{"title":"评估中的事实建构与分类:培养社会工作评估中的认识公正与阻力","authors":"Eunjung Lee","doi":"10.1086/721273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When an individual’s experience is discredited and their views silenced in conversation, epistemic injustice ensues, resulting in an ontological attack on the individual’s human dignity. I examine how social workers claim to know and construct the facts of clients’ experiences, subsequently categorizing them in accordance with professional and institutional knowledge. These constructs may differ from the clients’ own experiences, perpetuating epistemic injustice. Elaborating a process of fact construction and categorization in two case examples, I interrogate the inevitable workings of power at multiple levels during assessment. I argue categorization as a site of epistemic injustice serving three functions: permitting dominant discourses to be taken-for-granted and to legitimize professional actions, framing interactional tasks to align with professional and institutional agendas, and enticing clients and workers with activity-bound accountability, obligation, and entitlement. This analysis invites social workers to reflect critically on how to resist epistemic and social injustice in everyday assessment.","PeriodicalId":47665,"journal":{"name":"Social Service Review","volume":"96 1","pages":"534 - 571"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fact Construction and Categorization in Assessment: Cultivating Epistemic Justice and Resistance in Social Work Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Eunjung Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/721273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When an individual’s experience is discredited and their views silenced in conversation, epistemic injustice ensues, resulting in an ontological attack on the individual’s human dignity. I examine how social workers claim to know and construct the facts of clients’ experiences, subsequently categorizing them in accordance with professional and institutional knowledge. These constructs may differ from the clients’ own experiences, perpetuating epistemic injustice. Elaborating a process of fact construction and categorization in two case examples, I interrogate the inevitable workings of power at multiple levels during assessment. I argue categorization as a site of epistemic injustice serving three functions: permitting dominant discourses to be taken-for-granted and to legitimize professional actions, framing interactional tasks to align with professional and institutional agendas, and enticing clients and workers with activity-bound accountability, obligation, and entitlement. This analysis invites social workers to reflect critically on how to resist epistemic and social injustice in everyday assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Service Review\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"534 - 571\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Service Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/721273\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Service Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721273","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
Fact Construction and Categorization in Assessment: Cultivating Epistemic Justice and Resistance in Social Work Assessment
When an individual’s experience is discredited and their views silenced in conversation, epistemic injustice ensues, resulting in an ontological attack on the individual’s human dignity. I examine how social workers claim to know and construct the facts of clients’ experiences, subsequently categorizing them in accordance with professional and institutional knowledge. These constructs may differ from the clients’ own experiences, perpetuating epistemic injustice. Elaborating a process of fact construction and categorization in two case examples, I interrogate the inevitable workings of power at multiple levels during assessment. I argue categorization as a site of epistemic injustice serving three functions: permitting dominant discourses to be taken-for-granted and to legitimize professional actions, framing interactional tasks to align with professional and institutional agendas, and enticing clients and workers with activity-bound accountability, obligation, and entitlement. This analysis invites social workers to reflect critically on how to resist epistemic and social injustice in everyday assessment.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1927, Social Service Review is devoted to the publication of thought-provoking, original research on social welfare policy, organization, and practice. Articles in the Review analyze issues from the points of view of various disciplines, theories, and methodological traditions, view critical problems in context, and carefully consider long-range solutions. The Review features balanced, scholarly contributions from social work and social welfare scholars, as well as from members of the various allied disciplines engaged in research on human behavior, social systems, history, public policy, and social services.