No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
To examine how social work students and faculty perceive and embody cultural competence, we conducted five focus groups with graduate students ( N = 16) and faculty members ( N = 10) from Canadian schools of social work. We interrogated how different theoretical frameworks related to cross-cultural social work practice (CCSWP) have been circulated and reified in social work education, and how certain dominant frameworks have been translated to embodied cross-cultural interactions in social work practice. To examine the praxis of CCSWP, which is often subtle and embedded in the semantics of languages and discourses, we were informed by critical theories of power, language, and discourses to analyze the data. The interview transcripts of both student and faculty focus groups showed similar dominant discursive patterns: (1) critiquing the conceptual use of cultural competence, (2) having a preference for terms such as cultural humility, cultural safety, or other constructs, and (3) describing the embodied practice of these constructs mainly as a general practice and omitting cross-cultural work. Participants differed in their expressed opposition to cultural competence and the exact terms they preferred as an alternative. Overall, participants discursively changed from a critical debate on semantic and conceptual differences between these constructs to negating them altogether as meaningless, effacing the very notion of cross-cultural social work and its embodied practice. In the end, cultural competence was discounted as both oppressive and anti-oppressive, a position which is reflected in the contested scholarship on cultural competence.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.