Community Work - Literature review Example

Community Work: Reflective Essay Institution Name Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Understanding Communities 3 Approaches to Community 5 Working with Community 7 Conclusion 8 Introduction Issues concerning how the community should be engaged, consulted and participate in community development have traditionally been considered as significant concepts in community work. Still, from detailed survey of literature, I conclude that few texts or researches provide theoretically-grounded guidance on how working with communities should be undertaken more respectfully and effectively (Pugh & Cheers, 2010; Worral, 2007; Nkwake et al, 2013). I reflect that Taylor’s et al (2008) work fills this gap. It is my view a one-stop-shop that covers a multiple topics, ranging from the meaning of community to working with communities. Indeed, Taylor’s et al (2008) book is split into three segments: Understanding community, approaches to working with communities and working with communities. Indeed, Taylor’s et al (2008) book is split into three segments: Understanding community, approaches to working with communities and working with communities. These three form the subjects of discussion in this report, as drawn from my weekly journal entries and what I have learnt on my pathway to understanding working with communities. Understanding Communities In my view, this module (chapter 1 to chapter 4) is focused on the theoretical and conceptual understanding of a community. A critical message reflected in module is that a vital tool for assessing community functioning depends on the capacity to understand community as well as how the community functions. Taylor et al (2008) depicted an understanding of ‘community’ from Aboriginal family relations, arguing that it is at the centre of understanding Aboriginal community and family relations. I tend to agree. In my critical understanding from the module, in the society, every individual has a place. This offers order and sureness. Still, I feel that not each person can understand his place in the society. Taylor et al (2008) uses an approach that parallels that of Chong et al (2008) who describe the term community as individuals from a range of families and who use different languages. An example includes the entire Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who occupy parts of Australia. On reflection, I developed an understanding that the entire family groups that reside within a ‘community’ may interact or not. Taylor et al (2008), like Chong et al (2008), support this argument. Indeed, I feel that it is within this perspective that the existing health service arrangements for the Indigenous Australians are based on Western instead of Indigenous perception of community. As derived from Taylor’s et al (2008) work, these services, and governance structures are specifically situated within geographical areas rather than families, clans or kinships. This, in my view, explains why some regional service centres like the Whyalla has diverse groups of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In some circumstances therefore, the structure of service delivery used in such regional centres have the potential to exist as the case and Indigenous Australia will continue to pull together in such places for the reason. Deriving from Taylor’s et al (2008) perception of community functioning, I begin to understand that the term is concerned with functioning within specific locations, such as a remote community, a rural town, neighbourhood, or centre. I believe therefore that Taylor’s et al (2008) idea on community functioning allows the understanding of community functioning as a community’s strength to grow as well as to develop positive social change using strong relationships in language groups or families. I mention Pugh and Cheers’s (2010) work in this regard as the argue that a strong group that advocates for and supports implementing of cultural identity across the components of community functioning comprises identifying, acknowledging and strengthening positive annotations of such individuals as well as their contribution to the community. It is also critical to observe that family relationships are at the centre of interpreting a community and that kinship systems or family relations is not particularly restricted to a geographical territory and that such connectedness may not be necessarily weakened by distance. In respect to health care delivery, the features of community functioning that affect participation, as explained by Taylor et al (2008), in planning for health services and programs is essential for accessible and efficient delivery of primary healthcare. Approaches to Community In my view, the second module describes a range of approaches for working with communities, as well as discussion on strategies for community empowerment using interactional community development. Accordingly, an important message from this module (chapter 5 to chapter 9) is that community engagement is critical for ensuring effectual community participation. Taylor et al (2008) takes on important themes in working within the communities. Examples include introduction of ideas or working in partnership, community planning and leadership and community-based action research methodologies. As a matter of fact therefore, working with communities entrenches community participation in social science theory regarding community participation and presents me with practical tools and concepts that I would use to increase community participation in human service or health service settings. Taylor et al (2008) combined different approaches and concepts critical for interpreting the nature and a range of types of communities and how they can be integrated in working with communities. The approach allows to me contextualise what community participation means, as well as what is meant by program development and development of communities and collaborative service. In particular, Taylor et al (2008) views community participation as critical in primary healthcare development. Indeed, Preston et al (2010) provided evidence to show that community participation lead to positive health outcomes. I now understand that community participation refers to the collective involvement of local communities in evaluating their desires and coming up with strategies to achieve their collective needs. Indeed, Taylor’s et al (2008) emphasis on the significance of community participation remains uncontested in academic researchers. According to Preston et al (2010), the origin or community participation and its subsequent application derives from a report by World Health Organisation in 1991, which stressed its significance in promoting improved social, health and economic situations in developing communities. Like Taylor et al (2008) contributed to the conceptualisation of community participation as ‘top down’ or ‘bottom up’ approach. Similar conceptualisation is suggested by Worral (2007). Taylor’s et al (2008) conceptual approach for analysis or interpreting community participation suggests four aspects of community participation: instrumental, empowerment, contribution, development. I agree that such a typology can be derived to define community participation. While I view the conceptual approach as very innovative and problem-oriented, they appear to overlap and are technically difficult to differentiate. Taylor et al (2008) sees the contributions approach as regarding participation to be basically a voluntary contribution to community projects. Examples may include community-based knowledge, resources, and time. On the other hand, I understand the instrumental approach as defining health or general well-being as being an outcome instead of process of community participation used in service development. I perceive participation as primarily led by professionals in addition to other significant components of interventions (Nkwake et al, 2013). On the other hand, community empowerment approach is intended to empower or support a community to assume greater responsibility over concerns affecting their health and general well-being (McCabe, 2008). Lastly, I perceive the developmental approach as conceptualising social care or health care development as being an evolutionary or interactive process entrenched within a community of interest. The developmental approach, in my understanding, is underscored by social justice principles. Working with Community Reflecting on 'Working with Communities' (as reflected chapter 10 and Chapter 11), I conceive that it is centred on the skills needed to work with communities in creating community partnerships and planning. I also view this module as offering an important reference point for developing an international understanding of various discussions in social welfare and health delivery. The range of case study materials and resources enabled me to have a more insightful understanding of working in communities using social model rather than a planning or medical one. A critical lesson developed from the module ‘Working with Community’ is that community development should be perceived as consisting of providing ‘community leadership’ in working with the individuals within the community to create an environment that is fairer, and which members of the community are treated respectfully as well as can exercise their rights legitimately as well as take advantages of the opportunities presented by their communities. As agreed by Kirkpatrick and Auckland (2007) and Olson (2007), there has to be a level of leadership and justice in working with communities. An important concept that I believe asserts itself in “Working with Communities’ is that of ‘community leader.’ Taylor et al (2008) promotes the idea that community leadership emerges from having a range or networks in various communities, instituting a cultural link, and developing a vision. Hence, from my perspective, community leadership is a critical aspect of successfully working with communities. In my critical understanding therefore, working with communities entails providing effective leadership in order to create effective social or health services to the rural communities. In my view therefore, if a developmental approach proposed by Taylor et al (2008) can be applied in the scenario of working with communities, it would enable communities to work in partnership with the social or health system in order to employ resources to the primary issues of concern. Still, I feel that social or health professions, the health system and the government need to identify and accept the idea that working with communities needs a consistent and long-term investment as well as institute health or social system reforms. Conclusion A community can serve as function for understanding of the potential for growth of a group of people with certain connectedness and to develop positive social change using strong relationships in language groups or families. It is not particularly restricted to a geographical territory and that such connectedness may not be necessarily weakened by distance. Several approaches such as community participation, community engagement, and conceptual approach can be used in interpreting the nature and a range of types of communities and how they can be integrated in working with communities. These approaches allow to me contextualise what community participation means, as well as what is meant by program development and development of communities and collaborative service. Community engagement is critical for ensuring effectual community participation. Working with communities entrenches community participation in social science theory regarding community participation and presents me with practical tools and concepts that I would use to increase community participation in human service or health service settings. Taylor’s et al (2008) conceptual approach for analysis or interpreting community participation suggests four aspects of community participation: instrumental, empowerment, contribution, development. Such a typology can be derived to define community participation. While the conceptual approach is innovative and problem-oriented, it appears to overlap and is technically difficult to differentiate. Community development should be perceived as consisting of providing ‘community leadership’ in working with the individuals within the community to create an environment that is fairer, and which members of the community are treated respectfully as well as can exercise their rights legitimately as well as take advantages of the opportunities presented by their communities. There has to be a level of leadership and justice in working with communities. Community leadership emerges from having a range or networks in various communities, instituting a cultural link, and developing a vision. Reference List Chong, A., Champion, S., Cheers, S. & Taylor, J. (2007). Our community: our future. 10th National Rural Health Conference Kirkpatrick, S. & Auckland, S. (2007). Understanding social capital to support a primary health care approach in a socially fragmented region. 10th National Rural Health Conference McCabe, A. (2008). Book Review: Working with communities in health and human services. International Journal of Integrated Care 8(18), 1-2 Nkwake, A., Trandafali, H. & Hughey, J. (2013). Examining the Relationship between Community Participation and Program Outcomes in a Meta-evaluation. Journal of Multi Disciplinary Evaluation 9(20), 1-17 Olson, M. (2007). Strengthening Families: Community Strategies That Work. retrieved: Preston, R., Waugh, H., Larkins, S. & Taylor, J. (2010). Community participation in rural primary health care: intervention or approach? Australian Journal a/Primary Health, 16(1), 4- 16 Pugh, R. & Cheers, B. (2010). Rural Social Work: An International Perspective. Bristol: Policy Press Taylor, J., Wilkinson, D., Cheers, B. (2008). Working with communities in Health and Human Services. Sydney: Oxford University Press. Worral, L. (2007). Asking the Community: A Case Study of Community Partner Perspectives. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 9(1), 5-17 Read More