The State 'crowds out' community participation and the generation of social capital. Discuss.

Assignment Requirements

I have attached a document called
“INSTRUCTIONS_Working with Communities Essay_ The state”
Ir will be the first upload and the writer should read it and use it as a guild.

ESSAY Question:
The State ‘crowds out’ community participation and the generation of social capital. Discuss.

Essay Question:

The State ‘crowds out’ community participation and the generation of social capital. Discuss.

Note to writer:

     The essay should be social work perspective i.e. how a social worker might engage with community development work as defined by JIM IFE (attached to order) and can be counters (or critically reflected) by Sue KELLY’s work (also attached)

The essay should be critical of NEO-LIBERAL agendas which favour minimal intervention of the state (which included capital and a work-force to aid change). Conversely when the state does get in involved they tend to impose many reporting and evaluation expectations on community workers, non-government organisations and communities themselves. (this is the crux of the argument)

o   Do we get the stat involved (use tax payers money) which comes with a set of accountabilities (KPIs) which are often rigid and take a lot of work on behalf of the workers (which take time away from actually “working with communities”

o   Does the state pull out completely and leave it up to NGOs and Charitable organisations which have few restrictions and levels of bureaucracy. Consequently we leave it up to those with power and money to determine which “social good” is bestrode money.

Or

o   Is there a middle grown which acknowledges that working with community is longitudinal work, with a set of principles which are both organic and structured. However imposing Neo-Liberalistic methodologies is counterproductive as sometimes we can’t measure “how the local rugby team coach promoted a subsidised program for team fees via the local school, which mean a child was able feel more included, had access to health exercise and didn’t join a gang and therefore didn’t get a chance to into the field of work or study”. Community work should of course have a way of recording and demonstrating its good work, but it should not be in the traditional causal sense or rates, prevalence or ratios. It needs to me colours by qualitative research and a commitment by ALL facets of society to participant and contribute to the evauluation.

 

A key feature of community development (Working with Communities, which should be used) is that its long term work, and cannot restrained to 6 months , 12 months or even 5 years’ time frames. Communal changes takes time and it takes investment by community members particularly those who have an interest in SOCIAL JUSTIC.

 

Below are my class notes on a break down on terms which can also be found in MargotRawsthorne and AmandaHoward, But also in other readings attached

I have also attached an article by FOOK on critical reflection which might help and provide an analysis frame work.

Lastly I know I provided a great many articles, some are just for terminology rather than in depth analysis.

My class notes:

Capacity Building

–       UN Model (1997) in Health Promotion declaration

–       Anti-top down model

–       Driven by large corporations dropping money into a community/issue

–       Critique from the WHO > Health Promotion

–       It’s about education

 

Weakness:

1. It’s about an individual changing a exposure
2. Expert driven (I am here to fix your XXX problem)
3. They don’t mean a shift in power

 

Community Engagement Models

–       (What they mean is) Information and consultation

–       It’s absolutely TOP-DOWN.

–       What process are there in places to get people involved

–       Marginal voices are heard, but usually its heard about issues which are important to the “agenda” of those doing the intervening.

–       GLEBE: neighbourhood advisory board (glebe tenants) what are they working on “they really want to talk about is blocked drains and mouldy walls”. But “we” need them to be giving advising on our living standard.

–

Assets Based Community Development (ABCD)

–       From the USA

–       Developed from the the disability field

–       Its origins are very anti-services

–       “service delivery” is part of the problems

–       Users are the assets that exist within the community

o   Hard assets: building and facilities

o   Relational assets: the relationship that community workers(SV) has with Centre Link (welfare agency) etc.

–       Status Quo: (ABCD communities)

• Blue Mountains
• Central Coast
• Manley

–       Problem: coincided with John Howard and the “CAN DO” communities

o   But where they put the programs were viewed as “CAN’T DO”.

o   Issues where set down by the TOP (the state) and not the communities themselves.

o   ABCD: is actually copy written, “the little green book” (tick book approach)

o   People were going into community with tick boxes check-lists

–       Good: A shift away from a deficit model, deficit models do not recognise strengths in community and consequently do use the existing strengths in the community.

Community (Development) Empowerment

–       IFE

–       Shifting power: individual> family and Community level

o   DFINDING NEEDS

o   POWER OVER EDUCAITON

o   POWER OVER REPRODUCTIVE CHOICES

–       1960’s

–       Radical (lefty collectiveness position)

–       From the people -By the people >> Skills

–       The grand claims > no evidence that grand claims have been achieved

• Bad at documenting there work
• Bad at asking themselves tough questions

–       Publically funded (how radical can you be if your publically funded)

–       Overtime it’s becoming about SERVICE DELIVERY. i.e. bringing old grannies together .

–       Sue Kenny really dislikes it: as she believes that residence does not know best.

–       IFE thinks that the community DOES know best.

 

If you spoke to a community who told you “it’s all the young people fault, they are the ones make all the trouble”, if you followed this under IFE: you might take a punitive approach and install more lighting and policing etc.

 

If you listen KENNY, you might, talk to the young people and ask them why they are disliked and work from that.

Assessment criteria:

1. Demonstrates engagement with current and emerging community work policy and practice issues.

Attached to order

2. Draws on ideas, readings and materials presented in the course and beyond.

Attached to order

3. Demonstrates a high level of critical self-reflection.

Articles on critical reflection attached to order

4. Demonstrates a high level of analysis and is written in a coherent and scholarly manner, with appropriate APA referencing style.

 

Order Now

http://zelessaywritings.com/order/

 

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.

 

[order_calculator]