IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Teaching a systematic and evidence-based approach in an ambivalent context: A case example from Israel

Listed author(s):
  • Levin, Lia
  • Hamama, Liat
Registered author(s):

    Systematically planned intervention (SPI) and evidence-based practice (EBP) have become widely known and influential concepts in Israeli social service administration and provision. Nevertheless, the lack of success in implementing SPI and EBP in the social work field has returned the discussion regarding its importance and development to social work scholars and educators. The following article presents a case example describing an attempt to build social workers’ capacity to use SPI and EBP among graduate (Master level) Israeli social work students in a university-based practical workshop. A detailed description of contextual considerations and manifestations, alongside main teaching challenges and responses, general assessment of the attainment of the workshop's goals, concluding comments, and recommendations for SPI and EBP capacity builders are offered.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.

    Volume (Year): 36 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 136-144

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:136-144
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.09.004
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:136-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.