English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The Social Service Review article, “A Historical Analysis of Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work: The Unfinished Journey toward an Empirically Grounded Profession,” by Nathanael J. Okpych and James L-H Yu, is the kind of article that makes you sit up and say, “That’s revisionist history!” “What new ideas!” “I wish I had written that!” “But that’s not what I know!” Such an ambivalent response suggests that it is a groundbreaking article or at least one that will stimulate discussion and reassessment of what we know.Constructivism suggests both that there are many legitimate worldviews and that it is worth knowing those multiple worldviews. In that spirit, I would like to acknowledge the intriguing brilliance of the article but also pose some questions and other views.

social service review

How Quickly We Forget: Comments on “A Historical Analysis of Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work: The Unfinished Journey toward an Empirically Grounded Profession”