Comparison of Paradigmatic and Narrative Modes of Knowledge-building for Social Work

Knowledge- MODES
building factors
Paradigmatic Narrative

Orientation toward Proof oriented: uses ‘received’ concepts & Discovery oriented: is concept
science follows traditional rules of empiricism seeking & dialectic, i.e., studies
persons in relation and context
Closed agenda: definitive, specific hypotheses, Open agenda: process is iterative,
adheres to one plan until specific goals are unfolding, responsive to novel,
reached, plans for elimination of unexpected & unexpected, anomalous &
anomalous contradictory information; goals
redefinable
Orientation toward Received concepts are operationalized Concepts are constantly tested
data against experience
Language for description is complete, events of Language building: goal is to
interest are already known reframe, rename ‘old’ problems,
what is not yet speakable is of
greatest interest
Seeks exhaustive, mutually exclusive categories Epistemologies, typologies as
and taxonomies ‘fictions’, i.e., temporary
conveniences
Narratives are anecdotes or reducable to codes Narrative regarded as highly
valuable, attempts to ‘chunk’,
follow threads, ongoing dialogue
with story teller
Orientation toward Schema oriented: common traits of person & Morphogenic: uniqueness of
self & others situations are units of attention individuals and situations
Separation of self and observed Self observed and observing

Apolitical: studies from above & without Political: studies up & from within

Change in observer is controlled for Reflexive: goal is change in the

observer’s experience of self
Positivist: drive toward certainty, prediction & Phenomenological: use of
control subjective & first person
experience as a source of
knowledge
Motivation to do Professionalist: develop rational systems, work as Humanists: add value to or reform
research expert with clients/ patients systems, work in community with
persons
Truth-seeking Truth-making