What is the historic example used for the paper:
This history example of critical inquiry was taken from a social science journal, Smith College School for Social Work, Volume 1, Issue 1 September 1930, pages 66 – 85. The title of the article was “Some Effects of Unemployment as Seen by a Family Society”. It was a thesis submitted by Adelaide Hennion. The example is a study of two groups of wage earners; one group had earned lower wages and had more children, and the other group had higher wages and fewer children. The writer determined that the lower wage earners with more children returned for assistance more frequently during the 4 year study period, based on case records of the Family Society, Philadelphia between 1927-1928. In her study, Hennion considered strong familial relationships in her research, but wording and different ideas as to what constituted strong family relationships are much different from what we might consider today. Example: Hennion viewed care of home, loyalty, and spirit as important criteria. As opposed to current common terminology, Hennion wrote about clients’ being dishonest, shiftless, being lax, and “pauperized”. While reading this thesis, I concluded that the agency used hasty methodology that would not be considered precise in its science by today’s standards.
Did the example occur inside or outside the paradigm of prevailing belief?
The example occurred inside the paradigm of prevailing belief for a 1930’s frame of reference. The frame of reference was a moderately deeper understanding of originating beliefs compared to the 20th century, wherein destitute persons were thought of as being plagued with laziness and a tendency toward deviant behavior. In the late 1800’s, social workers often used faith-based methods toward helping the destitute in society. By the 1930’s, faith based assistance was a little less part of the helping process, and included a more psychological perspective. This psychological perspective included observing family interactions, personality flaws, and observing perpetuating circumstances that lead the destitute to continue living in poverty. By the 1930’s there were more well-known psychologists and better communications to getting this information out to the public and other scholars.
The same prevailing belief in modern times has evolved into a deeper sociological, psychological, and physiological understanding. These current studies are enhanced by modern technology; whereas scientists now have the ability to study brain chemistry and medical scans of persons who suffer from deviant behavior. We currently understand that causes of deviant behavior can be caused by genetic predispositions and chemical imbalances, perpetuated by psychological issues. I.e. Self-fulfilling behaviors that are not positive in nature. Psychologists today include the nature vs. nurture element when writing about their theories. My study, however, occurred during a time in history where modern technology was not available yet. Therefore, the prevailing belief that poverty-stricken families were plagued more by spiritual weakness and the general inability to change their lot in life was prominent. My journal study was also adrift with what we refer to today as politically incorrect biases and language. The writing in the 1930’s sociological study is clearly infantile in its methodology like many scientific studies in early history.
What was the plan of inquiry followed by the investigator, scholar, or artist?
The plan of inquiry followed by the investigation scholar was implemented with observing, assisting, and interviewing 60 families who had come to the Family Society for assistance due to unemployment. The study was written about 4 random families out of 60 that the agency assisted between the winters of 1927-1928. The observer’s rationale for the inquiry was “to determine what kind of families came to social agencies during periods of unemployment” pg. 67. To do this, the writer chose to review the 4 assisted families’ cases from the agency and obtain specific information regarding the circumstances that existed before, during, and after the client’s unemployment. Based on my review of the journal article, the author noted nationality, work history, wage information, and the atmosphere in the home as factors to study. The article also observes whether the wage earner has skills and whether or not the family sought help in the past. Ultimately, the author notes whether or not these families returned to the Family Society a year later. The author conducted the study because family agencies were feeling “increasing pressure” due to Philadelphia’s 1927 winter industrial unemployment rate. (pg.69)
How did the example demonstrate insight and higher-order learning?
The example demonstrated insight by the observer. Higher order learning in the journal investigative piece was not particularly evident to me except to understand that the writer’s methods were not scientific, and her observations seem (juvenile) by today’s standards. While trying to retain the goal of revealing ‘some effects of unemployment’ the author focused much on ‘emotional tone’ and discourse in the unit. Her conclusions were important at the time, but today’s learner would have already known these facts while studying their undergraduate work.
What lessons from the example can be applied to your own graduate work?
The lessons I can apply to my own graduate work after reading historic examples of critical inquiry, enables me to understand how current modern thinking evolved out of early studies. Being able to understand background in any topic enhances the ability to formulate new studies. In early eras, what seems like qualitative investigation reviewed in a humanities journal might not seem like adequate analysis in (later) years. Nevertheless, even early works play a role in my own graduate work. By cultivating an early understanding of social phenomena and incorporating it and later work into my own studies, I am able to synthesize and evaluate the information as it relates to my own work, thereby not only weeding out my own preliminary ideas, but by helping me reshape my own ideas so that my hypothesis are as unbiased as possible. By eliminating my own preconceived biases in graduate work, I am able to be acquainted with other scholarly perspectives and gather more concrete, reliable information.