on Ageing [Internet]. New York: UN; 2002. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/mica2002/documents/Madrid2002Report.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 25. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Regional Implementation Strategy for the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2002. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/mica2002/documents/ECE_AC23_2002_2_Rev6_e.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 26. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Vienna Ministerial Declaration: Ensuring a Society for all Ages: Promoting Quality of Life and Active Ageing [Internet]. New York, Geneva: UNECE; 2012. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/Ministerial_Conference_Vienna/Documents/ECE.AC.30-2012-3.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 27. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Lisbon Ministerial Declaration: A Sustainable Society for all Ages: Realizing the Potential of Living longer: Ensuring a Society for all Ages: Promoting Quality of Life and Active Ageing [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2017. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/Ministerial_Conference_Lisbon/Declaration/2017_Lisbon_Ministerial_Declaration.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 28. United Nations General Assembly. United Nations Millennium Declaration: Millennium Development Goals a/55/L.2 [Internet]. New York: United Nations General Assembly; 2000. Available from: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_55_2.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 29. UN General Assembly. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1 [Internet]. New York: UN General Assembly; 2015. Available from: https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html [Accessed: July 28, 2023]
• 30. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Ageing, Older Persons and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. [Internet]. New York: UNDP; 2017. Available from: https://www.undp.org/publications/ageing-older-persons-and-2030-agenda-sustainable-development [Accessed: July 28, 2023]
• 31. United Nations. Our Common Agenda – Report of the Secretary-General [Internet]. New York: United Nations; 2021. Available from: https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 32. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). León Ministerial Declaration: A Society for all Ages: Challenges and Opportunities [Internet]. New York, Geneva: UNECE; 2007. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/ConferenceonAgeing_2007/Declaration/ECE_AC30_2007_L1_E.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 33. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Implementation of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing in the UNECE Region: Review of the First Five Years [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2007. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/_images/PAU_2008_Publ_LeonCH03.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 34. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Synthesis Report on the Implementation of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing in the ECE Region between 2012 and 2017 [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2017. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/Ministerial_Conference_Lisbon/Practical_infos/Synthesis_report_MIPAA15_Room_Document_with_Annex.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 35. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Ageing in the Twenty-First Century: A Celebration and a Challenge [Internet]. New York: UNFPA; 2017. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/publications/ageing-twenty-first-century [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 36. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Second Review and Appraisal of the Regional Implementation Strategy of the Madrid Plan of Action on Ageing (MIPAA/RIS): Synthesis Report on the Implementation of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing in the UNECE Region [Internet]. Geneva: UNECE; 2012. Available from: https://unece.org/DAM/pau/age/Ministerial_Conference_Vienna/Documents/Synthesis_report_19-11-12.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2023]
• 37. Dean H. Social rights and natural resources. In: Fitzpatrick T, editor. International Handbook on Social Policy and the Environment. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar; 2014. pp. 401-418
• 38. Dean H. Understanding Human Need. Understanding Welfare: Social Issues, Policy and Practice Series. 1st ed. Bristol: The Policy Press; 2010. 240 p
• 39. Urek M. Zgodbe na delu: pripovedovanje, zapisovanje in poorčanje v socialnem delu. Ljubljana: Založba /*cf.; 2005. 319 p
• 40. Schutz A. In: Nijhoff M, editor. Collected Papers II. Studies in Social Theory. Haag: Springer; 1976. 312 p
• 41. Foucault M. The Birth of the Clinic: An Archeology of Medical Perception. London: Harmondsworth Penguin; 1994. 240 p
• 42. Hacking I. The looping effect of humankinds. In: Sperber D, Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ, editors. Casual Cognition: A Multi-Disciplinary Debate. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1995. pp. 351-383
• 43. Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Harmondsworth Penguin; 1980. 186 p
• 44. Mali J, Grebenc V. Strategije raziskovanja in razvoja dolgotrajne oskrbe starih ljudi v Ljubljani. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za socialno delo; 2021. 607 p
• 45. Ife J. Community Development in an Uncertain World: Vision, Analysis and Practice. 2nd ed. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press; 2016. 402 p
• 46. Thompson N. Anti-discriminatory Practice. London, New York: Pelgrave; 2001. 194 p
• 47. hooks b. Where we Stand: Class Matters. New York, London: Routledge; 2000. 176 p
• 48. Mali J. The cultural context of long-term care. In: Rogers HC, editor. Social Work Practice, Perceptions, Challenges. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2017. 102 p
• 49. Flaker V, Mali J, Kodele T, Grebenc V, Škerjanc J, Urek M. Dolgotrajna oskrba: očrt potreb in odgovorov nanje. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za socialno delo; 2008. 480 p
• 50. Jurček A, Urek M, Sobočan, AMarija. Življenja LGBTQ+ starejših od 50 let v času epidemije covida-19. Socialno delo. 2022; 61 (1):27-40. DOI: 10.51741/sd.2022.61.1.27-40
• 51. Grebenc V. Understanding the needs of older people: Shifting toward more community based responses. Revija za socijalnu politiku. 2014; 21 (2):133-160. DOI: 10.3935/rsp.v21i2.1187
• 52. Flaker V, Ficko K, Grebenc V, Mali J, Nagode M, Rafaelič A. Hitra ocean potreb in storitev. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za socialno delo; 2019. 359 p
• 53. Illich I. Needs. In: Sachs W, editor. The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge Power. London, New York: Zed Books; 1992. 306 p
• 54. Hesse-Biber SN, Leavy P, Yaiser ML. Feminist approaches to research as a process: Reconceptualizing epistemology, methodology, and methods. In: Hesse-Biber SN, Yaiser ML, editors. Feminist Perspectives in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. 448 p
• 55. Lipsky M. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service. New York: Russel Sage Foundation; 1980. 272 p
• 56. Goffman E. Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1981. 335 p
• 57. DuBois BL, Krogsrud Miley K. Social Work: An Empowering Profession. Boston: Pearson Education; 2005. 523 p
• 58. Alston M, Bowles W. Research for Social Workers: An Introduction to Methods. 3rd. ed. London: Routledge; 2013. 280 p
• 59. Ayre P, Barrett D. Theory and practice: The chicken and the egg. European Journal of Social Work, The International Forum for the Social Profession. 2002; 6 (2):125-132. DOI: 10.1080/1369145032000144395
• 60. Mali J. An example of qualitative research in social work with older people: The history of social work in old people’s homes in Slovenija. Collegium Antropologicum. 2011; 35 (3):657-664
• 61. Urek M. Flaker V. @Bojza.Direktno socialno delo. Ljubljana: Publishing house/*cf.; 2012. 372 p
• 62. Grebenc V, Šabič A, editors. Odprta scena: zmanjševanje škode med brezdomnimi uporabniki drog v Ljubljani. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za socialno delo; 2020. 228 p
• 63. Mali J. A case for a narrative approach to research into social work perspective on dementia. Socialno Delo. 2018; 57 (3):209-224
• 64. Flaker V, Rafaelič A. Dezinstitucionalizacija II: nedokončana. Ljubljana: Založba Univerze; 2023. 414 p
• 65. Rafaelič A, Flaker V. Dezinstitucionalizacija I: neskončna. V Ljubljani: Založba Univerze; 2021. 317 p
• 66. Giddens A. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern age. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1991. 264 p
• 67. Beck U. Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications; 1992. 260 p
• 68. Bauman Z. Liquid Times: Living in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2007. 115 p
• 69. Goffman E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London: Cox & Wyiman Ltd.; 1959. 259 p
• 70. Naude P. Can we overcome the anthropocentrism bias in sustainability discourse? African Journal of Business Ethics. 2018; 1 (2):56-67. DOI: 10.15249/11-2-189
• 71. Raworth K. A safe and just space for humanity: Can we live within the doughnut. Oxfam Disscassion Papers. 2012; 8 :1-26. Available from: https://www-cdn.oxfam.org/s3fs-public/file_attachments/dp-a-safe-and-just-space-for-humanity-130212-en_5.pdf [Accessed: June 25, 2023]
• 72. Dominelli L. Green Social Work: From Environmental Crisis to Environmental Justice. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2012. 462 p
• 73. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS III, Lambin E, et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature. 2009; 461 (24):427-475. DOI: 10.1038/461472a
• 74. Banks S. Ethics in the age of austerity: Social work and the evolving new public management. Journal of Social Interventions. 2011; 20 (2):5-23. DOI: 10.18352/jsi.260
• 75. D’Cruz H, Jones M. Social Work Research Ethical and Practical Context. London: Sage Publications; 2004. 194 p
• 76. Kleining G, Witt H. The qualitative heuristic approach: A methodology for discovery in psychology and the social sciences. Rediscovering the method of introspection as an example. FQS [Internet]. 2000; 1 (1):1-6. Available from: https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1123 [Accessed: July 3, 2023]
• 77. Dong M, Weststrate NM, Fournier MA. Thirty years of psychological wisdom research: What we know about the correlates of an ancient concept. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2023; 18 (4):778-811. DOI: 10.1177/17456916221114096
• 78. Smith ED. The Conceptual Practises of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 1990. 235 p
• 79. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2000. 1143 p
• 80. Garfinkel H. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Clifs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1967. 304 p
• 81. Kant I. Critique of the Power of Judgment. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press; 2000. 476 p
• Twenty-seven different documents from international organizations (e.g., UN and WHO resolutions, declarations, synthesis reports, etc.) were reviewed for their use of the concept of older people’s needs and intergenerational solidarity. The documents reviewed are listed in the Table 1.
• The list of research project with author’s participation:
• The 10 Commitments of the Regional Implementation Strategy for the Madrid International Plan of Action on Aging 2002 [26]:
• Sustainable Development Goals [29]:
• The UN Decade of Healthy Aging (2021–2030) [9] is based on the Global strategy and action plan on aging and health (2016–2030) [17] and aligned with Transforming our world- the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [30], and key global commitments set by Madrid International Plan of Action on Aging [24]. It follows also other closely related strategies and plans endorsed by the World Health Assembly and the United Nations General Assembly related to population aging.

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Social science research: principles, methods, and practices 

Link to book here.

Who It’s For: Anyone new to research in the social sciences, business, education, public health, and related disciplines or anyone who needs a refresher on different research methodologies.

Why We Love It: This resource is accessible to the new and seasoned researcher. It covers research design, data collection and analysis, and research ethics. It will help you choose the right design for your project and give you important things to consider when collecting and analyzing your data. 

Citation: Bha ttacherjee , A. (2012). Social science research: principles, methods, and practices . Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License   

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 11 April 2024

Design principles for integrating science practices with conceptual understanding: an example from a digital learning environment on microbial resistance to antibiotics

• Constantinos P. Constantinou   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3183-4131 1 &
• Eliza Rybska   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2778-1313 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  501 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

We aim to illustrate the use of generic design principles to attain the integrated promotion of conceptual understanding and science competences in online enquiry-oriented learning environments. Engaging students in the development of competences related to science practices in unison with nurturing rigorous understanding of the mechanisms underpinning phenomena is thought to be valuable both for making science education more relevant to students’ interests and for attaining meaningful learning outcomes. We describe the design and development of a learning environment on the socio-scientific issue of microbial resistance to antibiotics. Our effort is situated in reflective enquiry, a framework for teaching and learning in science. The learning environment seeks to promote argumentation skills and conceptual understanding of evolutionary adaptation, in unison. On the basis of theoretical grounds, we have chosen to work with five design principles, integration of epistemic practices, making evidence-based inferences, competence-oriented design, authentic and relevant context and scaffolding. The first part of the study presents the design principles that have been embedded in the learning environment and the second part provides a description of the learning environment linking the various features to the corresponding design principles. Finally, we discuss the implications of this study for research and teaching practice.

Introduction

The design and development of learning environments with the potential to improve the quality of science learning is an important mechanism for science education reform. In this context, the need to promote the development of competences relating to scientific practice in unison with conceptual understanding has been identified as an important priority (Hazelkorn et al., 2015 ; National Research Council, 2012 ). Researchers have formulated design frameworks and principles based on findings from education, psychology, and learning science. Recently, emphasis has been placed on technology-enhanced or online learning environments due to the inherent advantages of interactivity, monitoring, and feedback (Shi et al., 2021 ; De Jong, 2019 ). The attention of researchers has also turned to research on technology-enhanced or online learning environments that are designed in the framework of an enquiry-oriented learning strategy (Constantinou et al., 2018 ; Cai et al., 2021 ), often in the context of socio-scientific issues (SSI) to enhance relevance to students’ interests and aspirations (Hansson et al., 2011 ; Hernández-Ramos et al., 2021 ). SSIs often relate to value-laden, controversial, socially relevant, real-world problems that are informed by science (Sadler et al., 2007 ) and are constrained by missing knowledge (Chiappetta et al., 1998 ). Engaging students to work with socio-scientific issues can be motivating and challenging because ‘they embed evidence of cognitive and moral dissonance, where scientific evidence, real-time data collection, analysis, interpretation, and investigation become entangled with socio-political decisions, and where a public understanding of science is tantamount to life and death decisions at global, national, regional, and personal levels’ (Zeidler and Sadler, 2023 ).

In this paper, we present the principles employed in designing an online enquiry-oriented learning environment on the topical issue of microbial resistance as an example of a socio-scientific issue. Microbial resistance to antibiotics or anti-microbial resistance has emerged as a challenge of global concern with implications for public health, the safety of medical procedures and institutions, as well as home hygiene routines (Ferri et al., 2017 ; Bloomfield and Ackerley, 2023 ).

The value of this paper relates to how pedagogical principles can be applied in design for learning but also in how they can be used to promote the combined promotion of competencies and conceptual understanding. This approach holds enormous potential in promoting a paradigm shift in science education with substantial improvements in the quality of learning outcomes (Papadouris and Constantinou, 2017 ).

Theoretical background

Social constructivism posits that learner construction of knowledge is attained through social interaction, interpretation, and understanding. Learning emerges through active knowledge construction, which is evaluated through the development of consensus between individuals (Adams, 2006 ).

Consistent with this, enquiry-based teaching and learning is a complex process of sense-making and constructing coherent conceptual models where students approach the study of phenomena by formulating questions, gathering evidence, and investigating to find answers. Through this framework, students collaboratively build new understandings, meanings, and knowledge, communicate their learning to others, and apply their learning productively in unfamiliar situations. Enquiry-based science education engages students in: i) authentic, problem-based learning activities, where there may not be one correct answer; ii) experimental procedures, experiments, and ‘hands-on’ activities, including searching for information; iii) self-regulated learning facilitated by teaching sequences where the emergence of student autonomy is emphasised; and iv) discursive argumentation, negotiation of ideas and communication with peers (‘talking science’) (Hazelkorn et al., 2015 ; Constantinou et al., 2018 ).

Within this paradigm, nurturing the development of competences and coherent conceptual understanding in unison has received special attention. It is a challenging educational goal that is nevertheless thought to be worthwhile in promoting rigorous learning, critical thinking, and creativity (Papadouris et al., 2018 ). Educational standards have come to emphasise competences, such as argumentation, scientific modelling, problem-solving and technological design, as robust educational goals that serve to enculturate a new generation into the values and practices of science and technology (NRC, 2012 ).

To make it possible for educational efforts to respond to the challenges of meeting these goals for rigorous learning, tools in the form of structured learning environments, guidelines for teaching and formative assessment instruments to provide feedback for learning progression are of paramount importance. The formulation of design principles for the development of such educational artefacts can be a useful strategy both for consistency and replication (Quinton, 2010 ).

Design principles for an enquiry-oriented learning environment

In this section, we present the pedagogical tenets that have guided and informed the design of an enquiry-oriented learning environment on ‘Microbial Resistance.’ The tenets utilised in the design were derived from social constructivism and the framework of enquiry-based teaching and learning for the purpose of designing a learning environment that facilitates the attainment of targeted learning outcomes on a topic of socio-scientific interest. Figure 1 presents the theoretical framework and the principles that emerged for the design of the learning environment.

Formulation of theoretically grounded principles for the design of the learning environment.

Effective learning through the integration of epistemic practices

In recent decades, there is increasing emphasis on educational reform that promotes shifts away from the notions of learning as the transmission of knowledge and science as the accumulation of uncontroversial facts. Instead, the science education research community strives to promote and facilitate the study and understanding of science as a human enterprise (Driver et al., 2000 ; NRC, 2000 ). Within this effort, enquiry–based learning has gained substantial support as a learning approach that focuses not only on understanding of content but also on cognitive processes that students engage in during the exploration of a scientific topic thus also promoting the development of scientific practices (Constantinou et al., 2018 ). Scientific practices have been proposed as an integrative set of competences, which emerge as young people engage with active sense-making, investigation, problem-solving and project work with scientific issues of contemporary relevance (Kuhn et al., 2017 ).

Singer et al. ( 2000 ) included enquiry as one of the design frameworks that guided their development of several sets of curriculum materials enhanced with the use of appropriate learning technologies. In our endeavour, we regarded enquiry as the core teaching-learning framework and developed around it by employing design principles that originated from educational psychology and education studies addressing the issue of how people learn by constructing meaning, retaining knowledge and actively using it in co-creation in response to a driving question or a problem-based challenge. Following recent emphasis on the development of learning environments that engage students in authentic enquiry tenets, we expanded our focus to incorporate two other elements of scientific enquiry that are often neglected: epistemic and social practices (Grandy and Duschl, 2007 ; Chinn and Malhotra, 2002 ). Thus, the designed learning environment on Microbial Resistance to Antibiotics entails key aspects of enquiry, such as examining and analysing data, interpreting data, and drawing conclusions, all of which have been integrated under the prominent scientific practice of argumentation (Sandoval and Reiser, 2004 ; Jiménez-Aleixandre and Crujeiras, 2017 ; Sandoval and Millwood, 2007 ; Kolstø and Ratcliffe, 2007 ). A significant part of scientists’ time is devoted to reading other scientists’ communications, building on each other’s work and exchanging well thought and grounded arguments, to support their theories or to evaluate other scientists’ claims (Chinn and Malhotra, 2002 ). The practice of argumentation is a fundamental tenet of scientific enquiry and should also be considered a significant goal in teaching and learning science. Nurturing argumentation competence as an integral part of science instruction is one way of promoting students’ epistemological development (Kuhn, 1991 ; Duschl and Osborne, 2002 ; Iordanou and Constantinou, 2015 ). Argumentation also provides a bridge to enhance the relevance of science learning for resolving issues that concern students’ daily lives. At times of open access to scientific and other information and the widespread use of AI tools, students need to be able to identify and critically evaluate information of relevance to make informed decisions on any issue that concerns them and they also need to have the capacity to communicate those decisions in a clear, understandable and persuasive manner according to the audience (Zeidler, 2014 ; Valladares, 2021 ).

Sandoval and Reiser ( 2004 ) coined a term for an equivalent overarching principle used in the development of their learning environments and scaffolding tools. They referred to their key principle as ‘grounding process in the products’ and, for their learning environments, the focus (product) was scientific explanations. According to Reiser et al., ( 2001 ), while students are grappling with data to construct explanations, they employ various cognitive and social skills that are important for science learning. This principle is also in line with Jonassen’s ( 1999 , p. 222–223) ‘model’ for designing learning environments. At the heart of his model is the case or problem driving the learning, which is subdivided into three important components, context, representation, and manipulative space. The manipulative space of the ‘problem’ is the mindful engagement of the student in manipulating an epistemic artefact, e.g., a simulation (or physical objects) or developing a coherent argument.

Our own efforts sought to establish a view of science as a human construct and this was facilitated by promoting conceptual understanding and the competence of argumentation in unison. In Sandoval and Reiser’s ( 2004 ) terms, the ‘product’ of our study, was the written arguments constructed by the students themselves in an effort to support their claims with valid and sufficient evidence identified from resources provided within the learning environment. As shown in Fig. 1 , IBSE and scientific practices create a space for making connections to the nature of science as part of teaching and learning science. We have emphasised making evidence-based inferences as a crucial element that allows students to develop a sustained interest in science and their competence in making informed decisions.

Making evidence-based inferences

The overt emphasis on ‘ making evidence-based inferences ’ originates from the design principle formulated by Sandoval and Reiser ( 2004 ), which they termed as ‘link evidence to causal claims’. This also relates to the difficulty that students often encounter in grappling with data and in backing their hypotheses/claims with appropriate evidence. Kuhn ( 1991 ) found that students and adults had particular difficulty in coordinating evidence to claims. Most of the participants in her studies supplied pseudo-evidence, which reiterates the theory and thus cannot be accepted as ‘genuine’ evidence. Kuhn’s ( 2010 ) interpretation of the use of pseudo-evidence is that students fail to conceptualise the different epistemological statuses between data and explanation. Sandoval and Reiser ( 2004 , p. 351) also agree with this position stating that students ‘view explanations as being embodied in data’ and consider this view as being impregnated by instruction of science in schools that is based on the ‘over-objectification of data’. Thus, it is imperative for designed curricula and learning environments to include explicit activities and scaffolding that help students overcome those difficulties. Digital learning environments offer an additional advantage when it comes to data due to the multiple data representations that can be supported by technology, aiding students in employing their creativity in interpreting the available evidence (Krajcik et al., 2000 ).

In addition to spotlighting the different epistemological status of data and explanations, which is vital in the construction of causal explanations and cogent arguments, it is also important to include activities that engage students in evaluating data. Using credibility criteria, students can formulate judgements about data sources and about the completeness and validity of the evidence itself (Nicolaidou et al., 2011 ). These types of activities offer guidance to students throughout their investigation in recognising relevant and reliable data.

The creation of learning environments that help students to develop their abilities to reason from evidence and participate in scientific argumentation is recognised as a priority in science education (AAAS, 1993 ; NRC, 1996 , 2001 , 2007 ). According to Duschl and Gitomer ( 1997 ), this involves prioritising competences such as ‘the development of thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving skills to prepare students to participate in the generation and evaluation of scientific knowledge claims, explanations, models, and experimental designs’ (p. 38).

Competence-oriented design

Since the beginning of the XXI century, a concerted effort by many educational researchers has been made to promote argumentation in the science classroom (Driver et al., 2000 ; Duschl and Osborne, 2002 ; Kuhn and Udell, 2003 ). This effort has been promoted from four distinct educational perspectives at the same time: understanding the nature of science (Driver et al., 2000 ; Sandoval and Reiser, 2004 ), engagement in scientific public debates on critical issues for promoting citizenship (Erduran et al., 2004 ), development of cognitive skills (Jiménez-Aleixandre and Erduran, 2007 ) and scientific literacy (Cavagnetto, 2010 ). Argumentation can refer either to written arguments, rhetorical argumentation when someone formulates a line of reasoning to support a claim (argument as a product), or social, dialogical argumentation when two or more people engage in a debate (argument as a process) (Wegerif, 2019 ). These two types of argumentation operate on a similar set of skills (Kuhn, 2005 ; p.113; Driver et al., 2000 ). The practice of argumentation strengthens efforts to develop scientific literacy through active participation in evidence-based communication and also highlights the connections between enquiry-based science and developing an understanding of the nature of science.

Students encounter numerous difficulties while formulating arguments or participating in argumentative discourse. Students’ difficulties include coordinating evidence with claims (Kuhn, 1991 ), focusing on superficial evidence (Zeidler et al., 2009 ), supplying insufficient evidence (Sandoval and Millwood, 2005 ), providing reasoning that does not adequately connect the evidence with the claim (Bell, 2000 ), and handling cognitive overload in argumentative discourse (Kuhn, 2010 ). These research studies demonstrate the complexity of argumentation competence and suggest explicit teaching and extended engagement of students in aspects of argumentation (Kuhn and Udell, 2003 ; Larson et al., 2009 ).

In an effort to support students in garnering their resources to overcome these difficulties, our learning objectives aimed for students to: 1) formulate arguments that integrate elements of Toulmin’s ( 1958 ) model (claim, data, warrant, backing, rebuttal), 2) recognise the different roles of data and warrants, 3) evaluate evidence and elaborate their reasoning with an explicit intent to connect the data with their claims, 4) evaluate arguments constructed by their peers, and 5) refine their arguments based on the received comments.

The adoption of epistemic and social practices as educational goals encouraged us to seek an authentic context for students’ scientific inquiries that would be conducive to placing emphasis on the development of coherent and conceptual models but would also be topical and appreciated as relevant to students’ interests.

Authentic and relevant context: a socioscientific approach

The context of a set of curriculum materials or learning environment is critical for its success. Various researchers have devoted time, effort and space in their work to exemplify the multifaceted role of context. Linn et al., ( 2004 ) treat context under the design principle of ‘making science accessible’. Singer et al., ( 2000 ) include ‘context’ in their design principles and state that curriculum context needs to be meaningful and challenging for the learner. Meyers and Nulty ( 2009 , p.567) claim that students’ learning improves when teaching and learning materials are authentic, real-world and relevant to students’ lives.

The issue, problem, or question guiding the whole learning process should be authentic and adequately ill-structured, thus allowing students to make the associations and connections required for knowledge transfer into unfamiliar and complex real-world problems. Authenticity has a diverse meaning. The somewhat oversimplified and circumscribed meaning sometimes ascribed to authentic is a personally relevant or interesting topic. The more widely accepted definition refers to activities that engage students ‘on the same type of cognitive challenges as those in the real world’ (Jonassen, 1999 , p. 221). The essence is that science thinking and co-creation should be situated in real, important, and complex issues that are at the centre of attention and are meaningful to students. Nonetheless, the transfer of real-world, scientifically-based problems into the classroom requires adaptation to make them suitable for the students. Adaptation is the modification of the entire content (e.g. enclosed information, data representation, and methods) to match the cognitive level and prior knowledge of the students (Crawford, 2012 ) and to support constructive pathways for sense-making and co-creation. Building on students’ existing knowledge, ideas and experiences is not a new construct; it has been around for a long time, but it continues to receive significant attention as an important priority in design guidelines (Driver, 1989 ; Krajcik et al., 2000 ).

Contextualising a learning material or environment with a problem that is personally relevant to students encourages engagement and motivation (Jonassen, 1999 ; Herrington et al., 2004 ). Edelson, Gordin and Pea ( 1999 ) recognise student motivation (content-focused motivation) as the first that learning materials’ designers should address by creating legitimate interest. Students’ interaction with a learning environment or curriculum could be further enhanced by framing it with a pedagogical scenario. For example, in Kyza et al., ( 2011 ) a scenario was used to increase the appeal of the investigation. So, after students completed their investigation and had constructed their product (explanation), they had to communicate their findings on the issue of what caused the sudden death of a large number of flamingos in a Salt Lake , by writing a final report for use by the Fisheries Department. Similarly, in mission-driven learning environments, students, acting as scientists, are scaffolded to address a socio-scientific issue using evidence and tools for processing that evidence (De Jong et al., 2012 ). Using a pedagogical scenario strengthens the connections that students make with socio-scientific issues and creates a sense of ownership for their learning as a mission.

Scaffolding for engagement and reflection

Scaffolding , at its core, is any process that guides and assists a learner to activate their cognitive and epistemological resources and to exert the perseverance needed to overcome difficulties that make the completion of a task unattainable (Quintana et al., 2004 ). Providing appropriate scaffolding is integral to the design of learning materials and relies on design principles such as making thinking visible and offering tools for co-ordinating theory with evidence. Education reform can be advanced significantly by the development of learning materials that are challenging and engaging and also require students to employ substantive content knowledge, higher-order skills and processes. In this effort, it becomes imperative to anticipate student difficulties and plan for interactive resources in advance, on how to resolve them.

Scaffolding is separated into two types depending on ‘who’ is the source of the assistance provided to the students: teacher (or peer)-enhanced scaffolding and technology-enhanced scaffolding. It is also possible to blend combinations of the two in a learning intervention. Teacher (or peer)-enhanced scaffolding taking place face-to-face or online is concerned with the different approaches of human collaboration that may support students in accomplishing the task at hand. Technology-enhanced scaffolding can take various forms depending on the design purpose. Examples of scaffolding (software) tools include maps, graphic representations, reminders, prompts, templates and reflection tools. Despite the differences between the two types of scaffolding, they share the same underlying principle, which involves nudging students to activate their resources and bringing them to bear on the task at hand as well as helping students overcome learning impasses and reach goals that they never thought possible (Quintana et al., 2004 ; Lund, 2004 ). Raes et al. ( 2012 ) investigated the effect of different types of scaffolding in a web-based learning project and their findings support combined scaffolding as the approach that facilitates both knowledge acquisition and development of metacognitive skills. However, the challenge when designing scaffolding is to find the balance between under- and over-scaffolding; it is important for students to have opportunities to learn through failure, to have the required support in order not to feel incompetent, and also to work with gradually faded scaffolding in a way that enhances emergent autonomy (Guzdial, 1994 ).

In our study, we employed the framework for designing scaffolding that was proposed by Quintana et al., 2004 , p. 341). The framework revolves around three processes: sense-making (basic operations for testing hypothesis and interpreting data), process management (strategic decisions involved in controlling the enquiry process), and articulation and reflection (process of constructing, evaluating and articulating what has been learned). Specifically, emphasis was given to creating opportunities for students to externalise their thinking and reflect on what they have been working on, reducing the complexity of tasks or concepts and social scaffolds to support constructive peer-collaboration. Collaborative learning implicates students in cognitive activities, such as explanation and argumentation, in their attempt to co-construct knowledge, develop consensus, and co-create (Dillenbourg, 1999 ).

Design methodology

The iterative methodology we used in the design and development of the learning environment, consists of a series of processes shown in Fig. 2 (Papadouris and Constantinou, 2009 ). The first process includes the formulation of learning objectives. These need to be a) consistent with students’ conceptual and cognitive resources, and b) aligned with the conceptualisation of what is involved in learning in science. The second process draws on empirical investigations of students’ initial understandings and difficulties regarding the specified learning objectives. The third process focuses on the development of the teaching/learning sequence, largely drawing on inputs from the previous two processes. The last process, which is also empirical in nature, includes the enactment of the designed teaching/learning sequence in classroom settings and the collection of data on students’ learning outcomes. The findings from this field-testing are fed back to the design and development process so as to undertake refinements to the teaching design. This last process is vitally important - it allows for understanding how the designed ‘learning materials’ actually perform in the context in which they are intended.

The methodology employed in the design and development of the learning environment.

The designed learning environment on ‘Microbial Resistance to Antibiotics’.

Target audience

The microbial resistance learning environment is designed to address the needs of high school students. The phenomenon of microbial resistance is quite complex, drawing from different domains of biology, including physiology, immunology and microbiology, population genetics as well as chemistry. However, the learning environment could be adapted to a different age range by varying the breadth and depth of understanding that students are expected to attain. The designed learning environment is also suitable for use in teacher education. Pre-service teachers benefit additionally from such exposure by identifying and understanding the integration of innovative features in the design.

Addressing the principle of ‘Science in Context’

The design principle of ‘ science in context ’ was employed by framing the entire environment within the topical SSI of antimicrobial resistance. SSIs have been extensively used for contextualising learning environments. The prominent position they hold in science education is due to the suitable frames they offer for promoting scientific literacy for active citizenship (Hazelkorn et al., 2015 ). Working with SSIs presents a number of affordances for students. Firstly, making informed decisions on relevant issues is grounded in scientific evidence and understanding. Secondly, SSIs have a local dimension, which helps in relating to students’ experiences but also extends beyond local, to national and global levels. Furthermore, SSIs provide a context for engaging students in cost-benefit analysis also requiring from them to bring together ideas from different domains, such as science, politics and economics, (Tal et al., 2011 ). Finally, the moral dimensions of these issues motivate students to engage in constructive discourse and enhance their need for augmenting their content knowledge (Zeidler and Nichols, 2009 ). Therefore, SSIs constitute an effective context for engaging students and keeping them motivated for the extended period of time needed for robust knowledge construction. Several educational researchers have reported that students engaging in discourse around SSIs show improved conceptual understanding (Klosterman and Sadler, 2010 ; Sadler, 2011 ; Theobald et al., 2015 ), informal reasoning (Sadler and Zeidler, 2005 ), reflective judgement (Zeidler et al., 2009 ; Liu et al., 2015 ), and argumentation skills (Jimenez-Aleixandre, 2002 ; Zohar and Nemet, 2002 ).

Sadler ( 2009 ; p.13), also recommends SSIs ‘because they provide opportunities for students and teachers to engage with science in meaningful and relevant ways’ and offer opportunities for students to understand and appreciate ‘how science affects their lives and the lives of others’ (p. 15).

The context topic of microbial resistance

Microbial resistance is the resistance of microorganisms to antimicrobial drugs that were originally effective for treating infections caused by them (WHO, 2014 ). However, the term is used more commonly to describe or refer to bacteria resistant to antibiotics. Resistant bacteria are created by random mutations or when resistant traits are exchanged between bacteria. In an antibiotic-rich environment, resistant bacteria are favoured by natural selection and thrive over time. Therefore, misuse and overuse of antibiotics and general antimicrobial agents create an environment that helps resistant microbes to emerge and prevail over sensitive ones. There is overwhelming evidence attesting to increasing use of antibiotics, including through over-prescription and overconsumption, leading to an increasing prevalence of resistant bugs (Morrison and Zembower, 2020 ; van de Sande-Bruinsma et al., 2008 ). Overconsumption and misuse of antimicrobials by the general public are due to false beliefs regarding infections and antimicrobial agents. Thus, a vital step toward the containment of microbial resistance is education (Sosa et al., 2010 ; WHO, 2001 ). Part of educating the lay public is educating students to be in a position to make informed decisions about the use of antibiotics.

Despite the fact that microbial resistance attracts significant attention in the health industry, often due to persistent strains of resistant bacteria turning up in hospitals, a substantial percentage of the general public is unaware of this issue. It is important that students are informed and helped to understand the need to safeguard against infectious disease and to appreciate the importance of efforts extend the longevity of existing antibiotics and discover new ones.

Addressing the principles of integrating epistemic and social practices

In our learning environment students were engaged in rhetorical argumentation. Working in groups for the full duration of the intervention, they had to co-construct valid arguments supporting their standpoints. Argumentation entails the ability to formulate and evaluate claims. In the intervention, students first learn how to construct sound arguments and after they have accrued the required knowledge and skills, they proceed to evaluate arguments constructed by their peers. The learning objectives and the pacing of activities for the development of argumentation skills emerged by combining theoretical knowledge on formulating and evaluating arguments and associate students’ difficulties as presented in the research literature.

The learning environment examines the complex SSI of microbial resistance and aims to successfully combine and promote the development of a) argumentation skills and b) conceptual understanding of concepts pertaining to the topic of microbial resistance.

Conceptually, our main priority was for students to acknowledge microbial resistance as a natural selection process and develop understanding of the basic evolution mechanisms. Evolution is a core idea in the Life Sciences. Students have great difficulty understanding both evolution (Neubrand and Harms, 2017 , Archila and Molina, 2020 ) and microbial resistance (Fonseca et al., 2012 ; Richard et al., 2017 ). The ‘example’ of microbial resistance is conducive to promoting students’ understanding due to the fast generation times of bacteria and the relevance of the SSI to public health. The implementation of the design principles in the learning environment Microbial Resistance to Antibiotics is shown in Table 1 .

Apart from evolution, for students to develop a coherent conception of microbial resistance, it was important to differentiate between the main types of microbes causing infections, to recognise the important and beneficial role of certain bacteria, viruses (eg. Bacteriophage) and fungi, to understand the human body’s defence mechanisms (immune system), and the main types of microbial medication available for fighting infections. The learning environment included information and structured activities on all these issues.

Description of the learning environment

The microbial resistance learning environment was developed in STOCHASMOS (Kyza and Constantinou, 2007 ), a web-based platform designed to promote enquiry-based learning. The STOCHASMOS platform is organised into two main parts: the Inquiry Environment and the Reflective Workspace. The Inquiry Environment contains all the information that students are given access to in relation to the issue/problem under study. In the Reflective Workspace the designers create templates, which help students gather and synthesise important information to attain the learning objectives. The Reflective Workspace is used by the students as a co-creation environment to collaboratively develop their project in response to the driving question or the mission declared from the start. Following is a description of the Inquiry Environment and Reflective Workspace with reference to the design principles presented in the first section of this paper.

Our first design principle has been embodied in the learning environment by scaffolding the development of conceptual understanding and argumentation competence in unison. Typically, scientific literacy in schools is restricted to scientific ideas and concepts which are presented as separable and unambiguous facts, stripped from their context, often as the work of a single individual. Argumentation activities engage students in collaborative discourse and constructive criticism, during the consensus-building process, which resembles the practices scientists follow for the justification and verification of scientific knowledge. Contemporary views of science learning manifest the integration of conceptual understanding with other significant components of science learning, such as argumentation. The following paragraphs exemplify the way conceptual understanding and argumentation were integrated into the Inquiry Environment, as well as the remaining design principles presented in the first section, through the unfolding of the learning environment.

The first dimension Taking a Role (Fig. 3 ) of the Inquiry Environment introduces the microbial resistance issue through newspaper clippings and presents the students’ mission, which is to co-design communication products (posters, brochures and short videos) aiming to inform the lay public and stakeholders (doctors, pharmacists, nursing and other medical personnel) on the issue of microbial resistance. In addition to contextualising the learning environment with the SSI of microbial resistance, a scenario was used to enhance students’ motivation. In the framing scenario, students undertake the role of employees at a communication firm, who work in design teams to develop an awareness campaign to raise public awareness and engage health professionals in taking a more active role in pre-empting the issue of microbial resistance and mitigating its implications for public health. The students’ mission was formulated to facilitate co-creation and to maintain their interest for the extended period of time required to attain understanding of microbial resistance and to learn to formulate robust and well-supported arguments.

Image of the online Inquiry Environment on Microbial Resistance.

The second dimension, ‘ Information Campaigns ’, includes guidelines that help students develop an effective awareness campaign. Particular emphasis was placed on how to adapt their approach and content according to the target audience: lay public and stakeholders, including health professionals. This dimension also incorporates explicit teaching/learning activities for cultivating argumentation skills.

The ‘ Microbial Resistance ’ dimension scaffolds students to build an initial understanding of the issue of microbial resistance and to recognise the need for raising public awareness, thus giving ‘true’ purpose and meaning to the mission. The importance of this major public health issue is manifest through the presentation of authentic evidence, including data from public health monitoring websites showing the increasing detection of antibiotic resistant microbes around the world, interviews from the scientific community, patients and the general public. After students have covered the argumentation explicit activities, they are in a better position to recognise, appreciate and assess the value of various types of evidence portrayed under this section and the rest of the learning environment. Students have to evaluate the evidence while in the process of formulating their final arguments that underpin their campaign messages.

The ‘ Library ’ dimension encloses all the background information needed by the students to develop deep understanding of the biological phenomenon of microbial resistance. The Library covers the following concepts: microorganisms and infections, the immune system, evolution and natural selection, and the function of antibiotics. The scope of this dimension is not to get students to develop deep conceptual understanding on each of the individual concepts covered in the various sections (sub-tabs) of this dimension. Instead, the Library provides a more elaborative overview of these concepts to assist students in formulating a complete picture of microbial resistance and select what information is more relevant for their mission and delve more deeply into it. This dimension interweaves conceptual understanding and argumentation skills by providing students with biological facts that can be employed as pieces of data (evidence) in their arguments. More significantly, students develop their reasoning by conceptualising the causal mechanisms that create and feed the predominance of resistant bacteria. To scientifically warrant their claims, students have to come to terms with fundamental concepts covered in the Library.

The fifth dimension, ‘ Social Aspects ’, focuses on various erroneous behaviours of both target groups (lay public and public health stakeholders) at a national and international level, such as antibiotic consumption for the production of food products, over-prescription, overconsumption and inappropriate storage of antibiotics. The dimension also contains real data in diverse formats (e.g. text, graphs, tables) that illustrate the increasing trends in antibiotic consumption. Students are encouraged to use the platform tools to manipulate and interpret the supplied data to reach conclusions regarding a range of issues in relation to microbial resistance, such as exploring connections between the increasing trend in antibiotic consumption and the increasing percentages of multi-resistant bacteria, or other social and economic ramifications of microbial resistance. The final section (sub-tab) of this dimension is entitled ‘ Science and Technology ’. Through the design, development and the mass production stages of antibiotic development, students come to realise the interconnection and interrelationships between scientific research and technological development.

The learning environment is designed in such a way that students can go back and forth between the various dimensions and cross-reference their working hypotheses and their arguments as they are being developed. By undertaking the mission to develop an awareness campaign students are encouraged to work through the first three dimensions in an almost sequential manner. This is supported by the fact that the dimensions have been sequenced in a way that responds to the challenge at hand: what are the main steps in developing an effective campaign? Why is an awareness campaign on microbial resistance necessary? What arguments can be developed to support the information that will go out to different stakeholder groups? Normally, the subsection enclosing the argumentation activities is not made available to students until they have covered the introductory section on ‘ Microbial Resistance ’. This is intended to safeguard that students have developed a grasp of the basic ideas before they engage with the process of formulating claims and evaluating what evidence is relevant to their claims and how can it be used to support each claim.

Regarding the ‘Library ’ dimension, students become engaged in collaborative activities that cover every section before moving to the next. The intended purpose is for students to grapple with concepts in a sequence that facilitates understanding and also encourages connections. For example, students can better understand the defence mechanisms our immune system has in place for the different ‘enemies’, after they learn to identify a few key characteristics of the various types of microbes. After students have covered the ‘ Library ’ dimension and have gained information on how to formulate structurally complete (based on Toulmin’s model) and valid arguments, they move freely back and forth guided by their mission, in efforts to construct concise and robust arguments for their awareness campaigns. An overview of the activity sequence for the entire learning environment is presented in Fig. 4 .

Activity Sequence embedded in the Learning Environment.

Argumentation activities

To nurture the argumentation competence, we designed an initial set of activities for explicit teaching of the structural features and quality characteristics of an argument, followed by exploratory enquiry activities with embedded peer-assessment. To encourage students to appreciate the value of ‘ making evidence-based inferences ’, we included multiple opportunities to discuss the distinct epistemological features of evidence and explanations (data and warrants using Toulmin’s terminology) and to formulate or review evidence-based arguments. We also discussed explicitly the ‘value’ of internal consistency in the reasoning that connects evidence to claim.

The argumentation activities also place emphasis on structure, following Toulmin’s model (1958), as well as the quality of the argument, by stressing the relative value of various types of evidence, the need for scientifically accepted explanations to link evidence to claim, and the coherence and cohesion of the argument as a whole.

Students are assessed and given feedback on the different elements of a robust argument and the quality aspects using a different SSI, that of reproductive cloning. The aim is for students to attempt transfer of what they have learned from the context of cloning to the context of cloning to the context of microbial resistance. It is important to stress here that the information on reproductive cloning were made available to students through the Inquiry Environment but the first two activities were developed in the Reflective Workspace of the STOCHAMOS platform.

The introductory activity was the formulation of an argument including all the essential/main structural components (claim, data, warrant), as well as rebuttal. Students studied all the relevant information and watched two short documentaries on the subject of cloning and then had to complete a template where the questions guided them to state their claim and provide evidence supporting it. Following this, students had to think as someone holding an opposing position and provide supporting evidence and then to challenge those evidence. The second activity was based on a template providing an argument against reproductive cloning and students were asked to identify the function/role of the individual propositions. The final activity was prompting students to formulate the strongest argument possible by selecting from the available choices of individual propositions. For each structural component, students were given two options and according to their previous selection, one of the propositions was qualitatively stronger. After completing the task students had to compare their arguments with the one formulated according to the teacher’s selection and discuss advantages and disadvantages of their choices. Once students had completed those argumentation activities, explaining explicitly a robust argument’s structure and content, they had to construct their own sound argument on the issue of microbial resistance and evaluate an argument created by their peers.

Scaffolding used in the learning environment

Inquiry environment scaffolding.

To support students in their endeavour in the Inquiry Environment two scaffolding tools embedded in STOCHASMOS platform were utilised, hints and glossary. The glossary helps students to sustain focus in their activities without being distracted by difficult terminology. When a term has been entered in the glossary database of the environment, the word appears in the text with a green colour and upon mouseover the definition appears on a pop-up window. Hints were provided in the learning environment for two purposes: a) to direct students’ attention on specific sections that were important for completing their mission and b) to provide explanations for concepts or phenomena. For example, while students were working on the argumentation activities on the provided information, the terms gene and genome emerged. Genetic concepts are usually confusing to students (Smith et al., 2008 ) and contrasting the two terms might enable students to distinguish them. Moreover, different representation formats were employed to support students; particularly useful was the embedment of multimedia representations. In biology where we are dealing with abstract concepts and phenomena it is important to connect verbal description with a picture, or even better, with a multimedia representation. According to Yarden and Yarden ( 2013 , p. 95) multimedia representations ‘are most likely to lead to meaningful learning’.

In the learning environment, a blended approach was used regarding scaffolding. Hence software scaffolding co-existed with teacher-enhanced scaffolding or human support (Lund, 2004 ). In pre-determined points of the Inquiry Environment, students were directed to discuss with one of the members of the teaching staff. The interaction of the staff with the students was based on the Socratic method. During the semi-Socratic discussions, students acquired knowledge was used to advance their understanding. Students’ engagement with this type of discourse, where they are not given answers but are guided through questions to reach to the next level of understanding, helps them process information and improves their thinking and reasoning skills.

Workspace scaffolding

All the environments hosted in the STOCHASMOS platform incorporate the Reflective Workspace Environment. In the Workspace, using pre-designed templates, students gather and synthesise data from the Inquiry Environment. The templates provide scaffolding to students in selecting appropriate data and to synthesise them according to the requirements of the task. In the Microbial Resistance Learning environment, six template pages were created and used by the students; three pages were devoted to argumentation, two pages to microbial resistance and one page was for the construction of the awareness campaign.

The argumentation template pages are sequencing the development of argumentation skills (see 3.3.4. Argumentation Activities). The first template guides students in a step-by-step process to formulate arguments comprising the main elements of Toulmin’s model. The second template support students in comprehending the different role and epistemology of the main elements and the final template engages students in peer-discourse and teacher-discourse, in their groups, by juxtaposing two arguments, one formulated by them and the other by the teacher. This template examines both vital aspects in constructing robust arguments, structure and quality of the individual elements. In all three template pages there are discussions taking place to improve students’ epistemologies of what counts as good evidence (data) and good explanations (warrants).

Regarding the microbial resistance templates, these focused on enhancing students’ understanding on microbial resistance as a SSI and as a biological phenomenon based on natural selection. The last template supported students in formulating the argument that would constitute their awareness campaign. The template helped students to collect and organise their data and then to formulate an argument congruent to Toulmin’s model. This template was also used to scaffold peer-discourse between the groups. The groups were paired and exchanged their templates. Students had to evaluate each other’s arguments based on three criteria: structure, content and language adaptation according to the target audience, and quality of the content. Criteria were given to students in a checklist format to help them provide their peers with constructive feedback.

The Reflective Workspace environment was designed to scaffold ongoing reflection. When learning materials are contextualised with complex authentic problems, students need additional support to meet our expectations. Students need support to collect and organise data, to synthesise findings, and to determine how to proceed. By articulating their thinking in the pre-designed templates, students reflect on their progress; what has been understood and what needs revising. Reflection was also supported by the structured discussions, organised around the templates, with the teacher.

This study focused on the design and development of an online enquiry-based environment on the topical socio-scientific issue of microbial resistance to antibiotics. Emphasis was given on the design principles embedded in the learning environment which emerged from research focusing on promoting enquiry learning in order to change the way science is taught in schools. This study exemplified the following design principles: science in context , integration of epistemic practices , evidence based-inferences, competence-oriented design and scaffolding for student engagement and reflection . These design principles were adopted and adapted from existing literature in designing curriculum materials and learning environments in the subject of science.

The way the design principles have been presented at the beginning of the article seeks to provide, aspiring designers of learning materials, with basic tenets that could be modified to fit their purposes. Hence, the description of each tenet starts by revealing the reasons behind the selection, what we were trying to accomplish and why this is important regarding our knowledge on how students learn and the challenges (barriers) that impede their learning. Following this, there is an overview of how it was exemplified in the learning environment. In the description of the learning environment it becomes more apparent how each principle was adapted and applied in the design. Therefore, one of the aims of the article is to support teachers and other educators that undertake the task of designing activities and learning sequences to elicit certain features that would benefit their teaching practice and also to reflect on their own designs and how to evaluate them.

Furthermore, it is important to stress here the significant role the enactment of the learning material and the school and classroom settings have in the achievement of the learning outcomes. Enquiry-based learning needs to be also facilitated by the classroom culture. Students need to learn to collaborate, to exchange ideas and to construct on each other’s knowledge. To transform classroom culture demands a radical change in the role the teacher adopts in the classroom and the teaching approaches. The teacher needs to act as a guide, as a facilitator and as an equal member of the learning community of the classroom. Hence, reformed learning materials have to be accompanied by reformed classroom cultures (Reiser et al., 2001 ).

Regarding educational research, the article describes development of a learning environment that has innovative features and utilises a SSI that is at the forefront of the interests of the scientific community and public health policymakers and deserves wider public attention. The SSI of antimicrobial resistance, to our knowledge, has not been used as a context in a digital science learning environment. Examples of other socio-scientific topics that have been employed in the past as contexts for learning environments include, cloning, genetically modified organisms, global warming and other environmental and ecological issues. Furthermore, following the designed principles presented here, we developed an environment that is in accordance with the conceptual framework proposed by the National Research Council Committee (NRC, 2012 ). The proposed framework comprises three dimensions, practices, cross-cutting concepts and core ideas in the science disciplines that need to be woven together to facilitate students’ learning (NRC, 2012 , p. 29). From the major practices included in the NRC report, the microbial resistance learning environment promotes the development of the argumentation competence. Also, in the context of microbial resistance, students cover the core idea of evolutionary adaptation of microbes. The combination of formulating arguments and the framing issue of microbial resistance engage students in exploring causal relationships, which is one of the crosscutting concepts identified in current educational policy priorities.

Data availability

No data were generated or analysed for the purposes of the work reported in this article. The article describes the principles for creating a digital learning environment and how they were enacted in a platform for supporting reflective enquiry in science. Hence data sharing is not applicable to this research.

Adams P (2006) Exploring social constructivism: theories and practicalities. Education 34(3):243–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270600898893

Article   Google Scholar  

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993) Project 2061: benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/index.php

Archila PA, Molina J (2020) Evolution and creationism: views of students in a Colombian university—findings from 7 years of data using a three-question survey. Res Sci Educ 50(4):1619–1638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9746-3

Bell P (2000) Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. Int J Sci Educ 22(8):797–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284

Bloomfield SF, Ackerley LM (2023) Developing resilience against the threat of infectious diseases and anti-microbial resistance: putting targeted hygiene into practice in home and everyday lives. Public Health Pract, 100362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2023.100362

Cai S, Niu X, Wen Y, Li J (2021) Interaction analysis of teachers and students in inquiry class learning based on augmented reality by iFIAS and LSA. Interact Learn Environ 31(9):5551–5567. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2012808

Cavagnetto AR (2010) Argument to foster scientific literacy a review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Rev Educ Res 80(3):336–371. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953

Chiappetta E, Koballa T, Collette A (1998) Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools, 4th ed Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill

Chinn CA, Malhotra BA (2002) Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: a theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Sci Educ 86(2):175–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001

Constantinou CP, Tsivitanidou OE, Rybska E (2018) What is inquiry-based science teaching and learning? In: Constantinou CP, Tsivitanidou O, Gray P, Rybska E, Louca L (eds) Professional development for inquiry-based science teaching and learning, Springer International Publishing, p 1–23

Crawford BA (2012) Moving the essence of inquiry into the classroom: engaging teachers and students in authentic science. In: Tan KCD, Kim M (eds) Issues and challenges in science education research moving forward, Springer Netherlands, p 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3980-2_13

Dillenbourg P (1999) What do you mean by collaborative learning? In: Dillenbourg P (ed) Collaborative-learning: cognitive and computational approaches, Elsevier, Oxford, p 1–19

Driver R (1989) Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. Int J Sci Educ 11(5):481–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110501

Driver R, Newton P, Osborne J (2000) Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms Sci Educ 84(3):287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/%SICI%1098-237X%200005%84%3A33.0.CO;2-A

Duschl RA, Gitomer DH (1997) Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educ Assess 4(1):37–73. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea0401_2

Duschl RA, Osborne J (2002) Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Stud Sci Educ 38(1):39–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187

De Jong T (2019) Moving towards engaged learning in STEM domains; there is no simple answer, but clearly a road ahead. J Comput Assist Learn 35(2):153–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12337

De Jong T, Weinberger A, Girault I, Kluge A, Lazonder AW, Pedaste M, Zacharia ZC (2012) Using scenarios to design complex technology-enhanced learning environments. Educ Technol Res. Dev 60(5):883–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9258-1

Edelson DC, Gordin DN, Pea RD (1999) Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. J Learn Sci 8(3-4):391–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1999.9672075

Erduran S, Simon S, Osborne J (2004) TAPping into argumentation: developments in the application for studying science of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Sci Educ 88(6):915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012

Ferri M, Ranucci E, Romagnoli P, Giaccone V (2017) Antimicrobial resistance: a global emerging threat to public health systems. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 57(13):2857–2876. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2015.1077192

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fonseca MJ, Santos CL, Costa P, Lencastre L, Tavares F (2012) Increasing awareness about antibiotic use and resistance: a hands-on project for high school students. PLoS One 7(9):e44699. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044699

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Grandy R, Duschl RA (2007) Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: analysis of a conference. Sci Educ 16(2):141–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-2865-z

Guzdial M (1994) Software‐realized scaffolding to facilitate programming for science learning. Interact Learn Environ 4(1):001–044. https://doi.org/10.1080/1049482940040101

Hansson L, Redfors A, Rosberg M (2011) Students’ socio-scientific reasoning in an astrobiological context during work with a digital learning environment. J Sci Educ Technol 20:388–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9260-5

Hazelkorn E, Ryan Ch, Beernaert Y, Constantinou CP, Deca L, Grangeat M, Karikorpi M, Lazoudis A, Pintó Casulleras R, Welzel-Breuer, M (2015) Science education for responsible citizenship, directorate-general for research and innovation, science with and for society, European Commission, EUR 26893, Brussels, Belgium. https://doi.org/10.2777/12626

Hernández-Ramos J, Pernaa J, Cáceres-Jensen L, Rodríguez-Becerra J (2021) The effects of using socio-scientific issues and technology in problem-based learning: a systematic review. Educ Sci 11(10):640. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100640

Herrington J, Reeves TC, Oliver R, Woo Y (2004) Designing authentic activities in web-based courses. J Comput High Educ 16(1):3–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02960280

Iordanou K, Constantinou CP (2015) Supporting use of evidence in argumentation through practice in argumentation and reflection in the context of SOCRATES learning environment. Sci Educ 99(2):282–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21152

Jimenez-Aleixandre M (2002) Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision-making about environmental management. Int J Sci Educ 24(11):1171–1190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210134857

Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Crujeiras B (2017) Epistemic practices and scientific practices in science education. In: Taber KS, Akpan B (eds), Science education: an international course companion, Rotterdam: The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, p 69–80

Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Erduran S (2007) Argumentation in science education: an overview. In: Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Erduran S (eds) Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, p 3–27

Jonassen DH (1999) Designing constructivist learning environments. Instructional design theories and models: a new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p 215–239

Klosterman ML, Sadler TD (2010) Multi‐level assessment of scientific content knowledge gains associated with socioscientific issues‐based instruction. Int J Sci Educ 32(8):1017–1043. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902894512

Kolstø SD, Ratcliffe M (2007) Social aspects of argumentation. In: Erduran S, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP (eds) Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, p 117–136

Krajcik J, Blumenfeld P, Marx R, Soloway E (2000) Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In: Minstell J, Van Zee E, (eds) Inquiry into inquiry: science learning and teaching, American Association for the Advancement of Science Press, Washington, D.C., p 283–315

Kuhn D (1991) The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press

Kuhn D (2005) Education for thinking. Harvard University Press

Kuhn D (2010) Teaching and learning science as argument. Sci Educ 94:810–824. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20395

Kuhn D, Arvidsson TS, Lesperance R, Corprew R (2017) Can engaging in science practices promote deep understanding of them? Sci Educ 101(2):232–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21263

Kuhn D, Udell W (2003) The development of argument skills. Child Dev 74(5):1245–1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kyza EA, Constantinou CP (2007) STOCHASMOS: a web-based platform for reflective, inquiry-based teaching and learning [s/w]. Cyprus: LSG. Retrieved from http://www.stochasmos.org/media/Public%20website/STOCHASMOSManual_English_version.pdf . ( http://www.webcitation.org/6W6kRZGzn )

Kyza EA, Constantinou CP, Spanoudis G (2011) Sixth graders’ co-construction of explanations of a disturbance in an ecosystem: exploring relationships between grouping, reflective scaffolding, and evidence-based explanations. Int J Sci Educ 33(18):2489–2525. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.550951

Larson AA, Britt MA, Kurby CA (2009) Improving students’ evaluation of informal arguments. J Exp Educ 77(4):339–366. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.77.4.339-366

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Linn MC, Davies EA, Eylon B-S (2004) The scaffolded knowledge integration framework for instruction, In: Linn MC, Davies EA, Bell P (eds) Internet environments for science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 47–72

Liu S, Roehrig G, Bhattacharya D, Varma K (2015) In-service teachers’ attitudes, knowledge and classroom teaching of global climate change. Sci Educ 24(1):12–22. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2015&context=natrespapers Papers in Natural Resources. 1000. Retrieved from Accessed 23 Oct 2023

Google Scholar  

Lund K (2004) Human support in CSCL. In: Strijbos JW, Kirschner PA, Martens RL (eds) What we know about CSCL. Computer-supported collaborative learning series, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht, p 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7921-4_7

Meyers NM, Nulty DD (2009) How to use (five) curriculum design principles to align authentic learning environments, assessment, students’ approaches to thinking and learning outcomes. Assess Eval High Educ 34(5):565–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802226502

Morrison L, Zembower TR (2020) Antimicrobial resistance. Gastrointest Endosc Clin 30(4):619–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giec.2020.06.004

National Research Council (NRC) (1996) National Science Education Standards. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/4962

National Research Council (NRC) (2000) Inquiry and the national education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

National Research Council (NRC) (2001) Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/9847

National Research Council (NRC) (2007) Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625

National Research Council (NRC) (2012) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, committee on a conceptual framework for new K-12 science education standards. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Neubrand C, Harms U (2017) Tackling the difficulties in learning evolution: effects of adaptive self-explanation prompts. J Biol Educ 51(4):336–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2016.1233129

Nicolaidou I, Kyza EA, Terzian F, Hadjichambis A, Kafouris D (2011) A framework for scaffolding students’ assessment of the credibility of evidence. J Res Sci Teach 48(7):711–744. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20420

Papadouris N, Constantinou CP (2009) A methodology for integrating computer‐based learning tools in science curricula. J Curric Stud 41(4):521–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270802123946

Papadouris N, Constantinou CP (2017) Integrating the epistemic and ontological aspects of content knowledge in science teaching and learning. Int J Sci Educ 39(6):663–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1299950

Papadouris N, Vokos S, Constantinou CP (2018) The pursuit of a ‘better’ explanation as an organizing framework for science teaching and learning. Sci Educ 102(2):219–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21326

Quintana C, Reiser BJ, Davis EA, Krajcik J, Fretz E, Duncan RG, Soloway E (2004) A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J Learn Sci 13(3):337–386. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_4

Quinton SR (2010) Principles of effective learning environment design. In: Ebner M, Schiefner M (Eds) Looking toward the future of technology-enhanced education: ubiquitous learning and the digital native, IGI Global, p 327–352. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-678-0.ch019

Raes A, Schellens T, De Wever B, Vanderhoven E (2012) Scaffolding information problem-solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Comput Educ 59(1):82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.010

Reiser BJ, Tabak I, Sandoval WA, Smith BK, Steinmuller F, Leone AJ (2001) BGuILE: strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In: Carver SM, Klahr D (eds) Cognition and instruction: twenty-five years of progress, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p 263–305

Richard M, Coley JD, Tanner KD (2017) Investigating undergraduate students’ use of intuitive reasoning and evolutionary knowledge in explanations of antibiotic resistance. CBE—Life Sci Educ, 16(3), ar55. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-11-0317

Sadler TD (2009) Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Stud Sci Educ 45(1):1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839

Sadler TD (2011) Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In: Sadler TD (ed) Socio-scientific Issues in the classroom, contemporary trends and issues in science education, vol 39, Springer, Dordrecht, p 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_1

Sadler TD, Barab SA, Scott B (2007) What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Res Sci Educ 37:371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9

Sadler TD, Zeidler DL (2005) Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. J Res Sci Teach 42(1):112–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042

Sandoval WA, Millwood KA (2005) The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognit Instr 23(1):23–55. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2

Sandoval WA, Millwood KA (2007) What can argumentation tell us about epistemology? In: Erduran S, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP (eds) Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, p 71–88

Sandoval WA, Reiser BJ (2004) Explanation‐driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Sci Educ 88(3):345–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10130

Shi Y, Zhang J, Yang H, Yang HH (2021) Effects of interactive whiteboard-based instruction on students’ cognitive learning outcomes: a meta-analysis. Interact Learn Environ 29(2):283–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1769683

Singer J, Marx RW, Krajcik J, Clay Chambers J (2000) Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educ Psychol 35(3):165–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3503_3

Smith MK, Wood WB, Knight JK (2008) The genetics concept assessment: a new concept inventory for gauging student understanding of genetics. CBE Life Sci Educ 7(4):422–430. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-08-0045

Sosa A, Byarugaba D, Amabile-Cuevas C, Hsueh P, Kariuki S, Okeke I (2010) Antimicrobial resistance in developing countries, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89370-9

Tal T, Kali Y, Magid S, Madhok JJ (2011) Enhancing the authenticity of a web-based module for teaching simple inheritance. In: Sadler T (ed) Socio-scientific issues in the classroom. Contemporary trends and issues in science education, vol 39. Springer, Dordrecht, p 11–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_2

Theobald EJ, Crowe A, HilleRisLambers J, Wenderoth MP, Freeman S (2015) Women learn more from local than global examples of the biological impacts of climate change. Front Ecol Environ 13(3):132–137. https://doi.org/10.1890/140261

Toulmin S (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

van de Sande-Bruinsma N, Grundmann H, Verloo D, Tiemersma E, Ferech M (2008) Antimicrobial drug use and resistance in Europe. Emerg Infect Dis 14(11):1722–1730. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1411.070467

Valladares L (2021) Scientific literacy and social transformation: critical perspectives about science participation and emancipation. Sci Educ 30(3):557–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2

Wegerif R (2019) Dialogic education. In: Noblit GW (ed) Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.396

World Health Organisation (WHO) (2001) Global strategy for containment of microbial resistance, retrieved from http://www.who.int/drugresistance/WHO_Global_Strategy_English.pdf Accessed 23 Oct 2023

World Health Organisation (WHO) (2014) Microbial resistance: global report on surveillance, retrieved from http://www.who.int/drugresistance/documents/surveillancereport/en/ Accessed 23 Oct 2023

Yarden H, Yarden A (2013) Learning and teaching biotechnology methods using animations, In: Treagust D, Tsui C-Y (eds) Multiple representations in biological education. Book Series: Models and modeling in science education, Vol 7, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, p 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8_6

Zeidler DL (2014) Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis. Theory, research, and practice. In: Lederman NG, Abell SK (eds) Handbook of research on science education, vol 2, Routledge, p 714–740

Zeidler DL, Nichols BH (2009) Socioscientific issues: theory and practice. J Elem Sci Educ 21(2):49–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684

Zeidler DL, Sadler TD, Applebaum S, Callahan BE (2009) Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. J Res Sci Teach 46(1):74–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281

Zeidler DL, Sadler TD (2023) Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues. In: Lederman NG, Zeidler DL, Lederman JS (eds) Handbook of research on science education Routledge, p 899–929

Zohar A, Nemet F (2002) Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. J Res Sci Teach 39(1):35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge substantial contributions by Ms Argyro Scholinaki and Dr Nicos Papadouris to both of whom we are most grateful. This work has received support from the Microbial Resistance Project (AΝΘΡΩΠΙΣΤΙΚΕΣ/ΠΑΙΔΙ/0311/26), which was co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund and the Republic of Cyprus through the Research Promotion Foundation and the Partnerships for Science Education (PAFSE) project which has received support from the European Commission, DG Research, under H2020, Grant Agreement No. 10100646 - PAFSE - H2020-SwafS-2018-2020.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Learning in Science Group, Department of Educational Sciences, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

Constantinos P. Constantinou

Laboratory of Nature Education and Conservation, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

Eliza Rybska

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

CC initiated the formulation of the design principles and set the frame for the design enactment. CC and ER contributed to the elaboration of the ideas and the writing of the manuscript. The authors of this study participated voluntarily, collectively contributing to the conception of the main ideas and the writing process. This collaborative effort underscores the shared commitment to advancing our understanding of digital learning environments and their purposeful design for enhancing meaningful interactions and the quality of educational experiences.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Constantinos P. Constantinou .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study did not involve human participants, their data or any form of biological material. Hence no ethical approval was required to conduct this research.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Constantinou, C.P., Rybska, E. Design principles for integrating science practices with conceptual understanding: an example from a digital learning environment on microbial resistance to antibiotics. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 501 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03022-4

Download citation

Received : 16 November 2023

Accepted : 28 March 2024

Published : 11 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03022-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies